In addition to the mechanical fragility of the sarcolemma, dystrophin deficiency is characterized by metabolic dysregulation, manifesting as reduced glycolytic enzymes, mitochondrial structural and functional abnormalities, and altered glucose uptake and response to insulin [4, 8, 11, 19, 25,26,27,28]. Reduced muscle mass and increased fat are risk factors and could contribute to altered insulin sensitivity, independent of dystrophin. However, the presence of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia in boys with normal or low body mass index [11] suggests that the dystrophy state, and not just body composition, alters insulin sensitivity in DMD. Cumulatively, these changes lead to a “metabolic crisis” in dystrophin deficient myofibers, which could result in greater susceptibility to ischemia, metabolic stress, and reduced regenerative capacity.
Glucose transport into muscle cells in response to insulin or contraction [29] occurs primarily through translocation of GLUT4 from the cytoplasm to the sarcolemma/T-tubules [10]. As such, alterations in GLUT4 levels or trafficking within the cell significantly impact overall glucose metabolism. Changes in GLUT4 localization has been noted in both DMD and mdx muscles, but it is unclear if this altered trafficking is a direct result of dystrophin loss or a secondary response to metabolic stress. We hypothesized that GLUT4 alterations in GRMD would be similar to DMD muscle [11], contributing to the metabolic dysregulation in dystrophic muscle.
We queried microarray profiles and found reduced GLUT4 mRNA in dystrophin-deficient muscles. However, our follow-up studies showed varying protein levels, being similar to normal dogs in GRMD CS and VL muscles, but increased in GRMD LDE. The protein results in the CS and VL are in keeping with unchanged levels of GLUT4 protein expression in type II diabetes, though mRNA is also unchanged in that disease [30, 31]. On the other hand, increased levels in GRMD LDE were consistent with elevated values in hind limb muscles of the mdx mouse, regardless of age [12]. Interestingly, GRMD LDE had the most profound changes in GLUT4 mRNA and protein, suggesting a negative feedback loop may be involved between mRNA and protein. Moreover, these molecular changes in GRMD LDE may be due to the severe dystrophic phenotype and significant degeneration/regeneration observed in this muscle (LDE is atrophied/wasted to half the size of normal) [32]. With regard to the left ventricle of the heart, there was a trend for increased GLUT-4 in GRMD (p = 0.06). Perhaps with the availability of more samples, statistical significance could be achieved.
While overall GLUT4 protein levels in the tissues were not increased in most GRMD muscles evaluated, immunofluorescence microscopy surprisingly revealed increased GLUT4 localization at the myofiber cell membrane in all GRMD skeletal muscle evaluated. This membrane localization could represent a dysregulation in cellular trafficking or a physiological response to increased metabolic demand for glucose (due to the metabolic crisis). On that note, GLUT4 translocation to the muscle membrane in this model may represent a sort of “priming” to allow for rapid extracellular glucose uptake. Interestingly, normal and GRMD muscles had similar amounts of cytoplasmic GLUT4 aggregates, representing a potential therapeutic reservoir for the latter. With regard to cardiomyocytes, we did not detect a statistical difference in GLUT4 membrane expression between normal and GRMD left ventricle samples. Lesions and associated clinical disease occur much earlier in skeletal vs. cardiac muscle in DMD and GRMD, raising questions of factors that could either accelerate skeletal muscle or delay cardiac involvement. These alterations in skeletal vs. cardiac muscle GLUT4 translocation may represent the differences in severity between the two tissues.
Although we did not co-stain for GLUT-4 and fiber type, it should be noted that most dystrophin-deficient myofibers undergo fiber type switching from fast to slow twitch [4]. We can then infer that GRMD myofibers with GLUT-4 membranous expression were of the slow twitch phenotype. A previous study in human muscle showed small, but significant differences in GLUT-4 expression and fiber type; however, the authors concluded that GLUT-4 protein content was related more closely to activity level than fiber type [33].
We recently revealed that the morphologically spared and hypertrophied GRMD CS muscle had a reduction in expression in several glycolytic enzymes, including phosphoglucomutase-1, 6-phosphofructokinase, and glucose-6-phosphate isomerase [4]. In the current study, we evaluated at the mRNA level, HK-1, the first enzyme of the glycolytic pathway, and observed an increased expression in GRMD LDE muscle. These differences in glycolytic enzyme expression may be due to muscle specific changes that occur between hypertrophied (CS) and atrophied (LDE) muscle in GRMD and should be further explored. Nevertheless, the increased HK1 is in keeping with our hypothesized compensatory mechanism within dystrophic muscle to rapidly metabolize glucose.
We then hypothesized that increased sarcolemmal GLUT4 could lead to rapid and immediate glucose uptake into skeletal muscle. Indeed, GRMD dogs had rapid BG uptake with a comcomitant insulin peak at 5-min post-dextrose challenge. In contrast, normal/carrier insulin levels peaked at 15 min. This truncated insulin response shows that the apparently rapid glucose uptake was not due to a larger overall insulin level in GRMD. Interestingly, GRMD dogs had higher basal (pre-dextrose injection) BG and insulin levels, suggesting dystrophic muscle is under higher metabolic demand and requires a slightly higher level of BG and insulin levels to compensate. Area under the BG curves did not differ between GRMD and normal/carrier dogs, perhaps because of our failure to sample frequently over the first 15 min and continue sampling for 3 h [34]. Had we employed more frequent early sampling, the slope of GRMD curves might have been increased. In addition, because glucose metabolism varies with age, GRMD and normal/carrier dogs should be matched more closely in future studies. Here, we tested the response to insulin-mediated GLUT4 uptake of glucose. Ideally, contraction-mediated GLUT4 uptake should be tested, but performing a treadmill exhaustion protocol in GRMD dogs, as seen in mice,would not be feasible [35].
We further hypothesized that GLUT-4 localization at the dystrophic myofiber membrane would produce a measurable increase in the immediate uptake of [18F]FDG. In order to force rapid and specific uptake into skeletal muscle, we co-administered insulin and [18F]FDG tracer at the initiation of scanning. Similar to our IV-GTT results, [18F]FDG uptake was higher in GRMD vs. normal/carrier dogs at 5 min post-[18F]FDG/insulin administration but not at 1 h, consistent with an early, transient response [36]. Most likely, this early transient response to glucose (and a glucose analog) partially compensates for metabolic dysregulation in dystrophic muscle. Other methods such as dynamic PET after [18F]FDG administration might demonstrate differences in uptake over time [37]. With regards to exercise, all dogs are provided daily enrichment, including exercise (walking and running outside for a period of time). Normal animals are inherently more active than GRMD dogs, but regular conditioning would be expected to create increased insulin sensitivity in normal muscle (i.e., increasing glucose and glucose analog uptake). For these imaging studies, exercise was minimized in all groups the morning prior to the PET/CT studies to reduce any exercise-related short-term effects on [18F]FDG uptake. Nevertheless, our findings in GRMD dogs that increased [18F]FDG and dextrose uptake at 5 min post-administration provides a potential biomarker “window” to assess treatments intended to improve muscle metabolism.
Like skeletal muscle, GLUT4 is the major transporter of glucose into cardiomyocytes [38, 39]. Surprisingly, mean and max SUVs were lower on PET studies of the left ventricle in GRMD vs. normal/carrier dogs. Since this reduction persisted beyond the 5-min time point, this likely did not occur simply because of selective skeletal muscle uptake. Instead, this presumably reflects a primary cardiac insulin resistance associated with dystrophic cardiomyopathy [16]. While we further hypothesized that [18F]FDG distribution would correspond to the regional nature of lesions within the dystrophic heart, mean or max SUV did not vary among the 16 LV segments nor did CoV differ between genotypes. Similarly, GLUT4 protein expression and translocation differences could not be confirmed in the heart, though there was a trend toward increased GLUT4 protein expression in GRMD, which appeared to be affected by higher levels in older dogs. Indeed, further studies in GRMD heart muscle are needed to confirm GLUT-4 trafficking abnormalities due to potential aberrant insulin and/or contraction stimulation.
Taken together, these findings reiterate that glucose dynamics and metabolism vary between cardiac and skeletal muscle. Indeed, these two muscle cell types have different GLUT4 vesicle populations with varying responses to insulin and contraction [38, 39]. This metabolic dissimilarity could also help explain the difference in disease progression between these two tissues, as suggested by recent gene microarray studies in GRMD dogs [40]. Most affected dogs from the PET/CT study are thriving in the colony, which has precluded assessment of GLUT4 expression in their hearts to better clarify these differences.
Blood flow and inflammation can be contributors to differences in [18F]FDG uptake, particularly in early PET scans. Due to prolonged washout times and concerns about prolonged anesthesia in the dogs, as well as not wanting to administer an additional tracer to confound results, we did not assess blood flow or inflammation directly in this study. However, blood pressure, which is measured in the pelvic limb, was not significantly different between groups before, during, or after [18F]FDG and insulin administration. Additionally, SUV measurements of pelvic fat, which should not be affected by the GLUT4 differences observed in the skeletal muscle between genotypes, did not show significant differences in mean SUV. However, pelvic fat max SUV was higher in normal dogs compared with other groups. Overall, these results suggest that altered blood flow was not a major contributor to increased skeletal muscle SUV in GRMD dogs.
Likewise, we assessed multiple GRMD muscles in the thigh which naturally show differences in degree of pathology, including inflammation. These include the CS, which is hypertrophied but has minimal inflammation, and the VL and rectus femoris that show classic dystrophic changes of inflammation/degeneration [20, 32]. Our statistical analysis revealed that GRMD skeletal muscle had a significant increase in mean SUV at 5 min post-[18F]FDG/insulin, but the GRMD genotype did not influence uptake between the individual muscles (CS, VL, rectus femoris). Elevated blood glucose from feeding has been shown to interfere with [18F]DG uptake, while co-administration of insulin results in a rapid uptake of 85–90 % of glucose within the first 5 min [41]. Additionally, although inflammatory cells have insulin responsive GLUT4 translocation [42], the inflammatory infiltrate present in GRMD muscle would be expected to interfere with insulin sensitivity, rather than increasing uptake [43]. Therefore, we hypothesize that the primary driver of increased SUV in GRMD skeletal muscle was due to insulin-stimulated GLUT-4 uptake of [18F]DG. We acknowledge that further studies should be performed to co-administer [18F]FDG, a blood flow tracer, and an inflammatory marker in GRMD dogs to further clarify this issue.
Another potential confounding factor is the age differences between the molecular and PET studies. For our initial molecular assessment of mRNA, protein expression, and qPCR, we used a cohort of frozen samples banked from previous biopsies and muscle sampling at disease-specific time points. When we moved to in vivo imaging, we utilized breeder dogs with a wider age range that were currently available and attempted to best match between the examined groups. It is possible that the gene expression and GLUT4 localization profiles in older, affected dogs are different than those seen in younger animals. However, disease differences are manifested and stratified by 6 months of age, and would be expected to be similar or worse in older affected dogs.
Gender is also a potential confounding factor. In people, there are differences in GLUT4 expression and insulin resistance between males and females [41]. Carrier animals in this study were female, while GRMD and normal animals were of mixed gender. Female dogs in diestrus or pregnancy can have increased insulin resistance and higher insulin, but we did not include females which had recently been in heat in this study. However, analysis of glucose or insulin levels stratified by gender did not show a significant difference between genders in our cohort. Previous canine studies of circulating monocyte glucose transporters did not show a difference between gender [42]. We have not detected any functional differences between genders in GRMD dogs, either [44]. As such, we believe sex differences were not a major confounder in this study.