Dataset Information

Sitting less elicits metabolic responses similar to exercise and enhances insulin sensitivity in postmenopausal women.

ABSTRACT:

Aims/hypothesis

In our current society sedentary behaviour predominates in most people and is associated with the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. It has been suggested that replacing sitting time by standing and walking could be beneficial for individuals with type 2 diabetes but the underlying mechanisms are unknown and direct comparisons with exercise are lacking. Our objective was to directly compare metabolic responses of either sitting less or exercising, relative to being sedentary.

Methods

We performed a randomised, crossover intervention study in 12 overweight women who performed three well-controlled 4 day activity regimens: (1) sitting regimen (sitting 14 h/day); (2) exercise regimen (sitting 13 h/day, exercise 1 h/day); and (3) sitting less regimen (sitting 9 h/day, standing 4 h/day and walking 3 h/day). The primary outcome was insulin sensitivity measured by a two-step hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp. We additionally performed metabolomics on muscle biopsies taken before the clamp to identify changes at the molecular level.

Results

Replacing sitting time by standing and walking over 4 days resulted in improved peripheral insulin sensitivity, comparable with the improvement achieved by moderate-to-vigorous exercise. Specifically, we report a significant improvement in peripheral insulin sensitivity in the sitting less (~13%) and the exercise regimen (~20%), compared with the sitting regimen. Furthermore, sitting less shifted the underlying muscle metabolome towards that seen with moderate-to-vigorous exercise, compared with the sitting regimen.

Conclusions/interpretations

Replacing sitting time by standing and walking is an attractive alternative to moderate-to-vigorous exercise for improving metabolic health.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03912922.

SUBMITTER: Remie CME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8435176 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aims/hypothesisWe aimed to examine the effects of breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking vs an energy-matched bout of structured exercise on 24 h glucose levels and insulin resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes.MethodsIn a randomised crossover study, 19 patients with type 2 diabetes (13 men/6 women, 63 ± 9 years old) who were not using insulin each followed three regimens under free-living conditions, each lasting 4 days: (1) Sitting: 4415 steps/day with 14 h sitting/day; (2) Exercise: 4823 steps/day with 1.1 h/day of sitting replaced by moderate- to vigorous-intensity cycling (at an intensity of 5.9 metabolic equivalents [METs]); and (3) Sit Less: 17,502 steps/day with 4.7 h/day of sitting replaced by standing and light-intensity walking (an additional 2.5 h and 2.2 h, respectively, compared with the hours spent doing these activities in the Sitting regimen). Blocked randomisation was performed using a block size of six regimen orders using sealed, non-translucent envelopes. Individuals who assessed the outcomes were blinded to group assignment. Meals were standardised during each intervention. Physical activity and glucose levels were assessed for 24 h/day by accelerometry (activPAL) and a glucose monitor (iPro2), respectively. The incremental AUC (iAUC) for 24 h glucose (primary outcome) and insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR) were assessed on days 4 and 5, respectively.ResultsThe iAUC for 24 h glucose (mean ± SEM) was significantly lower during the Sit Less intervention than in Sitting (1263 ± 189 min × mmol/l vs 1974 ± 324 min × mmol/l; p = 0.002), and was similar between Sit Less and Exercise (Exercise: 1383 ± 194 min × mmol/l; p = 0.499). Exercise failed to improve HOMA2-IR compared with Sitting (2.06 ± 0.28 vs 2.16 ± 0.26; p = 0.177). In contrast, Sit Less (1.89 ± 0.26) significantly reduced HOMA2-IR compared with Exercise (p = 0.015) as well as Sitting (p = 0.001).Conclusions/interpretationBreaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking effectively improved 24 h glucose levels and improved insulin sensitivity in individuals with type 2 diabetes to a greater extent than structured exercise. Thus, our results suggest that breaking sitting with standing and light-intensity walking may be an alternative to structured exercise to promote glycaemic control in patients type 2 diabetes.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02371239 FUNDING: : The study was supported by a Kootstra grant from Maastricht University Medical Centre+, and the Dutch Heart Foundation. Financial support was also provided by Novo Nordisk BV, and Medtronic and Roche made the equipment available for continuous glucose monitoring.

Project description:ObjectiveExercise enhances the sensitivity of mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) to amino acids, in particular leucine. How long this enhanced sensitivity lasts, and which mechanisms control enhanced leucine-mediated mTORC1 activation following exercise is currently unknown.MethodsC57BL/6J mice were exercised for one night in a resistance-braked running wheel after a 12-day acclimatization period. Mice were gavaged with a submaximal dose of l-leucine or saline acutely or 48 h after exercise cessation, following 3 h food withdrawal. Muscles were excised 30 min after leucine administration. To study the contribution of mTORC1, we repeated those experiments but blocked mTORC1 activation using rapamycin immediately before the overnight running bout and one hour before the first dose of leucine. mTORC1 signaling, muscle protein synthesis and amino acid sensing machinery were assessed using immunoblot and qPCR. Leucine uptake was measured using L-[14C(U)]-leucine tracer labeling.ResultsWhen compared to sedentary conditions, leucine supplementation more potently activated mTORC1 and protein synthesis in acutely exercised muscle. This effect was observed in m. soleus but not in m. tibialis anterior nor m. plantaris. The synergistic effect in m. soleus was long-lasting as key downstream markers of mTORC1 as well as protein synthesis remained higher when leucine was administered 48 h after exercise. We found that exercise enhanced the expression of amino acid transporters and promoted uptake of leucine into the muscle, leading to higher free intramuscular leucine levels. This coincided with increased expression of activating transcription factor 4 (ATF4), a main transcriptional regulator of amino acid uptake and metabolism, and downstream activation of amino acid genes as well as leucyl-tRNA synthetase (LARS), a putative leucine sensor. Finally, blocking mTORC1 using rapamycin did not reduce expression and activation of ATF4, suggesting that the latter does not act downstream of mTORC1. Rather, we found a robust increase in eukaryotic initiation factor 2α (eIF2α) phosphorylation, suggesting that the integrated stress response pathway, rather than exercise-induced mTORC1 activation, drives long-term ATF4 expression in skeletal muscle after exercise.ConclusionsThe enhanced sensitivity of mTORC1 to leucine is maintained at least 48 h after exercise. This shows that the anabolic window of opportunity for protein ingestion is not restricted to the first hours immediately following exercise. Increased mTORC1 sensitivity to leucine coincided with enhanced leucine influx into muscle and higher expression of genes involved in leucine sensing and amino acid metabolism. Also, exercise induced an increase in ATF4 protein expression. Altogether, these data suggest that muscular contractions switch on a coordinated program to enhance amino acid uptake as well as intramuscular sensing of key amino acids involved in mTORC1 activation and the stimulation of muscle protein synthesis.