Cargando…

Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The conventional oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) cannot detect future diabetics among isolated impaired fasting glucose (is‐IFG) nor normal glucose tolerant (NGT) groups. By analyzing the relationship between fasting (FPG) and 2‐h plasma glucose (2hPG), the present study identi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carnevale Schianca, Gian Piero, Fra, Gian Paolo, Bigliocca, Marcello, Mella, Roberto, Rossi, Luca, Bartoli, Ettore
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4188111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25411621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.12185
_version_ 1782338216851931136
author Carnevale Schianca, Gian Piero
Fra, Gian Paolo
Bigliocca, Marcello
Mella, Roberto
Rossi, Luca
Bartoli, Ettore
author_facet Carnevale Schianca, Gian Piero
Fra, Gian Paolo
Bigliocca, Marcello
Mella, Roberto
Rossi, Luca
Bartoli, Ettore
author_sort Carnevale Schianca, Gian Piero
collection PubMed
description AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The conventional oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) cannot detect future diabetics among isolated impaired fasting glucose (is‐IFG) nor normal glucose tolerant (NGT) groups. By analyzing the relationship between fasting (FPG) and 2‐h plasma glucose (2hPG), the present study identifies is‐IFG subjects liable to worsening glucose homeostasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Oral glucose tolerance test was carried out in 619 patients suffering from obesity, hypertension or dyslipidemia, whose FPG was in the 100–125 mg/dL range. We calculated the percentage increment of 2hPG with respect to FPG (PG%) in these patients using the formula: ([2hPG − FPG] / FPG) × 100. Differences in β‐cell function within is‐IFG patients were assessed by estimated insulin sensitivity index (EISI), first‐phase insulin release (1stPH) and 1stPH/1/EISI (1stPH(corrected)). RESULTS: Diabetes was diagnosed in 69 patients (11.2%), combined IFG/impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) in 185 patients (29.9%) and is‐IFG in 365 patients (58.9%). Is‐IFG was subdivided into PG% tertile groups: the percentage of females increased from 25% in the lowest to 45.2% in the highest tertile (χ(2) = 18.7, P < 0.001). Moving from the lowest to the highest PG% tertile group, insulin and 2hPG concentrations rose, whereas FPG, EISI, and 1stPH(corrected) decreased progressively and significantly. Furthemore, PG% correlated inversely with EISI (r = −0.44, P < 0.0001) and 1stPH(corrected) (r = −0.38, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Oral glucose tolerance test does differentiate the great heterogeneity in metabolic disorders of patients with FPG 100–125 mg/dL. Furthermore, PG% can expand the diagnostic power of OGTT in the is‐IFG range by distinguishing metabolic phenotypes very likely to herald different clinical risks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4188111
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Wiley-Blackwell
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41881112014-11-19 Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range Carnevale Schianca, Gian Piero Fra, Gian Paolo Bigliocca, Marcello Mella, Roberto Rossi, Luca Bartoli, Ettore J Diabetes Investig Articles AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The conventional oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) cannot detect future diabetics among isolated impaired fasting glucose (is‐IFG) nor normal glucose tolerant (NGT) groups. By analyzing the relationship between fasting (FPG) and 2‐h plasma glucose (2hPG), the present study identifies is‐IFG subjects liable to worsening glucose homeostasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Oral glucose tolerance test was carried out in 619 patients suffering from obesity, hypertension or dyslipidemia, whose FPG was in the 100–125 mg/dL range. We calculated the percentage increment of 2hPG with respect to FPG (PG%) in these patients using the formula: ([2hPG − FPG] / FPG) × 100. Differences in β‐cell function within is‐IFG patients were assessed by estimated insulin sensitivity index (EISI), first‐phase insulin release (1stPH) and 1stPH/1/EISI (1stPH(corrected)). RESULTS: Diabetes was diagnosed in 69 patients (11.2%), combined IFG/impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) in 185 patients (29.9%) and is‐IFG in 365 patients (58.9%). Is‐IFG was subdivided into PG% tertile groups: the percentage of females increased from 25% in the lowest to 45.2% in the highest tertile (χ(2) = 18.7, P < 0.001). Moving from the lowest to the highest PG% tertile group, insulin and 2hPG concentrations rose, whereas FPG, EISI, and 1stPH(corrected) decreased progressively and significantly. Furthemore, PG% correlated inversely with EISI (r = −0.44, P < 0.0001) and 1stPH(corrected) (r = −0.38, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Oral glucose tolerance test does differentiate the great heterogeneity in metabolic disorders of patients with FPG 100–125 mg/dL. Furthermore, PG% can expand the diagnostic power of OGTT in the is‐IFG range by distinguishing metabolic phenotypes very likely to herald different clinical risks. Wiley-Blackwell 2014-01-21 2014-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4188111/ /pubmed/25411621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.12185 Text en © 2014 The Authors. Journal of Diabetes Investigation published by Asian Association of the Study of Diabetes (AASD) and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
Carnevale Schianca, Gian Piero
Fra, Gian Paolo
Bigliocca, Marcello
Mella, Roberto
Rossi, Luca
Bartoli, Ettore
Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range
title Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range
title_full Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range
title_fullStr Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range
title_full_unstemmed Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range
title_short Oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range
title_sort oral glucose tolerance test‐based calculation identifies different glucose intolerance phenotypes within the impaired fasting glucose range
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4188111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25411621
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.12185
work_keys_str_mv AT carnevaleschiancagianpiero oralglucosetolerancetestbasedcalculationidentifiesdifferentglucoseintolerancephenotypeswithintheimpairedfastingglucoserange
AT fragianpaolo oralglucosetolerancetestbasedcalculationidentifiesdifferentglucoseintolerancephenotypeswithintheimpairedfastingglucoserange
AT biglioccamarcello oralglucosetolerancetestbasedcalculationidentifiesdifferentglucoseintolerancephenotypeswithintheimpairedfastingglucoserange
AT mellaroberto oralglucosetolerancetestbasedcalculationidentifiesdifferentglucoseintolerancephenotypeswithintheimpairedfastingglucoserange
AT rossiluca oralglucosetolerancetestbasedcalculationidentifiesdifferentglucoseintolerancephenotypeswithintheimpairedfastingglucoserange
AT bartoliettore oralglucosetolerancetestbasedcalculationidentifiesdifferentglucoseintolerancephenotypeswithintheimpairedfastingglucoserange