ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Opinion Article

Defining “FGF21 Resistance” during obesity: Controversy, criteria and unresolved questions

[version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]
PUBLISHED 07 Mar 2018
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

The term “FGF21 resistance” was first used to describe increased circulating FGF21 levels concomitant to decreased FGF21 receptor complex expression in white adipose tissue of obese mice.  Since this initial report, the term has been associated with a wide range of pathological states, including human obesity, in which circulating FGF21 levels are elevated. However, the notion of “FGF21 resistance” has been controversial partly due to difficulty in delineating the mechanisms underlying the physiological versus pharmacological effects of FGF21.  Here, key aspects of the term “FGF21 resistance” are discussed including; the origin and experimental context surrounding the term “FGF21 resistance”, new criteria for evaluating FGF21 sensitivity in vivo and finally, crucial unresolved questions regarding the function of FGF21 during obesity.

Keywords

FGF21 resistance, fibroblast growth factor 21, obesity, insulin senstivity, FGF21, beta-klotho, insulin resistance

Fibroblast Growth Factor 21 (FGF21) has pleiotropic metabolic effects including increasing insulin sensitivity and energy expenditure, while decreasing body weight and sugar intake1,2. Paradoxical to these beneficial metabolic effects, circulating FGF21 is increased during obesity potentially suggesting a state of “FGF21 resistance”3. This hypothesis, however, has generated controversy within the field. In light of this and in response to a recent call for a unified definition of “FGF21 resistance”4, I would like to discuss the controversy surrounding “FGF21 resistance” during obesity, highlight unresolved questions and outline additional criteria for its definition.

“FGF21 resistance” was first used to describe decreased expression of the FGF21 receptor complex in epididymal white adipose tissue, increased plasma FGF21, blunted ERK phosphorylation, and attenuated reduction in plasma glucose following low dose administration of FGF21 that occurred in obese mice3. Shortly thereafter, an independent group also reported decreased FGF21 co-receptor expression in white adipose tissue and increased plasma FGF21 levels in obese mice5. However, based on dose response studies, these investigators concluded that circulating FGF21 is increased during obesity to maintain insulin sensitivity, and not due to “FGF21 resistance”5. Hence, the existence of “FGF21 resistance” during obesity has remained controversial with the prevailing question: how can “FGF21 resistance” exist if pharmacological dosing is still efficacious1? Potentially, FGF21 sensitivity during obesity may be akin to insulin resistance whereby the biological effect of endogenous FGF21 is lacking yet pharmacological dosing elicits an effect. Therefore, although effects of exogenous FGF21 should be evaluated in testing FGF21 sensitivity4, consideration of the dose, functional readout, and time-course of FGF21 action should be taken.

Although plasma FGF21 levels, FGF21 co-receptor expression and downstream signaling should be evaluated in defining “FGF21 resistance”4, it is difficult to interpret tissue-specific decreases in receptor and signaling activation without understanding how that specific tissue mediates FGF21’s effects. For example, what is the relevance of decreased co-receptor expression in white adipose tissue? Adipose tissue is necessary for FGF21’s acute insulin sensitizing effect6 yet, different results have been reported in vivo when either overexpressing or maintaining physiological levels of β-klotho during obesity7,8. Furthermore, brown adipocytes mediate the acute insulin sensitizing action of FGF216; meaning, that although decreased white adipose co-receptor expression has been used as a marker of “FGF21 resistance” we still do not understand the pathological relevance of this event.

How then, should “FGF21 resistance” during obesity be defined? Different experimental designs are required when evaluating the acute insulin sensitizing action of physiological levels of FGF21 versus the chronic effects on body composition of pharmacological doses of FGF21. Acute FGF21 sensitivity should be determined via insulin tolerance test following co-injection of insulin and FGF21 in addition to assessing tissue specific glucose uptake and activation of the FGF21 signaling cascade in brown adipose tissues6. To test chronic FGF21 sensitivity, weight loss and energy expenditure should be evaluated, although FGF21 signaling is difficult to assess since the specific tissue(s) mediating these effects of chronic FGF21 treatment remain undetermined.

Finally, caution is warranted in translating rodent studies to man. Although plasma FGF21 is elevated in obese and diabetic humans9, human FGF21 is proteolytically cleaved in vivo10. Therefore, the bioactivity of increased circulating FGF21 in humans remains unknown. It is possible that increased circulating FGF21 during obesity could serve a yet uncharacterized role. FGF21 has been shown to have central effects1113, however whether or not central FGF21 co-receptor expression and signaling are altered during obesity remains unreported.

There is still much to discover regarding FGF21 action but consideration of the points outlined here can help avoid ambiguity in defining “FGF21 resistance” during obesity. Undoubtedly, the definition of “FGF21 resistance” will continue to evolve as new physiological and pharmacological studies help unravel the mechanisms underlying FGF21’s metabolic actions.

Data availability

All data underlying the results are available as part of the article and no additional source data are required

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 07 Mar 2018
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Markan KR. Defining “FGF21 Resistance” during obesity: Controversy, criteria and unresolved questions [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] F1000Research 2018, 7:289 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.14117.1)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 07 Mar 2018
Views
8
Cite
Reviewer Report 26 Jun 2018
Andrew C. Adams, Lilly Research Laboratories, Eli Lilly and company, Indianapolis, IN, USA 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 8
The opinion presented by Dr. Markan discusses an important topic in the FGF21 field, which has persisted as an unresolved issue for quite some time. While the report presents a balanced view, I would suggest the following potential additions/revisions: ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Adams AC. Reviewer Report For: Defining “FGF21 Resistance” during obesity: Controversy, criteria and unresolved questions [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2018, 7:289 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.15354.r34679)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
11
Cite
Reviewer Report 08 Jun 2018
Junichiro Sonoda, Department of Cancer Immunology, Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 11
Markan KR discusses the controversial “FGF21 resistance” in obesity. It is an important topic for discussion given the crucial role of FGF21 signaling in health and disease. However, I feel that the discussion should also incorporate more recent findings, especially ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Sonoda J. Reviewer Report For: Defining “FGF21 Resistance” during obesity: Controversy, criteria and unresolved questions [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2018, 7:289 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.15354.r34680)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
11
Cite
Reviewer Report 27 Mar 2018
Moosa Mohammadi, Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Pharmacology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA 
Approved
VIEWS 11
In this article, Dr. Markan expresses her opinion on the ongoing controversy surrounding FGF21 resistance in obesity. This issue has not been explicitly addressed in the past publications so the commentary piece should be a refreshing read for the researchers ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Mohammadi M. Reviewer Report For: Defining “FGF21 Resistance” during obesity: Controversy, criteria and unresolved questions [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2018, 7:289 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.15354.r31641)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 07 Mar 2018
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.