BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Two methods for measuring insulin sensitivity, fasting plasma insulin (FPI) and homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) have been proposed for use in large epidemiological research and clinical practice. This project describes the range of observed values of the HOMA and FPI in a large sample of the U.S. population. METHODS: We used fasting plasma glucose and insulin values from the Third National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES III) to identify the FPI and HOMA values. For both FPI and HOMA, higher values indicate lower insulin sensitivity. RESULTS: Among 6,511 participants without treated diabetes mellitus, FPI ranged from 1.8 to 175.8 microU/mL, with 25th percentile=6.7, median=9.3, 75th percentile=13.3, and mean+/-1 SD=11.2+/-7.5; HOMA ranged from 0.3 to 52.6 (mmol)(microU)/L(2), with 25th percentile=1.5, median=2.2, 75th percentile=3.3, and mean+/-SD=2.8+/-2.4. CONCLUSION: These findings describe the spectrum of insulin sensitivity and may be useful in helping physicians develop a clinical understanding of the dynamic range of both FPI and HOMA measures.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Two methods for measuring insulin sensitivity, fasting plasma insulin (FPI) and homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) have been proposed for use in large epidemiological research and clinical practice. This project describes the range of observed values of the HOMA and FPI in a large sample of the U.S. population. METHODS: We used fasting plasma glucose and insulin values from the Third National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES III) to identify the FPI and HOMA values. For both FPI and HOMA, higher values indicate lower insulin sensitivity. RESULTS: Among 6,511 participants without treated diabetes mellitus, FPI ranged from 1.8 to 175.8 microU/mL, with 25th percentile=6.7, median=9.3, 75th percentile=13.3, and mean+/-1 SD=11.2+/-7.5; HOMA ranged from 0.3 to 52.6 (mmol)(microU)/L(2), with 25th percentile=1.5, median=2.2, 75th percentile=3.3, and mean+/-SD=2.8+/-2.4. CONCLUSION: These findings describe the spectrum of insulin sensitivity and may be useful in helping physicians develop a clinical understanding of the dynamic range of both FPI and HOMA measures.
Authors: Naoki Kumashiro; Derek M Erion; Dongyan Zhang; Mario Kahn; Sara A Beddow; Xin Chu; Christopher D Still; Glenn S Gerhard; Xianlin Han; James Dziura; Kitt Falk Petersen; Varman T Samuel; Gerald I Shulman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-09-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Marc-Andre Cornier; Dana Dabelea; Teri L Hernandez; Rachel C Lindstrom; Amy J Steig; Nicole R Stob; Rachael E Van Pelt; Hong Wang; Robert H Eckel Journal: Endocr Rev Date: 2008-10-29 Impact factor: 19.871
Authors: Kevin C Oeffinger; Beverley Adams-Huet; Ronald G Victor; Timothy S Church; Peter G Snell; Andrea L Dunn; Debra A Eshelman-Kent; Robert Ross; Peter M Janiszewski; Alicia J Turoff; Sandra Brooks; Gloria Lena Vega Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-06-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Ceccato; G Occhi; N M Albiger; S Rizzati; S Ferasin; G Trivellin; F Mantero; C Scaroni Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Attila Nakeeb; Anthony G Comuzzie; Hayder Al-Azzawi; Gabriele E Sonnenberg; Ahmed H Kissebah; Henry A Pitt Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Medha Priyadarshini; Mohammad A Kamal; Nigel H Greig; Marcella Reale; Adel M Abuzenadah; Adeel G A Chaudhary; Ghazi A Damanhouri Journal: CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets Date: 2012-06-01 Impact factor: 4.388
Authors: Nathalie Bergeron; Paul T Williams; Regina Lamendella; Nastaran Faghihnia; Alyssa Grube; Xinmin Li; Zeneng Wang; Rob Knight; Janet K Jansson; Stanley L Hazen; Ronald M Krauss Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2016-12-20 Impact factor: 3.718