The Expression of TBC1 Domain Family, Member 4 (TBC1D4) in Skeletal Muscles of Insulin-Resistant Mice in Response to Sulforaphane

Abstract

The Expression of TBC1 Domain Family, member 4 (TBC1D4) in Skeletal Muscles of Insulin-Resistant Mice in Response to Sulforaphane.

Background: Obesity is commonly accompanied by impaired glucose homeostasis. Decreased glucose transport to the peripheral tissues, mainly skeletal muscle, leads to reduced total glucose disposal and hyperglycemia. TBC1D4 gene is involved in the trafficking of GLUT4 to the outer cell membrane in skeletal muscle. Sulforaphane (SFN) has been suggested as a new potential anti-diabetic compound acting by reducing blood glucose levels through mechanisms not fully understood (1). The aim of this study is to investigate the effects SFN on TBC1D4 and GLUT4 gene expression in skeletal muscles of DIO mice, in order to elucidate the mechanism(s) through which SFN improves glucose homeostasis.

Methodology: C57BL/6 mice (n=20) were fed with a high fat diet (60%) for 16 weeks to generate diet induced obese (DIO) mice with body weights between 45–50 gm. Thereafter, DIO mice received either SFN (5mg/kg BW) (n=10) or vehicle (n=10) as controls daily by intraperitoneal injections for four weeks. Glucose tolerance test (1g/kg BW, IP) and insulin sensitivity test (ITT) were conducted (1 IU insulin/ g BW, IP route) at the beginning and end of the third week of the injection.

At the end of 4 weeks of the injection, samples of blood and skeletal muscles of both hindlimbs were collected. The expression levels of GLUT4 and TBC1D4 genes were analyzed by qRT-PCR. Blood was also used for glucose, adiponectin and insulin measurements.

Results: SFN-treated DIO mice had significantly lower non-fasting blood glucose levels than vehicle-treated mice (194.16 ± 14.12 vs. 147.44 ± 20.31 mg/dL, vehicle vs. SFN, p value=0.0003). Furthermore, GTT results indicate that the blood glucose levels at 120 minutes after glucose infusion in was (199.83±34.53 mg/dl vs. 138.55±221.78 mg/dl) for vehicle vs. SFN with p=0.0011 respectively. ITT showed that SFN treatment did not enhance insulin sensitivity in DIO mice. Additionally, SFN treatment did not significantly change the expression of TBC1D4, and GLUT4 genes in skeletal muscles compared to vehicle treatment (p values >0.05).

Furthermore, SFN treatment did not significantly affect the systemic insulin (1.84±0.74 vs 1.54±0.55 ng/ml, p=0.436), or adiponectin (11.96 ±2.29 vs 14.4±3.33 ug/ml, p=0.551) levels in SFN vs. vehicle-treated DIO mice, respectively. Conclusion: SFN treatment improves glucose disposal in DIO mice, which is not linked to the gene expression of GLUT4 and TBC1D4 and its mechanism of glucose disposal in skeletal muscles. Furthermore, SFN treatment did not improve insulin level, and the insulin sensitizer hormone adiponectin as potential players for enhancing insulin sensitivity.