Cited by 181Regulation of Appetite and ObesityAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic DiseasesEating Disorders and Behaviors

Postprandial administration of intranasal insulin intensifies satiety and reduces intake of palatable snacks in women

Open access
Hallschmid, Manfred, Higgs, Suzanne, Thienel, Matthias, Ott, Volker, Lehnert, Hendrik·2012·Diabetes

Abstract

The role of brain insulin signaling in the control of food intake in humans has not been thoroughly defined. We hypothesized that the hormone contributes to the postprandial regulation of appetite for palatable food, and assessed the effects on appetite and snack intake of postprandial versus fasted intranasal insulin administration to the brain in healthy women. Two groups of subjects were intranasally administered 160 IU insulin or vehicle after lunch. Two hours later, consumption of cookies of varying palatability was measured under the pretext of a taste test. In a control study, the effects of intranasal insulin administered to fasted female subjects were assessed. Compared with placebo, insulin administration in the postprandial but not in the fasted state decreased appetite as well as intake and rated palatability of chocolate chip cookies (the most palatable snack offered). In both experiments, intranasal insulin induced a slight decrease in plasma glucose but did not affect serum insulin concentrations. Data indicate that brain insulin acts as a relevant satiety signal during the postprandial period, in particular reducing the intake of highly palatable food, and impacts peripheral glucose homeostasis. Postprandial intranasal insulin administration might be useful in curtailing overconsumption of snacks with accentuated rewarding value.

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 · 10.2337/db11-1390

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Some studies reported effects of brain insulin on postprandial snacking in women.

    “However, some studies reported effects of brain insulin on postprandial snacking in women25.”
  • The snack test assesses reward-related eating in the absence of hunger.

    “Reward-related eating in the absence of hunger was assessed using a snack test validated in a series of previous studies (22–24).”

    From Oxytocin Reduces Reward-Driven Food Intake in Humans (2013) · cites this paper as [23]

  • IN insulin administered to healthy women in the postprandial but not preprandial state reduced consumption and rated palatability of chocolate cookies offered after lunch.

    “IN insulin administered to healthy women in the postprandial (but not in the preprandial) state reduced the consumption and rated palatability of chocolate cookies offered some time after lunch.”

    From Intranasal insulin (2021) · cites this paper as [44]

  • Delivery schedules synced to food intake might be necessary for the catabolic impact of IN insulin to emerge.

    “suggesting that delivery schedules synced to food intake 39,42,44,47 might be necessary for the catabolic impact of IN insulin to emerge.”

    From Intranasal insulin (2021) · cites this paper as [44]

  • IN insulin modulates reward-processing pathways that regulate motivated behaviour, including the hedonic drive to eat.

    “The conclusion that IN insulin modulates reward-processing pathways that regulate motivated behaviour including the 'hedonic' drive to eat is in line with experiments in humans showing that IN insulin decreases the intake of palatable snacks.44”

    From Intranasal insulin (2021) · cites this paper as [44]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hallschmid, M., Higgs, S., Thienel, M., Ott, V., & Lehnert, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Lübeck (DE)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Hallschmid, Manfred
Venue
Diabetes
Published
2012-03-14
Volume
61
Issue
4
Pages
782-789
ISSN
  • 0012-1797 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-327X
OpenAlex
W2109962764
Cited by
181
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 12
FWCI
7.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Adipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
Keywords
intranasal insulin, brain insulin signaling, satiety, postprandial appetite, dietary intake, snacking, chocolate chip cookies, palatability, glucose homeostasis, women, overeating
MeSH terms
Administration, Intranasal, Adult, Appetite, Brain, Drug Administration Schedule, Eating, Female, Food, Humans, Insulin, Male, Satiety Response, Time Factors, Postprandial Period

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