The hot but not the cold minimal model allows precise assessment of insulin sensitivity in NIDDM subjects

Angelo Avogaro, Paolo Vicini, Anna Valerio, Andrea Caumo, Claudio Cobelli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

54 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Assessment of insulin sensitivity in subjects with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) is of paramount importance but intrinsically difficult. The standard (hereafter cold) minimal model, in conjunction with an insulin-modified protocol, has been recently proposed, but the estimates of insulin sensitivity showed poor precision (Saad et al. Diabetes 43: 1114- 1121, 1994). We propose the tracer (hereafter hot) minimal model as a highly reliable method to estimate insulin sensitivity (S(I)/*) and fractional glucose clearance (S(G)/*), reflecting glucose disposal only, in NIDDM subjects. A [6,6-2H2]glucose-labeled insulin-modified intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed in seven NIDDM subjects. In particular, S(I)/* was 1.07 ± 0.34 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml estimated with an average precision (mean coefficient of variation of 12%, range 4-22%), whereas the cold minimal model S(I) was 0.96 ± 0.26 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml (mean coefficient of variation of 105%, range 3-353%). Another advantage of the hot indexes with respect to the cold indexes is their ability to reflect glucose and insulin effect on glucose disposal only, and not also on hepatic glucose production. Finally, we also studied by simulation the effect of glucose urinary loss on cold and hot minimal model indexes; only cold glucose effectiveness (S(G)) was significantly affected, resulting in a mean ~40% lower. The hot minimal model appears therefore more reliable than the cold model for assessing glucose tolerance in NIDDM subjects. In particular, its ability to dissect disposal from production processes, coupled with the very good precision of the estimated metabolic indexes, supports the clinical use of this method in NIDDM subjects.

Original languageEnglish
JournalAmerican Journal of Physiology - Endocrinology and Metabolism
Volume270
Issue number3 33-3
Publication statusPublished - 1996

Fingerprint

Medical problems
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Insulin Resistance
Insulin
Glucose
Glucose Tolerance Test
Liver

Keywords

  • diabetes
  • intravenous glucose tolerance test
  • mathematical model
  • parameter estimation
  • tracer kinetics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Endocrinology
  • Biochemistry
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

The hot but not the cold minimal model allows precise assessment of insulin sensitivity in NIDDM subjects. / Avogaro, Angelo; Vicini, Paolo; Valerio, Anna; Caumo, Andrea; Cobelli, Claudio.

In: American Journal of Physiology - Endocrinology and Metabolism, Vol. 270, No. 3 33-3, 1996.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Avogaro, Angelo ; Vicini, Paolo ; Valerio, Anna ; Caumo, Andrea ; Cobelli, Claudio. / The hot but not the cold minimal model allows precise assessment of insulin sensitivity in NIDDM subjects. In: American Journal of Physiology - Endocrinology and Metabolism. 1996 ; Vol. 270, No. 3 33-3.
@article{e89563ab85db4d0b89b86d8b55bff89b,
title = "The hot but not the cold minimal model allows precise assessment of insulin sensitivity in NIDDM subjects",
abstract = "Assessment of insulin sensitivity in subjects with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) is of paramount importance but intrinsically difficult. The standard (hereafter cold) minimal model, in conjunction with an insulin-modified protocol, has been recently proposed, but the estimates of insulin sensitivity showed poor precision (Saad et al. Diabetes 43: 1114- 1121, 1994). We propose the tracer (hereafter hot) minimal model as a highly reliable method to estimate insulin sensitivity (S(I)/*) and fractional glucose clearance (S(G)/*), reflecting glucose disposal only, in NIDDM subjects. A [6,6-2H2]glucose-labeled insulin-modified intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed in seven NIDDM subjects. In particular, S(I)/* was 1.07 ± 0.34 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml estimated with an average precision (mean coefficient of variation of 12{\%}, range 4-22{\%}), whereas the cold minimal model S(I) was 0.96 ± 0.26 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml (mean coefficient of variation of 105{\%}, range 3-353{\%}). Another advantage of the hot indexes with respect to the cold indexes is their ability to reflect glucose and insulin effect on glucose disposal only, and not also on hepatic glucose production. Finally, we also studied by simulation the effect of glucose urinary loss on cold and hot minimal model indexes; only cold glucose effectiveness (S(G)) was significantly affected, resulting in a mean ~40{\%} lower. The hot minimal model appears therefore more reliable than the cold model for assessing glucose tolerance in NIDDM subjects. In particular, its ability to dissect disposal from production processes, coupled with the very good precision of the estimated metabolic indexes, supports the clinical use of this method in NIDDM subjects.",
keywords = "diabetes, intravenous glucose tolerance test, mathematical model, parameter estimation, tracer kinetics",
author = "Angelo Avogaro and Paolo Vicini and Anna Valerio and Andrea Caumo and Claudio Cobelli",
year = "1996",
language = "English",
volume = "270",
journal = "American Journal of Physiology",
issn = "0363-6119",
publisher = "American Physiological Society",
number = "3 33-3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The hot but not the cold minimal model allows precise assessment of insulin sensitivity in NIDDM subjects

AU - Avogaro, Angelo

AU - Vicini, Paolo

AU - Valerio, Anna

AU - Caumo, Andrea

AU - Cobelli, Claudio

PY - 1996

Y1 - 1996

N2 - Assessment of insulin sensitivity in subjects with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) is of paramount importance but intrinsically difficult. The standard (hereafter cold) minimal model, in conjunction with an insulin-modified protocol, has been recently proposed, but the estimates of insulin sensitivity showed poor precision (Saad et al. Diabetes 43: 1114- 1121, 1994). We propose the tracer (hereafter hot) minimal model as a highly reliable method to estimate insulin sensitivity (S(I)/*) and fractional glucose clearance (S(G)/*), reflecting glucose disposal only, in NIDDM subjects. A [6,6-2H2]glucose-labeled insulin-modified intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed in seven NIDDM subjects. In particular, S(I)/* was 1.07 ± 0.34 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml estimated with an average precision (mean coefficient of variation of 12%, range 4-22%), whereas the cold minimal model S(I) was 0.96 ± 0.26 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml (mean coefficient of variation of 105%, range 3-353%). Another advantage of the hot indexes with respect to the cold indexes is their ability to reflect glucose and insulin effect on glucose disposal only, and not also on hepatic glucose production. Finally, we also studied by simulation the effect of glucose urinary loss on cold and hot minimal model indexes; only cold glucose effectiveness (S(G)) was significantly affected, resulting in a mean ~40% lower. The hot minimal model appears therefore more reliable than the cold model for assessing glucose tolerance in NIDDM subjects. In particular, its ability to dissect disposal from production processes, coupled with the very good precision of the estimated metabolic indexes, supports the clinical use of this method in NIDDM subjects.

AB - Assessment of insulin sensitivity in subjects with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) is of paramount importance but intrinsically difficult. The standard (hereafter cold) minimal model, in conjunction with an insulin-modified protocol, has been recently proposed, but the estimates of insulin sensitivity showed poor precision (Saad et al. Diabetes 43: 1114- 1121, 1994). We propose the tracer (hereafter hot) minimal model as a highly reliable method to estimate insulin sensitivity (S(I)/*) and fractional glucose clearance (S(G)/*), reflecting glucose disposal only, in NIDDM subjects. A [6,6-2H2]glucose-labeled insulin-modified intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed in seven NIDDM subjects. In particular, S(I)/* was 1.07 ± 0.34 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml estimated with an average precision (mean coefficient of variation of 12%, range 4-22%), whereas the cold minimal model S(I) was 0.96 ± 0.26 x 10-4 min-1 · μU-1 · ml (mean coefficient of variation of 105%, range 3-353%). Another advantage of the hot indexes with respect to the cold indexes is their ability to reflect glucose and insulin effect on glucose disposal only, and not also on hepatic glucose production. Finally, we also studied by simulation the effect of glucose urinary loss on cold and hot minimal model indexes; only cold glucose effectiveness (S(G)) was significantly affected, resulting in a mean ~40% lower. The hot minimal model appears therefore more reliable than the cold model for assessing glucose tolerance in NIDDM subjects. In particular, its ability to dissect disposal from production processes, coupled with the very good precision of the estimated metabolic indexes, supports the clinical use of this method in NIDDM subjects.

KW - diabetes

KW - intravenous glucose tolerance test

KW - mathematical model

KW - parameter estimation

KW - tracer kinetics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029912588&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029912588&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 270

JO - American Journal of Physiology

JF - American Journal of Physiology

SN - 0363-6119

IS - 3 33-3

ER -