Joon Young Kim1, Hala Tfayli2, Fida Bacha3, SoJung Lee4, Nour Gebara5, Silva Arslanian6. 1. Department of Exercise Science, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, United States of America. 2. Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon. 3. Children's Nutrition Research Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States of America. 4. Division of Sports Medicine, Graduate School of Physical Education, Kyung Hee University, Yongin, Republic of Korea. 5. Center for Pediatric Research in Obesity and Metabolism, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America. 6. Center for Pediatric Research in Obesity and Metabolism, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America; Division of Pediatric Endocrinology, Metabolism and Diabetes Mellitus, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America. Electronic address: Silva.arslanian@chp.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: In obese youth, it is not clear what degree of β-cell impairment translates to glucose dysregulation commensurate with shifts from normal glucose tolerance (NGT) to impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) to type 2 diabetes. We aimed to investigate the quantitative relationship between β-cell (clamp-measured disposition index [DI]) and OGTT glucose area under the curve (G-AUC) in obese youth across the spectrum of glucose tolerance. METHODS: Data from 152 youth (58 African-American [AA] and 94 American-White [AW]; 73 NGT, 48 IGT, and 31 type 2 diabetes) who completed a 3-h hyperinsulinemic (80 mu/m2/min)-euglycemic clamp, and a 2-h hyperglycemic (225 mg/dL) clamp synchronized with a 2-h OGTT were examined. RESULTS: In IGT vs. NGT, 36% lower DI corresponded to 27% higher G-AUC; in type 2 diabetes vs. IGT, 65% lower DI related to 25% higher G-AUC, and in type 2 diabetes vs. NGT, 78% lower DI paralleled 59% higher G-AUC. Although AA vs. AW youth had larger decrements in DI, from NGT to IGT and from NGT to type 2 diabetes, they displayed comparable increments in G-AUC. CONCLUSION: At least ~35-50% recovery in β-cell function might be needed to have clinically meaningful improvement in G-AUC commensurate with conversion to better glucose tolerance. Mechanism(s) protective against dysglycemia might be operative in AA vs. AW youth despite greater declines in DI. Treatments aiming to improve β-cell function should focus on degree of change in DI commensurate with clinically meaningful changes in glycemia, reflective of restoration of glucose tolerance.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: In obese youth, it is not clear what degree of β-cell impairment translates to glucose dysregulation commensurate with shifts from normal glucose tolerance (NGT) to impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) to type 2 diabetes. We aimed to investigate the quantitative relationship between β-cell (clamp-measured disposition index [DI]) and OGTT glucose area under the curve (G-AUC) in obese youth across the spectrum of glucose tolerance. METHODS: Data from 152 youth (58 African-American [AA] and 94 American-White [AW]; 73 NGT, 48 IGT, and 31 type 2 diabetes) who completed a 3-h hyperinsulinemic (80 mu/m2/min)-euglycemic clamp, and a 2-h hyperglycemic (225 mg/dL) clamp synchronized with a 2-h OGTT were examined. RESULTS: In IGT vs. NGT, 36% lower DI corresponded to 27% higher G-AUC; in type 2 diabetes vs. IGT, 65% lower DI related to 25% higher G-AUC, and in type 2 diabetes vs. NGT, 78% lower DI paralleled 59% higher G-AUC. Although AA vs. AW youth had larger decrements in DI, from NGT to IGT and from NGT to type 2 diabetes, they displayed comparable increments in G-AUC. CONCLUSION: At least ~35-50% recovery in β-cell function might be needed to have clinically meaningful improvement in G-AUC commensurate with conversion to better glucose tolerance. Mechanism(s) protective against dysglycemia might be operative in AA vs. AW youth despite greater declines in DI. Treatments aiming to improve β-cell function should focus on degree of change in DI commensurate with clinically meaningful changes in glycemia, reflective of restoration of glucose tolerance.
Authors: Muhammad A Abdul-Ghani; Christopher P Jenkinson; Dawn K Richardson; Devjit Tripathy; Ralph A DeFronzo Journal: Diabetes Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Gabriel I Uwaifo; Tuc T Nguyen; Margaret F Keil; Deserea L Russell; Jennifer C Nicholson; Sandra H Bonat; Jennifer R McDuffie; Jack A Yanovski Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Stephen F Burns; Fida Bacha; So Jung Lee; Hala Tfayli; Neslihan Gungor; Silva A Arslanian Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Lindsey A Sjaarda; Sara F Michaliszyn; SoJung Lee; Hala Tfayli; Fida Bacha; Lama Farchoukh; Silva A Arslanian Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-08-21 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Kristina M Utzschneider; Ronald L Prigeon; Mirjam V Faulenbach; Jenny Tong; Darcy B Carr; Edward J Boyko; Donna L Leonetti; Marguerite J McNeely; Wilfred Y Fujimoto; Steven E Kahn Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-10-28 Impact factor: 19.112