The effects of metformin and glibenclamide on glucose metabolism, counter-regulatory hormones and cardiovascular responses in women with Type 2 diabetes during exercise of moderate intensity

Metformin does not compromise energy status in human skeletal muscle at rest or during acute exercise: A randomised, crossover trial

5´AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) is a mediator of a healthy metabolic phenotype in skeletal muscle. Metformin may exacerbate the energy disturbances observed during exercise leading to enhanced AMPK activation, and these disturbances may provoke early muscular fatigue. We studied acute (1 day) and short-term (4 days) effects of metformin treatment on AMPK and its downstream signaling network, in healthy human skeletal muscle and adipose tissue at rest and during exercise, by applying a randomized blinded crossover study design in 10 lean men. Muscle and fat biopsies were obtained before and after the treatment period at rest and after a single bout of exercise. Metformin treat ment elicited peak plasma and muscle metformin concentrations of 31 μM and 11 μM, respectively. Neither of the treatments affected AMPK activity in skeletal muscle and adipose at rest or during exercise. In contrast, whole-body stress during exercise was elevated as indicated by increased plasma lactate and adrenaline concentrations as well as increased heart rate and rate of perceived exertion. Also whole-body insulin sensitivity was enhanced by 4 days metformin treatment, that is reduced fasting plasma insulin and HOMA-IR. In conclusion, acute and short-term metformin treatment does not affect energy homeostasis and AMPK activation at rest or during exercise in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue of healthy subjects. However, metformin treatment is accompanied by slightly enhanced perceived exertion and whole-body stress which may provoke a lesser desire for physical activity in the metformin-treated patients.

Lactate Levels with Chronic Metformin Use: A Narrative Review

Metformin has been associated with lactic acidosis. Lactate levels are not commonly tested in clinical practice, and it is unclear to what extent metformin would typically increase lactate levels with chronic use. The aim of this review was to determine whether regular monitoring of the plasma lactate level would be beneficial in avoiding lactate accumulation and, ultimately, minimising the incidence of lactic acidosis in metformin-treated patients.A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases covering the period up to 30 May 2017 was performed. Search terms included combinations of terms and keywords, including "metformin", "lactate", "lactic acid" and "lactic acidosis". Cases series of lactic acidosis or metformin-associated lactic acidosis were excluded.Of 1539 potentially relevant articles, a total of 52 reported lactate levels from routine/regular pathological tests in metformin users. The studies were subdivided into four themes, regarding metformin usage and the reported lactate levels in patients who: (1) did not have contraindications to the use of metformin; (2) had contraindications, or renal impairment but without other contraindications; (3) exercised; or (4) also received any nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Studies have reported that metformin treatment could increase lactate level of users. However, most results showed that the lactate level remained in the normal range.No definitive conclusions on the benefits of regular lactate monitoring in patients taking metformin can be made. Future research on larger populations focusing on the measurement of lactate levels with continuous metformin use is warranted.

Metformin and exercise in type 2 diabetes: examining treatment modality interactions

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of metformin on the acute metabolic response to submaximal exercise, the effect of exercise on plasma metformin concentrations, and the interaction between metformin and exercise on the subsequent response to a standardized meal.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Ten participants with type 2 diabetes were recruited for this randomized crossover study. Metformin or placebo was given for 28 days, followed by the alternate condition for 28 days. On the last 2 days of each condition, participants were assessed during a nonexercise and a subsequent exercise day. Exercise took place in the morning and involved a total of 35 min performed at three different submaximal intensities.

RESULTS

Metformin increased heart rate and plasma lactate during exercise (both P≤0.01) but lowered respiratory exchange ratio (P=0.03) without affecting total energy expenditure, which suggests increased fat oxidation. Metformin plasma concentrations were greater at several, but not all, time points on the exercise day compared with the nonexercise day. The glycemic response to a standardized meal was reduced by metformin, but the reduction was attenuated when exercise was added (metformin×exercise interaction, P=0.05). Glucagon levels were highest in the combined exercise and metformin condition.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals several ways by which metformin and exercise therapies can affect each other. By increasing heart rate, metformin could lead to the prescription of lower exercise workloads. Furthermore, under the tested conditions, exercise interfered with the glucose-lowering effect of metformin.

Women with type 2 diabetes perceive harder effort during exercise than nondiabetic women

Regular exercise is a cornerstone of diabetes treatment; however, people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are commonly sedentary. It is possible that a harder rate of perceived exertion (RPE) during exercise for those with T2D as compared with nondiabetics may be a barrier to physical activity. This study examined RPE (Borg scale, ordinal range 6-20) during submaximal exercise at identical absolute work rates to test the hypothesis that women with T2D demonstrate harder RPE during exercise than nondiabetic controls. In a prespecified analysis of existing data from equivalently sedentary women, RPE during submaximal exercise was compared among women with uncomplicated T2D (n = 13, mean body mass index (BMI) 34.2, mean hemoglobin A1c 9%), overweight controls (OC, n = 13, mean BMI 30.7), and normal-weight controls (NWC, n = 13, mean BMI 23.1). Subjects performed three 7 min, constant-load exercise tests at 20 W and 30 W. Mixed-effects general linear modeling was used to test for differences in mean RPE estimates among groups with and without adjustment for relative work intensity, age, habitual physical activity, or BMI. Subjects with T2D perceived harder effort during bicycling exercise than controls, as measured by RPE at 20 W and 30 W (p < 0.05 for T2D vs. OC and for T2D vs. NWC). Adjusting for relative work intensity eliminated significant group RPE differences at 30 W, but group RPE differences at 20 W remained significant. Harder perceived effort during exercise may be a barrier to physical activity for those with T2D.

Comparison of the effects of pioglitazone and metformin on hepatic and extra-hepatic insulin action in people with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To determine mechanisms by which pioglitazone and metformin effect hepatic and extra-hepatic insulin action.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Thirty-one subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to pioglitazone (45 mg) or metformin (2,000 mg) for 4 months.

RESULTS

Glucose was clamped before and after therapy at approximately 5 mmol/l, insulin raised to approximately 180 pmol/l, C-peptide suppressed with somatostatin, glucagon replaced at approximately 75 pg/ml, and glycerol maintained at approximately 200 mmol/l to ensure comparable and equal portal concentrations on all occasions. Insulin-induced stimulation of glucose disappearance did not differ before and after treatment with either pioglitazone (23 +/- 3 vs. 24 +/- 2 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1)) or metformin (22 +/- 2 vs. 24 +/- 3 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1)). In contrast, pioglitazone enhanced (P < 0.01) insulin-induced suppression of both glucose production (6.0 +/- 1.0 vs. 0.2 +/- 1.6 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1)) and gluconeogenesis (n = 11; 4.5 +/- 0.9 vs. 0.8 +/- 1.2 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1)). Metformin did not alter either suppression of glucose production (5.8 +/- 1.0 vs. 5.0 +/- 0.8 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1)) or gluconeogenesis (n = 9; 3.7 +/- 0.8 vs. 2.6 +/- 0.7 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1)). Insulin-induced suppression of free fatty acids was greater (P < 0.05) after treatment with pioglitazone (0.14 +/- 0.03 vs. 0.06 +/- 0.01 mmol/l) but unchanged with metformin (0.12 +/- 0.03 vs. 0.15 +/- 0.07 mmol/l).

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, relative to metformin, pioglitazone improves hepatic insulin action in people with type 2 diabetes, partly by enhancing insulin-induced suppression of gluconeogenesis. On the other hand, both drugs have comparable effects on insulin-induced stimulation of glucose uptake.