J P Kirwan1, L Huston-Presley, S C Kalhan, P M Catalano. 1. Department of Reproductive Biology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine at MetroHealth Medical Center, Bell Greve Building, 2500 MetroHealth Dr., Cleveland, OH 44109-1998, USA. jkirwan@metrohealth.org
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We examined whether selected indexes of insulin sensitivity derived from an oral glucose tolerance test (IS(OGTT)) or fasting glucose/insulin levels (IS(QUICKI) and IS(HOMA)) can be used to predict insulin sensitivity in women before and during pregnancy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 2-h euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (5 mmol/l glucose, 40 mU. m(-2). min(-1) insulin) and a 120-min oral glucose tolerance test (75 g load pregravid, 100 g pregnant) were repeated on 15 women (10 with normal glucose tolerance [NGT] and 5 with gestational diabetes mellitus [GDM]) pregravid and during both early (12-14 weeks) and late (34-36 weeks) pregnancy. An index of insulin sensitivity derived from the clamp (IS(CLAMP)) was obtained from glucose infusion rates adjusted for change in fat-free mass and endogenous glucose production measured using [6,6(-2)H(2)]glucose. RESULTS: Univariate analysis using combined groups and periods of pregnancy resulted in significant correlations between IS(CLAMP) and IS(OGTT) (r(2) = 0.74, P < 0.0001), IS(QUICKI) (r(2) = 0.64, P < 0.0001), and IS(HOMA) (r(2) = 0.53, P < 0.0001). The IS(OGTT) provided a significantly better correlation (P < 0.0001) than either IS(QUICKI) or IS(HOMA.) Multivariate analysis showed a significant group effect (P < 0.0003) on the prediction model, and separate equations were developed for the NGT (r(2) = 0.64, P < 0.0001) and GDM (r(2) = 0.85, P < 0.0001) groups. When subdivided by period of pregnancy, the correlation between IS(CLAMP) and IS(OGTT) pregravid was r(2) = 0.63 (P = 0.0002), during early pregnancy was r(2) = 0.80 (P < 0.0001), and during late pregnancy was r(2) = 0.64 (P = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of insulin sensitivity from the IS(OGTT) during pregnancy were significantly better than from fasting glucose and insulin values. However, separate prediction equations are necessary for pregnant women with NGT and women with GDM.
OBJECTIVE: We examined whether selected indexes of insulin sensitivity derived from an oral glucose tolerance test (IS(OGTT)) or fasting glucose/insulin levels (IS(QUICKI) and IS(HOMA)) can be used to predict insulin sensitivity in women before and during pregnancy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 2-h euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (5 mmol/l glucose, 40 mU. m(-2). min(-1) insulin) and a 120-min oral glucose tolerance test (75 g load pregravid, 100 g pregnant) were repeated on 15 women (10 with normal glucose tolerance [NGT] and 5 with gestational diabetes mellitus [GDM]) pregravid and during both early (12-14 weeks) and late (34-36 weeks) pregnancy. An index of insulin sensitivity derived from the clamp (IS(CLAMP)) was obtained from glucose infusion rates adjusted for change in fat-free mass and endogenous glucose production measured using [6,6(-2)H(2)]glucose. RESULTS: Univariate analysis using combined groups and periods of pregnancy resulted in significant correlations between IS(CLAMP) and IS(OGTT) (r(2) = 0.74, P < 0.0001), IS(QUICKI) (r(2) = 0.64, P < 0.0001), and IS(HOMA) (r(2) = 0.53, P < 0.0001). The IS(OGTT) provided a significantly better correlation (P < 0.0001) than either IS(QUICKI) or IS(HOMA.) Multivariate analysis showed a significant group effect (P < 0.0003) on the prediction model, and separate equations were developed for the NGT (r(2) = 0.64, P < 0.0001) and GDM (r(2) = 0.85, P < 0.0001) groups. When subdivided by period of pregnancy, the correlation between IS(CLAMP) and IS(OGTT) pregravid was r(2) = 0.63 (P = 0.0002), during early pregnancy was r(2) = 0.80 (P < 0.0001), and during late pregnancy was r(2) = 0.64 (P = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of insulin sensitivity from the IS(OGTT) during pregnancy were significantly better than from fasting glucose and insulin values. However, separate prediction equations are necessary for pregnant women with NGT and women with GDM.
Authors: J J Meier; B Gallwitz; M Askenas; K Vollmer; C F Deacon; J J Holst; W E Schmidt; M A Nauck Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2005-07-12 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: R Retnakaran; A J G Hanley; N Raif; C R Hirning; P W Connelly; M Sermer; S E Kahn; B Zinman Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2005-03-19 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Clare B Kelly; Michelle B Hookham; Jeremy Y Yu; Samuel M Lockhart; Mei Du; Alicia J Jenkins; Alison Nankervis; Kristian F Hanssen; Tore Henriksen; Satish K Garg; Samar M Hammad; James A Scardo; Christopher E Aston; Christopher C Patterson; Timothy J Lyons Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Ravi Retnakaran; Ying Qi; Mathew Sermer; Philip W Connelly; Anthony J G Hanley; Bernard Zinman Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2008-10-21 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: Leonie K Callaway; Paul B Colditz; Nuala M Byrne; Barbara E Lingwood; Ingrid J Rowlands; Katie Foxcroft; H David McIntyre Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-03-31 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Tatjana Radaelli; Kristen Anne Farrell; Larraine Huston-Presley; Saeid Baradaran Amini; John Patrick Kirwan; Harold David McIntyre; Patrick Michael Catalano Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-12-23 Impact factor: 19.112