João G A Bergamasco, Maíra C Scarpelli, Joshua S Godwin, Paulo H C Mesquita, Talisson S Chaves, Deivid G da Silva, Diego Bittencourt, Nathalia F Dias, Ricardo A Medalha, Paulo C Carello Filho, Vitor Angleri, Luiz A R Costa, J Max Michel, Felipe C Vechin, Andreas N Kavazis, Carlos Ugrinowitsch, Michael D Roberts, Cleiton A Libardi
{"title":"在阻力训练诱导的肌肉肥大中,无反应者和有反应者的雄激素受体标记物没有差异。","authors":"João G A Bergamasco, Maíra C Scarpelli, Joshua S Godwin, Paulo H C Mesquita, Talisson S Chaves, Deivid G da Silva, Diego Bittencourt, Nathalia F Dias, Ricardo A Medalha, Paulo C Carello Filho, Vitor Angleri, Luiz A R Costa, J Max Michel, Felipe C Vechin, Andreas N Kavazis, Carlos Ugrinowitsch, Michael D Roberts, Cleiton A Libardi","doi":"10.1152/japplphysiol.00354.2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study was to investigate whether baseline values and acute and chronic changes in androgen receptors (AR) markers, including total AR, cytoplasmic (cAR), and nuclear (nAR) fractions, as well as DNA-binding activity (AR-DNA), are involved in muscle hypertrophy responsiveness by comparing young nonresponder and responder individuals. After 10 wk of resistance training (RT), participants were identified as nonresponders using two typical errors (TE) obtained through two muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) ultrasound measurements (2 × TE; 4.94%), and the highest responders within our sample were numerically matched. Muscle biopsies were performed at baseline, 24 h after the first RT session (acute responses), and 96 h after the last session (chronic responses). AR, cAR, and nAR were analyzed using Western blotting, and AR-DNA was analyzed using an ELISA-oligonucleotide assay. Twelve participants were identified as nonresponders (ΔmCSA: -1.32%) and 12 as responders (ΔmCSA: 21.35%). There were no baseline differences between groups in mCSA, AR, cAR, nAR, or AR-DNA (<i>P</i> > 0.05). For acute responses, there was a significant difference between nonresponders (+19.5%) and responders (-14.4%) in AR-DNA [effect size (ES) = -1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.53 to -0.16; <i>P</i> = 0.015]. There were no acute between-group differences in any other AR markers (<i>P</i> > 0.05). No significant differences between groups were observed in chronic responses across any AR markers (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Nonresponders and responders presented similar baseline, acute, and chronic results for the majority of the AR markers. Thus, our findings do not support the influence of AR markers on muscle hypertrophy responsiveness to RT in untrained individuals.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> We explored, for the first time, the influence of androgen receptor (AR) through the separation of cytoplasmic and nuclear cell fractions [i.e., cytoplasmic androgen receptor (cAR), nuclear androgen receptor (nAR), and androgen receptor DNA-binding activity (AR-DNA)] on muscle hypertrophy responsiveness to resistance training. The absence of muscle hypertrophy in naïve individuals does not seem to be explained by baseline values, and acute or chronic changes in AR markers.</p>","PeriodicalId":15160,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied physiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Androgen receptor markers do not differ between nonresponders and responders to resistance training-induced muscle hypertrophy.\",\"authors\":\"João G A Bergamasco, Maíra C Scarpelli, Joshua S Godwin, Paulo H C Mesquita, Talisson S Chaves, Deivid G da Silva, Diego Bittencourt, Nathalia F Dias, Ricardo A Medalha, Paulo C Carello Filho, Vitor Angleri, Luiz A R Costa, J Max Michel, Felipe C Vechin, Andreas N Kavazis, Carlos Ugrinowitsch, Michael D Roberts, Cleiton A Libardi\",\"doi\":\"10.1152/japplphysiol.00354.2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this study was to investigate whether baseline values and acute and chronic changes in androgen receptors (AR) markers, including total AR, cytoplasmic (cAR), and nuclear (nAR) fractions, as well as DNA-binding activity (AR-DNA), are involved in muscle hypertrophy responsiveness by comparing young nonresponder and responder individuals. After 10 wk of resistance training (RT), participants were identified as nonresponders using two typical errors (TE) obtained through two muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) ultrasound measurements (2 × TE; 4.94%), and the highest responders within our sample were numerically matched. Muscle biopsies were performed at baseline, 24 h after the first RT session (acute responses), and 96 h after the last session (chronic responses). AR, cAR, and nAR were analyzed using Western blotting, and AR-DNA was analyzed using an ELISA-oligonucleotide assay. Twelve participants were identified as nonresponders (ΔmCSA: -1.32%) and 12 as responders (ΔmCSA: 21.35%). There were no baseline differences between groups in mCSA, AR, cAR, nAR, or AR-DNA (<i>P</i> > 0.05). For acute responses, there was a significant difference between nonresponders (+19.5%) and responders (-14.4%) in AR-DNA [effect size (ES) = -1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.53 to -0.16; <i>P</i> = 0.015]. There were no acute between-group differences in any other AR markers (<i>P</i> > 0.05). No significant differences between groups were observed in chronic responses across any AR markers (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Nonresponders and responders presented similar baseline, acute, and chronic results for the majority of the AR markers. Thus, our findings do not support the influence of AR markers on muscle hypertrophy responsiveness to RT in untrained individuals.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> We explored, for the first time, the influence of androgen receptor (AR) through the separation of cytoplasmic and nuclear cell fractions [i.e., cytoplasmic androgen receptor (cAR), nuclear androgen receptor (nAR), and androgen receptor DNA-binding activity (AR-DNA)] on muscle hypertrophy responsiveness to resistance training. The absence of muscle hypertrophy in naïve individuals does not seem to be explained by baseline values, and acute or chronic changes in AR markers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of applied physiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of applied physiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00354.2024\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied physiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00354.2024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究旨在通过比较年轻的无反应者和有反应者,研究雄激素受体(AR)标记物(包括总 AR、细胞质(cAR)和核(nAR)部分以及 DNA 结合活性(AR-DNA))的基线值和急性与慢性变化是否与肌肉肥大反应有关。经过 10 周的阻力训练(RT)后,通过两次肌肉横截面积(mCSA)超声波测量(2×TE;4.94%)获得的两个典型误差(TE)将参与者确定为无反应者,并与样本中反应最高者进行数字匹配。肌肉活检分别在基线、第一次 RT 治疗后 24 小时(急性反应)和最后一次治疗后 96 小时(慢性反应)进行。使用 Western 印迹法分析 AR、cAR 和 nAR,使用 ELISA-寡核苷酸检测法分析 AR-DNA。十二名参与者被确定为无反应者(ΔmCSA:-1.32%),十二名参与者被确定为有反应者(ΔmCSA:21.35%)。各组之间在 mCSA、AR、cAR、nAR 或 AR-DNA 方面没有基线差异(P > 0.05)。就急性反应而言,无反应者(+19.5%)和有反应者(-14.4%)的 AR-DNA 存在显著差异(ES = -1.39; 95% CI: -2.53 to -0.16;P=0.015)。其他任何 AR 标记物均无严重的组间差异(P > 0.05)。在任何 AR 标记的慢性反应方面,各组间均未观察到明显差异(P > 0.05)。无反应者和有反应者在大多数 AR 标志物方面的基线、急性和慢性结果相似。因此,我们的研究结果不支持 AR 标记对未经训练的人肌肉肥大对 RT 的反应性的影响。
Androgen receptor markers do not differ between nonresponders and responders to resistance training-induced muscle hypertrophy.
The aim of this study was to investigate whether baseline values and acute and chronic changes in androgen receptors (AR) markers, including total AR, cytoplasmic (cAR), and nuclear (nAR) fractions, as well as DNA-binding activity (AR-DNA), are involved in muscle hypertrophy responsiveness by comparing young nonresponder and responder individuals. After 10 wk of resistance training (RT), participants were identified as nonresponders using two typical errors (TE) obtained through two muscle cross-sectional area (mCSA) ultrasound measurements (2 × TE; 4.94%), and the highest responders within our sample were numerically matched. Muscle biopsies were performed at baseline, 24 h after the first RT session (acute responses), and 96 h after the last session (chronic responses). AR, cAR, and nAR were analyzed using Western blotting, and AR-DNA was analyzed using an ELISA-oligonucleotide assay. Twelve participants were identified as nonresponders (ΔmCSA: -1.32%) and 12 as responders (ΔmCSA: 21.35%). There were no baseline differences between groups in mCSA, AR, cAR, nAR, or AR-DNA (P > 0.05). For acute responses, there was a significant difference between nonresponders (+19.5%) and responders (-14.4%) in AR-DNA [effect size (ES) = -1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.53 to -0.16; P = 0.015]. There were no acute between-group differences in any other AR markers (P > 0.05). No significant differences between groups were observed in chronic responses across any AR markers (P > 0.05). Nonresponders and responders presented similar baseline, acute, and chronic results for the majority of the AR markers. Thus, our findings do not support the influence of AR markers on muscle hypertrophy responsiveness to RT in untrained individuals.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We explored, for the first time, the influence of androgen receptor (AR) through the separation of cytoplasmic and nuclear cell fractions [i.e., cytoplasmic androgen receptor (cAR), nuclear androgen receptor (nAR), and androgen receptor DNA-binding activity (AR-DNA)] on muscle hypertrophy responsiveness to resistance training. The absence of muscle hypertrophy in naïve individuals does not seem to be explained by baseline values, and acute or chronic changes in AR markers.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Applied Physiology publishes the highest quality original research and reviews that examine novel adaptive and integrative physiological mechanisms in humans and animals that advance the field. The journal encourages the submission of manuscripts that examine the acute and adaptive responses of various organs, tissues, cells and/or molecular pathways to environmental, physiological and/or pathophysiological stressors. As an applied physiology journal, topics of interest are not limited to a particular organ system. The journal, therefore, considers a wide array of integrative and translational research topics examining the mechanisms involved in disease processes and mitigation strategies, as well as the promotion of health and well-being throughout the lifespan. Priority is given to manuscripts that provide mechanistic insight deemed to exert an impact on the field.