Cited by 44Coffee research and impactsPancreatic function and diabetesMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer

The effect of caffeine on glucose kinetics in humans - influence of adrenaline

Battram, Danielle S., Graham, Terry E., Richter, Erik A., Dela, Flemming·2005·The Journal of Physiology

Abstract

While caffeine impedes insulin-mediated glucose disposal in humans, its effect on endo-genous glucose production (EGP) remains unknown. In addition, the mechanism involved in these effects is unclear, but may be due to the accompanying increase in adrenaline concentration. We studied the effect of caffeine on EGP and glucose infusion rates (GIR), and whether or not adrenaline can account for all of caffeine's effects. Subjects completed three isoglycaemic-hyperinsulinaemic clamps (with 3-[(3)H]glucose infusion) 30 min after ingesting: (1) placebo capsules (n= 12); (2) caffeine capsules (5 mg kg(-1)) (n= 12); and either (3) placebo plus a high-dose adrenaline infusion (HAdr; adrenaline concentration, 1.2 nM; n= 8) or (4) placebo plus a low-dose adrenaline infusion (LAdr; adrenaline concentration, 0.75 nM; n= 6). With caffeine, adrenaline increased to 0.6 nM but no effect on EGP was observed. While caffeine and HAdr decreased GIR by 13 (P < 0.05) and 34% (P < 0.05) versus the placebo, respectively, LAdr did not result in a significant reduction (5%) in GIR versus the placebo. Due to the fact that both caffeine and LAdr resulted in similar adrenaline concentrations, but resulted in different decreases in GIR, it is concluded that adrenaline alone does not account for the effects of caffeine and additional mechanisms must be involved.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1113/jphysiol.2005.097444

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Battram, D. S., Graham, T. E., Richter, E. A., & Dela, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Guelph (CA)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Venue
The Journal of Physiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-11
Volume
569
Issue
1
Pages
347-355
ISSN
  • 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7793
OpenAlex
W1584869846
Cited by
44
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Physiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Novo Nordisk Fonden
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatic function and diabetes
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Metabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Keywords
caffeine, glucose kinetics, endogenous glucose production, epinephrine, glucose infusion rate, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, insulin-stimulated glucose disposal, adrenaline infusion
MeSH terms
Administration, Oral, Adult, Blood Glucose, Caffeine, Epinephrine, Humans, Insulin, Kinetics, Male, Metabolic Clearance Rate

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