Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The insulinotropic actions of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (7–37) in normal and diabetic subjects

Open access
Elahi, Dariush, McAloon-Dyke, Marianne, Fukagawa, Naomi K., Meneilly, Graydon S., Sclater, Anne L., Minaker, Kenneth L., Habener, Joel F., Andersen, Dana K.·1994·Regulatory Peptides

Abstract

Despite similar glycemic profiles, higher insulin levels are achieved following oral versus intravenous administration of glucose. This discrepancy is due to the incretin effect and is believed to be mediated via stimulation of beta-cells by hormone(s) released from the gut. The leading gut hormone candidates are glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1). To determine the relative insulinotropic activity of these peptides, we infused GLP-1(7-37) and GIP into normal subjects and patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). In normal subjects during euglycemia, GLP-1(7-37) stimulated insulin release, whereas GIP did not. Using the Andres clamp technique, we established stable hyperglycemia for 2 h (5.4 mmol/l above the basal level). During the second hour, either GIP, GLP-1(7-37), or both were infused in normal healthy volunteers and in patients with NIDDM. In normal subjects, at a glucose level of 10.4 mmol/l, the 90-120 min insulin response was 279 pmol/l. GIP at a dose of 1, 2 or 4 pmol/kg/min augmented the 90-120 min insulin response by 69, 841 and 920 pmol/l, while GLP-1(7-37), at a dose of 1.5 pmol/kg/min augmented the insulin response by 2106 pmol/l. When both hormones were administered simultaneously, the augmentation was additive--2813 pmol/l. In the diabetic subjects, GIP had no effect, while GLP-1(7-37) augmented the insulin response by 929 pmol/l. We conclude that in normal healthy subjects, GLP-1(7-37), on a molar basis, is several times more potent than GIP at equivalent glycemic conditions. The additive insulinotropic effect suggests that more than one incretin may be responsible for the greater insulin levels observed following oral administration of glucose compared to the intravenous route. In NIDDM, GIP had no insulinotropic effect, while GLP-1(7-37) had a marked effect. This suggests that GLP-1(7-37) may have therapeutic potential as a hypoglycemic agent in NIDDM patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0167-0115(94)90136-8

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Elahi, D., McAloon-Dyke, M., Fukagawa, N. K., Meneilly, G. S., Sclater, A. L., Minaker, K. L., Habener, J. F., & Andersen, D. K.
Venue
Regulatory Peptides
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1994-04
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
63-74
ISSN
0167-0115 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2074956966
Cited by
309
References
28
FWCI
4.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The insulinotropic actions of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (7–37) in normal and diabetic subjects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0167-0115(94)90136-8
The paper
Elahi, D., McAloon-Dyke, M., Fukagawa, N. K., Meneilly, G. S., Sclater, A. L., Minaker, K. L., Habener, J. F., & Andersen, D. K. (1994). The insulinotropic actions of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (7–37) in normal and diabetic subjects. Regulatory Peptides. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-0115(94)90136-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.