AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Knowledge of the within-subject variability of a parameter is required to properly design and calculate sample sizes for longitudinal studies. We sought to determine the day-to-day variability of measures of beta cell function derived from an OGTT. METHODS: Thirty-seven adults (13 with normal glucose tolerance, ten with impaired glucose tolerance, 14 with type 2 diabetes) underwent a standard 2 h 75 g OGTT on two separate days (median time between tests, 7 days; range, 5-14). From these data, the reproducibility of several indices of beta cell function were determined: insulinogenic index (DeltaI(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30)), early C-peptide response (DeltaCP(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30)), incremental AUC insulin to glucose response (incAUC(ins)/incAUC(glu)), integrated insulin secretion response from 0 to 120 min (IS/Glu(0-120)) and indices of beta cell function derived from a mathematical model. RESULTS: Within-subject variability for DeltaI(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30) (CV 57.1%) was higher than DeltaCP(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30) (CV 34.7%). Measures integrated over the full 120 min of the OGTT, incAUC(ins)/incAUC(glu) (CV 24.9%) and IS/Glu(0-120) (CV 17.4%), demonstrated less variability. The mathematical model-derived measures of beta cell glucose sensitivity (CV 20.3%) and potentiation (CV 33.0%) showed moderate variability. The impact of the different measures' variability on sample size (30% change from baseline) is demonstrated by calculated sample sizes of 89 for DeltaI(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30), 37 for DeltaCP(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30), 21 for incAUC(ins)/incAUC(glu) and 11 for IS/Glu(0-120). CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: Some OGTT-derived indices of beta cell function, in particular the insulinogenic index, demonstrate high within-subject variability. Integrated measures that utilise multiple time points and measures that use C-peptide show less variability and may lead to a reduced sample size requirement.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Knowledge of the within-subject variability of a parameter is required to properly design and calculate sample sizes for longitudinal studies. We sought to determine the day-to-day variability of measures of beta cell function derived from an OGTT. METHODS: Thirty-seven adults (13 with normal glucose tolerance, ten with impaired glucose tolerance, 14 with type 2 diabetes) underwent a standard 2 h 75 g OGTT on two separate days (median time between tests, 7 days; range, 5-14). From these data, the reproducibility of several indices of beta cell function were determined: insulinogenic index (DeltaI(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30)), early C-peptide response (DeltaCP(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30)), incremental AUC insulin to glucose response (incAUC(ins)/incAUC(glu)), integrated insulin secretion response from 0 to 120 min (IS/Glu(0-120)) and indices of beta cell function derived from a mathematical model. RESULTS: Within-subject variability for DeltaI(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30) (CV 57.1%) was higher than DeltaCP(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30) (CV 34.7%). Measures integrated over the full 120 min of the OGTT, incAUC(ins)/incAUC(glu) (CV 24.9%) and IS/Glu(0-120) (CV 17.4%), demonstrated less variability. The mathematical model-derived measures of beta cell glucose sensitivity (CV 20.3%) and potentiation (CV 33.0%) showed moderate variability. The impact of the different measures' variability on sample size (30% change from baseline) is demonstrated by calculated sample sizes of 89 for DeltaI(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30), 37 for DeltaCP(0-30)/DeltaG(0-30), 21 for incAUC(ins)/incAUC(glu) and 11 for IS/Glu(0-120). CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: Some OGTT-derived indices of beta cell function, in particular the insulinogenic index, demonstrate high within-subject variability. Integrated measures that utilise multiple time points and measures that use C-peptide show less variability and may lead to a reduced sample size requirement.
Authors: M Stumvoll; A Mitrakou; W Pimenta; T Jenssen; H Yki-Järvinen; T Van Haeften; W Renn; J Gerich Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: S E Kahn; R L Prigeon; D K McCulloch; E J Boyko; R N Bergman; M W Schwartz; J L Neifing; W K Ward; J C Beard; J P Palmer Journal: Diabetes Date: 1993-11 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Loïc Le Marchand; Hansong Wang; Sabina Rinaldi; Rudolf Kaaks; Thomas M Vogt; Lance Yokochi; Robert Decker Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-05-25 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Sudha S Shankar; Adrian Vella; Ralph H Raymond; Myrlene A Staten; Roberto A Calle; Richard N Bergman; Charlie Cao; Danny Chen; Claudio Cobelli; Chiara Dalla Man; Mark Deeg; Jennifer Q Dong; Douglas S Lee; David Polidori; R Paul Robertson; Hartmut Ruetten; Darko Stefanovski; Maria T Vassileva; Gordon C Weir; David A Fryburg Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2016-07-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Paul Begovatz; Chrysi Koliaki; Katharina Weber; Klaus Strassburger; Bettina Nowotny; Peter Nowotny; Karsten Müssig; Jürgen Bunke; Giovanni Pacini; Julia Szendrödi; Michael Roden Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Mirjam V Faulenbach; Lorena A Wright; Carlos Lorenzo; Kristina M Utzschneider; Julia H Goedecke; Wilfred Y Fujimoto; Edward J Boyko; Marguerite J McNeely; Donna L Leonetti; Steven M Haffner; Steven E Kahn Journal: J Diabetes Complications Date: 2012-11-07 Impact factor: 2.852
Authors: Pamela Abrams; Lorraine E Levitt Katz; Reneé H Moore; Melissa S Xanthopoulos; Chanelle T Bishop-Gilyard; Thomas A Wadden; Robert I Berkowitz Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Anthony P Thomas; Jonathan Hoang; Kenny Vongbunyong; Andrew Nguyen; Kuntol Rakshit; Aleksey V Matveyenko Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2016-09-21 Impact factor: 4.736