OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) and the reciprocal index of homeostasis model assessment (1/HOMA-IR) derived from fasting plasma glucose and insulin level are excellent surrogate indices of insulin resistance in both normal range-weight and moderately obese type 2 diabetic and healthy subjects. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The association between QUICKI or 1/HOMA-IR and insulin resistance index assessed by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (clamp-IR) was investigated in 121 type 2 diabetic and 29 healthy subjects recruited from among 120 (age 55 +/- 11, 48 +/- 15, and 52 +/- 15 years [means +/- SD], respectively). Type 2 diabetic subjects were divided into groups of 76 normal range-weight and 45 moderately obese subjects (BMI 21.4 +/- 2.3 vs. 27.2 +/- 2.2 kg/m(2), P < 0.0001). RESULTS: QUICKI and 1/HOMA-IR were significantly lower in the moderately obese group than in the normal range-weight type 2 diabetic and healthy groups (n = 120) (QUICKI, 0.338 +/- 0.030, 0.371 +/- 0.037, and 0.389 +/- 0.041, respectively, P < 0.0001; 1/HOMA-IR, 0.50 +/- 0.33, 0.92 +/- 0.55, and 1.24 +/- 0.82, P < 0.0001). QUICKI was strongly correlated with clamp-IR in normal range-weight, moderately obese type 2 diabetic, and healthy subjects (r = 0.641, 0.570, and 0.502, respectively; all subjects, r = 0.608, P < 0.01) and 1/HOMA-IR exhibited correlations comparable to those of QUICKI with clamp-IR (r = 0.637, 0.530, and 0.461, respectively; all subjects, r = 0.589, P < 0.001). In multiple regression models including QUICKI or 1/HOMA-IR as an independent variable, the estimation formula accounted for 55% of the variability of clamp-IR for the group of all type 2 diabetic subjects (R(2) = 0.547 and 0.551, respectively, P <or= 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: QUICKI and 1/HOMA-IR were highly correlated with clamp-IR, with comparable coefficients in both normal range-weight and moderately obese type 2 diabetic patients and nondiabetic subjects. The latter can probably be applied clinically in view of its convenience.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) and the reciprocal index of homeostasis model assessment (1/HOMA-IR) derived from fasting plasma glucose and insulin level are excellent surrogate indices of insulin resistance in both normal range-weight and moderately obese type 2 diabetic and healthy subjects. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The association between QUICKI or 1/HOMA-IR and insulin resistance index assessed by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (clamp-IR) was investigated in 121 type 2 diabetic and 29 healthy subjects recruited from among 120 (age 55 +/- 11, 48 +/- 15, and 52 +/- 15 years [means +/- SD], respectively). Type 2 diabetic subjects were divided into groups of 76 normal range-weight and 45 moderately obese subjects (BMI 21.4 +/- 2.3 vs. 27.2 +/- 2.2 kg/m(2), P < 0.0001). RESULTS: QUICKI and 1/HOMA-IR were significantly lower in the moderately obese group than in the normal range-weight type 2 diabetic and healthy groups (n = 120) (QUICKI, 0.338 +/- 0.030, 0.371 +/- 0.037, and 0.389 +/- 0.041, respectively, P < 0.0001; 1/HOMA-IR, 0.50 +/- 0.33, 0.92 +/- 0.55, and 1.24 +/- 0.82, P < 0.0001). QUICKI was strongly correlated with clamp-IR in normal range-weight, moderately obese type 2 diabetic, and healthy subjects (r = 0.641, 0.570, and 0.502, respectively; all subjects, r = 0.608, P < 0.01) and 1/HOMA-IR exhibited correlations comparable to those of QUICKI with clamp-IR (r = 0.637, 0.530, and 0.461, respectively; all subjects, r = 0.589, P < 0.001). In multiple regression models including QUICKI or 1/HOMA-IR as an independent variable, the estimation formula accounted for 55% of the variability of clamp-IR for the group of all type 2 diabetic subjects (R(2) = 0.547 and 0.551, respectively, P <or= 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: QUICKI and 1/HOMA-IR were highly correlated with clamp-IR, with comparable coefficients in both normal range-weight and moderately obese type 2 diabeticpatients and nondiabetic subjects. The latter can probably be applied clinically in view of its convenience.
Authors: Jill K Morris; Eric D Vidoni; Jonathan D Mahnken; Robert N Montgomery; David K Johnson; John P Thyfault; Jeffrey M Burns Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Deborah A Elder; Patricia M Herbers; Tammy Weis; Debra Standiford; Jessica G Woo; David A D'Alessio Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Ryan S Friese; Jiaur R Gayen; Nitish R Mahapatra; Geert W Schmid-Schönbein; Daniel T O'Connor; Sushil K Mahata Journal: Physiol Genomics Date: 2009-12-01 Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: David M Mutch; Jens C Fuhrmann; Dietrich Rein; Jan C Wiemer; Jean-Luc Bouillot; Christine Poitou; Karine Clément Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-11-19 Impact factor: 3.240