Melanie Cree-Green1,2, Ninghe Cai1, Jessica E Thurston3, Gregory V Coe1, Lindsay Newnes1, Yesenia Garcia-Reyes1, Amy D Baumgartner1, Laura Pyle4,3, Kristen J Nadeau1,2. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Endocrinology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado. 2. Center for Women's Health Research, Aurora, Colorado. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, Colorado. 4. Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) includes insulin resistance (IR) and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) in youth, and a greatly elevated risk of type 2 diabetes in adulthood. Identifying IR is challenging and documenting IGT requires an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). OBJECTIVE: Identify easily applied surrogate measures for IR and IGT in girls with PCOS. METHODS: We studied 28 girls with PCOS (body mass index [BMI] percentile 98 (83.99); 15.5 (14.5,16.6) years of age) and 20 with normal menses [BMI percentile (97 (88.99); 15.5 (13.3,16.1) years]. Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps (insulin dose of 80 μU/ml/min) to determine glucose infusion rate (GIR) and a 75 g OGTT were performed. Surrogates for IR including fasting insulin, homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistant (HOMA-IR), Matsuda index, and estimate of insulin sensitivity (e-IS) were compared to IGT status and GIR. Spearman correlations were performed between surrogates and GIR or IGT, and receiver operator curve (ROC) analysis to predict GIR below the median or IGT status. RESULTS: GIR was lower in PCOS (12.9 ± 4.6 vs 17.1 ± 5.1 mg/kg fat-free mass·min; P = 0.01). Within PCOS, HOMA-IR (r = -0.78, P < 0.0001), e-IS (r = 0.70, P < 0.001), and Matsuda (r = 0.533, P < 0.001) correlated with GIR. e-IS provided a good sensitivity (100%) and specificity (71%) to identify IR (e-IS cutoff: <6.3, ROC-area under curve = 0.898). Fasting insulin >22 IU/mL had the best sensitivity (88%), specificity (78%), and ROC (0.760) for IGT status. CONCLUSIONS: Girls with PCOS have significant IR, and IGT is common. Both e-IS and fasting insulin are obtainable without an OGTT or clamp and could be used clinically to guide treatment in PCOS.
BACKGROUND:Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) includes insulin resistance (IR) and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) in youth, and a greatly elevated risk of type 2 diabetes in adulthood. Identifying IR is challenging and documenting IGT requires an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). OBJECTIVE: Identify easily applied surrogate measures for IR and IGT in girls with PCOS. METHODS: We studied 28 girls with PCOS (body mass index [BMI] percentile 98 (83.99); 15.5 (14.5,16.6) years of age) and 20 with normal menses [BMI percentile (97 (88.99); 15.5 (13.3,16.1) years]. Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps (insulin dose of 80 μU/ml/min) to determine glucose infusion rate (GIR) and a 75 g OGTT were performed. Surrogates for IR including fasting insulin, homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistant (HOMA-IR), Matsuda index, and estimate of insulin sensitivity (e-IS) were compared to IGT status and GIR. Spearman correlations were performed between surrogates and GIR or IGT, and receiver operator curve (ROC) analysis to predict GIR below the median or IGT status. RESULTS: GIR was lower in PCOS (12.9 ± 4.6 vs 17.1 ± 5.1 mg/kg fat-free mass·min; P = 0.01). Within PCOS, HOMA-IR (r = -0.78, P < 0.0001), e-IS (r = 0.70, P < 0.001), and Matsuda (r = 0.533, P < 0.001) correlated with GIR. e-IS provided a good sensitivity (100%) and specificity (71%) to identify IR (e-IS cutoff: <6.3, ROC-area under curve = 0.898). Fasting insulin >22 IU/mL had the best sensitivity (88%), specificity (78%), and ROC (0.760) for IGT status. CONCLUSIONS:Girls with PCOS have significant IR, and IGT is common. Both e-IS and fasting insulin are obtainable without an OGTT or clamp and could be used clinically to guide treatment in PCOS.
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: A Katz; S S Nambi; K Mather; A D Baron; D A Follmann; G Sullivan; M J Quon Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: M E Silfen; A M Manibo; D J McMahon; L S Levine; A R Murphy; S E Oberfield Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Matthias Möhlig; Joachim Spranger; Michael Ristow; Andreas F H Pfeiffer; Thilo Schill; Hans W Schlösser; Lothar Moltz; Georg Brabant; Christof Schöfl Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Julia Hudnut-Beumler; Jill L Kaar; Anya Taylor; Megan M Kelsey; Kristen J Nadeau; Philip Zeitler; Janet Snell-Bergeon; Laura Pyle; Melanie Cree-Green Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 3.409