help button home button Endocrine Society JCEM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hovorka, R.
Right arrow Articles by Owens, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hovorka, R.
Right arrow Articles by Owens, D. R.
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 83, No. 3 744-750
Copyright © 1998 by The Endocrine Society


Original Studies

Pancreatic ß-Cell Responsiveness during Meal Tolerance Test: Model Assessment in Normal Subjects and Subjects with Newly Diagnosed Noninsulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus1

Roman Hovorka, Ludovic Chassin, Stephen D. Luzio, Rebecca Playle and David R. Owens

Metabolic Modelling Group, Center for Measurement and Information in Medicine, City University (R.H., L.C.), London, United Kingdom EC1V OHB; the Diabetes Research Unit, University of Wales College of Medicine, Academic Center, Llandough Hospital and Community National Health Service Trust (S.D.L., R.P., D.R.O.), Penarth, South Glamorgan, United Kingdom CF64 2XX

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. Roman Hovorka, Metabolic Modelling Group, Center for Measurement and Information in Medicine, City University, Northampton Square, London, United Kingdom EC1V OHB. E-mail: r.hovorka{at}city.ac.uk


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
A model-based method was developed to quantify pancreatic ß-cell responsiveness during a meal tolerance test (MTT). C peptide secretion was related in a linear fashion to glucose concentration, whereas the standard population model was used to derive transfer rate constants of the two compartmental model of C peptide kinetics. Two indexes of pancreatic ß-cell responsiveness were defined: 1) postprandial sensitivity MI (ability of postprandial glucose to stimulate ß-cell), and 2) basal sensitivity M0 (ability of fasting glucose to stimulate ß-cell). The method was evaluated using plasma glucose and C peptide measured over 180 min with a 10- to 30-min sampling interval during a MTT (75 g carbohydrates; 500 Cal) performed in 16 normal subjects (7 men and 9 women; age, 50 ± 10 yr; body mass index, 29.2 ± 3.6 kg/m2; fasting plasma glucose, 5.1 ± 0.5 mmol/L; mean ± SD) and 16 body mass index-matched subjects with newly diagnosed noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM; 15 men and 1 woman; age, 50 ± 9 yr; body mass index, 29.3 ± 3.7 kg/m2; fasting plasma glucose, 12.6 ± 3.2 mmol/L). MI and M0 indexes were estimated with very good precision (coefficient of variation, <15%). Subjects with NIDDM demonstrated lower postprandial sensitivity MI (17.7 ± 11.4 vs. 90.0 ± 43.3 x 10-9/min; NIDDM vs. normal, P < 0.001) and basal sensitivity M0 (5.4 ± 2.2 vs. 10.3 ± 4.9 x 10-9/min; P < 0.005). Deconvolution analysis documented that the relationship between C peptide secretion and glucose concentration is approximately linear during MTT in both normal subjects (plasma glucose range, 5–8 mmol/L) and subjects with NIDDM (12–17 mmol/L). We conclude that pancreatic responsiveness during glucose stimulation (MI) and under basal conditions (M0) can be obtained from this novel method during MTT in healthy and disease states.


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
IMPAIRED pancreatic ß-cell responsiveness is associated with noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and various experimental methods and modelling approaches have been developed to assess in vivo pancreatic ß-cell responsiveness to glucose in man: hyperglycemic clamp (1), minimal model of C peptide secretion during iv glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) (2), combined model of insulin and C peptide secretion during IVGTT (3), Low-Dose Insulin and Glucose-Infusion Test (LDIGIT) (4), Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA) (5), and Continuous Infusion of Glucose with Model Assessment (CIGMA) (6) methods.

A variety of oral glucose tolerance tests and meal tolerance tests (MTT) have been used extensively to diagnose NIDDM in a clinical setting. The oral load results in a typical postprandial exposure of the pancreas to glucose, and gut and vagal hormones. The measurement of pancreatic responsiveness, then, closely reflects the ability of the pancreas to produce insulin under normal physiological conditions.

Insulin and C peptide are cosecreted in an equimolar ratio by the pancreas, and this phenomenon has been successfully exploited to assess prehepatic insulin secretion in man (7, 8). Unlike insulin, C peptide is not cleared by the liver to any significant extent, and C peptide kinetics have been shown to be linear over a physiological to supraphysiological range of plasma C peptide concentrations (9). A population (standard) model of C peptide kinetics provides parameters of C peptide kinetics from a subject’s demographic data (10), avoiding the need to assess C peptide kinetics on an individual basis.

In the present study we aimed to assess pancreatic responsiveness during MTT. A model-based approach was adopted. A linear relationship between C peptide secretion and plasma glucose was postulated and combined with the population model of C peptide kinetics. Two indexes of pancreatic responsiveness were defined, one related to basal and the other to postprandial conditions. The approach was evaluated employing data collected in normal subjects and body mass index (BMI)-matched subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM. This gave us the opportunity to assess the ability of the method to discriminate between healthy and disease states. The evaluation procedure included deconvolution and sensitivity analyses, validating the approach from the modelling point of view.


    Subjects and Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Subjects

Two BMI-matched subject groups, 16 normal subjects (7 men and 9 women; age, 50 ± 10 yr; weight, 80 ± 14 kg; BMI, 29.2 ± 3.6 kg/m2) and 16 subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM according to WHO criteria (5 men and 1 woman; age, 50 ± 9 yr; weight, 87 ± 13 kg; BMI, 29.3 ± 3.7 kg/m2) participated in the study. The subjects were admitted on the study day to the Diabetes Research Unit, Llandough Hospital (Penarth, UK). The study was approved by the South Glamorgan Local Research Ethics Committee.

Experimental protocol

After a 10-h overnight fast, the subjects were admitted to a metabolic unit, where they remained on bed rest throughout the study. Blood was taken via an indwelling iv cannula that was inserted into the antecubital fossa vein and connected via a three-way tap to a slow running infusion of saline. Blood samples were taken at -30, 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 75, 90, 120, 150, and 180 min relative to meal ingestion. A mixed meal consisted of 15 g Weetabix, 100 g skimmed milk, 250 mL pineapple juice, 50 g white meat chicken, 60 g wholemeal bread, 10 g polyunsaturated margarine (75 g carbohydrates; total, 500 Cal; calorie contribution: 55% carbohydrate, 30% fat, and 15% protein). The subjects were required to consume the meal within 10 min.

C Peptide, insulin, and glucose assay

Blood was taken into fluoride oxalate for measurement of glucose (YSI 2300, YSI, Hants, UK) and into lithium-heparin for measurement of C peptide (11) and specific insulin (12). The within- and between-assay coefficients of variation were 5.4% and 8.8%, respectively, for the C peptide assay and 4.1% and 8.8%, respectively, for the insulin assay.

Data analysis

Model of C peptide kinetics during MTT. It was assumed that C peptide secretion is linearly related to the blood glucose concentration. The linear relationship was imposed from the time of meal ingestion until plasma glucose returned to its fasting concentration. The model (Fig. 1Go) of C peptide kinetics is described by a set of differential equations:



where c1(t) is C peptide concentration in the central (plasma) compartment (nanomoles per L), c2(t) is equivalent concentration in the peripheral compartment (nanomoles per L), i.e. the amount of C peptide in the peripheral compartment per unit volume of the central compartment, kij are transfer rate constants (per min), g(t) is plasma glucose concentration (millimoles per L), gb is fasting plasma glucose concentration (millimoles per L), u(t) is the secretion rate of C peptide per unit volume of the central compartment and is constrained to nonnegative values (nanomoles per L/min), MI, MI >= 0, is the postprandial sensitivity index (per min), M0, M0 >= 0, is the basal sensitivity (per min), and tmax is either 180 min or the time when plasma glucose returns to its fasting value, whichever occurs first.2



View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Model of C peptide secretion and kinetics during MTT. C peptide secretion is a linear function of the plasma glucose concentration, g(t), with parameters MI (postprandial sensitivity of ß-cell) and M0 (sensitivity of ß-cell at fasting plasma glucose concentration gb). C peptide kinetics are described by a two-compartmental model, with removal of C peptide from the central (plasma) compartment.

 
MI represents the ability of postprandial glucose to stimulate ß-cell. A change in plasma glucose by 1 mmol/L results in a change in the C peptide secretion rate by MI pmol/L·min.

M0 represents the ability of fasting glucose to stimulate ß-cell. M0 is numerically equal to the fasting C peptide divided by the fasting plasma glucose concentration. Both MI and M0 are normalized to the distribution volume of C peptide in the central compartment, i.e. the indexes represent secretion rates per unit volume of the central compartment.

The population model of C peptide kinetics was employed to obtain estimates of transfer rate constants k01, k21, and k12 from the subject’s age and classification (normal, obese, or NIDDM) using a regression model (10). The model parameters MI and M0 were estimated employing weighted nonlinear regression analysis (13). The plasma glucose concentration (the driving function) was taken as the model input, and the plasma C peptide concentration was taken as the model output. C peptide concentrations were zero weighted after the time when the plasma glucose measurement decreased below the fasting level to limit the estimation procedure to the period when (above fasting) glucose stimulus was present. Weights were defined as the reciprocals of the variance of the measurement errors. The measurement errors were assumed to be uncorrelated, with zero mean and a constant coefficient of variation (CV = 6%). The precision of parameter estimates was obtained from the inverse of the Fisher information matrix (13) and expressed as CV of the parameter estimate. The model is a priori uniquely identifiable when considering MI and M0 to be the model parameters, g(t) to be the model input, and c1(t) to be the model output (13).

Normalized residuals, i.e. differences between model-predicted and measured C peptide concentration divided by the SD of the measurement error, were calculated to assess the ability of the model to fit C peptide concentrations.

Sensitivity analysis.In the present study we adopted the population model of C peptide kinetics to calculate transfer rate constants k01, k21, and k12 (10). To assess the effect of potential inaccuracies in k01, k21, and k12 on estimates of MI and M0, a sensitivity analysis was performed. The effects on MI and M0 were evaluated by calculating the percent change in MI and M0 estimates given a 10% change in kij (i.e. values {partial}MI/{partial}kij x 0.1 kij/MI x 100% and {partial}M0/{partial}kij x 0.1 kij/M0 x 100% were evaluated).

Deconvolution analysis. C Peptide secretion was also calculated employing a model-free calculation (deconvolution) without the use of plasma glucose data. These calculations were carried out to verify the assumption that C peptide secretion is linearly related to plasma glucose concentration during MTT.

The calculations were performed using the ISEC program (14), which implements a regularization method of deconvolution constrained to nonnegative values and also employs a population model of C peptide kinetics (10). The input consisted of plasma C peptide concentrations and the subject’s age, weight, height, gender, and classification (normal, obese, or NIDDM). ISEC calculated on the output C peptide secretion (picomoles per kg/min) in the form of a piecewise constant function. The regularization component of the deconvolution analysis was chosen according to the discrepancy principle (15) to obtain the CV of the residuals (differences between measured and estimated C peptide concentrations) identical to the measurement error (CV = 6%). C peptide secretion was calculated during the period when plasma glucose concentration was above the fasting level.

Statistical analysis

MI and M0 were compared between the two subject groups using t test. Statistical significance was declared at P < 0.05. Values are represented as the mean ± SD unless stated otherwise.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Plasma glucose, C peptide, and insulin

The two subject groups had different responses to the meal (see Fig. 2Go). In normal subjects, plasma glucose increased from a fasting level of 5.0 ± 0.5 mmol/L to a maximum of 7.5 ± 1.3 mmol/L at 40 min, with a fall to the fasting level by 90 min. In subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM, the increase in plasma glucose was from 12.6 ± 3.2 to 18.2 ± 4.4 mmol/L at 75 min, and it failed to return to the fasting level by the end of the study. In normal subjects, plasma insulin increased from a fasting level of 51 ± 28 to 389 ± 219 pmol/L at 50 min and then decreased to 88 ± 52 pmol/L at the end of the study. In subjects with NIDDM, plasma insulin increased from a fasting level of 79 ± 46 to 279 ± 161 pmol/L at 120 min. In normal subjects, plasma C peptide increased from 0.80 ± 0.36 to 2.63 ± 0.78 nmol/L at 60 min. In subjects with NIDDM, plasma C peptide increased from 0.99 ± 0.33 to 2.29 ± 0.79 nmol/L at 120 min.



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Plasma glucose (top panel), plasma insulin (middle panel), and plasma C peptide (bottom panel) during MTT (75 g carbohydrates; 500 Cal) in 16 normal subjects (solid squares) and 16 BMI-matched subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM (open squares).

 
Estimation of MI and M0

The parameter estimation procedure estimated MI and M0 with precision in both subject groups. The precision of parameter estimates was high, with CVs of parameter estimates of 15% or less.

Strong significant differences in MI and M0 were found between the two subject groups (see Table 1Go). MI in subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM was reduced to about 20%, and M0 was reduced to about 50% of the respective values in normal subjects.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Estimates of pancreatic ß-cell responsiveness indexes during MTT

 
The scatterplot of MI and M0 values (see Fig. 3Go) clearly demonstrates the separation of the two study groups. It also shows considerable intersubject variability within each study group. MI and M0 were significantly correlated in subjects with NIDDM (Spearman rs = 0.73; P < 0.005), but not in normal subjects (rs = 0.01; P = NS).



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Estimates of postprandial sensitivity (MI) plotted against estimates of basal sensitivity (M0) in normal subjects (solid squares) and subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM (open squares). The mean ± SD for each group are also plotted.

 
The model was validated from the mathematical modeling perspective by analyzing normalized residuals and by evaluating the Runs test (16). The plot of normalized residuals given in Fig. 4Go indicates that the model fit in subjects with NIDDM was good, with a random distribution of normalized residuals around the zero value. The mean residuals in normal subjects during the first 75 min were within 1.8 of the C peptide measurement error, with one exception at 30 min, when the mean residual was 2.2 of the measurement error. At 90, 120, and 150 min, the mean residual was between 2.6–3.7 of the measurement error. However, there is a lower confidence in these values, as only six subjects contributed to the calculation of the highest value (and four subjects to the second highest value). Plasma glucose in the other subjects had already returned to its fasting value. Runs test gave nonsignificant results, indicating random distribution of positive and negative residuals.



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. Normalized residuals (difference between calculated and measured C peptide concentration divided by the measurement error) vs. time in normal subjects (top panel) and subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM (bottom panel).

 
Sensitivity analysis

Estimates of MI and M0 were insensitive to 10% changes in k21 and k12 (<2% mean change in MI and M0). The transfer rate constant, k01, had the largest effect on estimates MI and M0. The percent effects on MI (mean, 6%) and M0 (mean, 10%) were approximately proportional to the percent change in the value of k01.

Deconvolution analysis

The deconvolution analysis enabled the C peptide secretion rate to be calculated without employing glucose levels in the calculations. A sample C peptide secretion rate is shown in the top panel of Fig. 5Go together with the plasma glucose concentration to illustrate the relationship between the glucose concentration and the C peptide secretion rate. The bottom panel of Fig. 5Go plots the C peptide secretion rate against the plasma glucose concentration at the measurement points.



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 5. Sample results of deconvolution analysis. Plasma glucose (solid squares) and C peptide secretion (open squares) in one normal subject are shown in the top panel. C peptide secretion was calculated by deconvolution from plasma C peptide concentration without employing plasma glucose measurements. The same data are reproduced in the bottom panel, with C peptide secretion plotted against plasma glucose with adjacent points connected during the increase in plasma glucose concentration (solid line) and during the decrease in plasma glucose concentration (dashed line). Arrows indicate the flow of time.

 
The mean C peptide secretion rates are shown in the top panel of Fig. 6Go, indicating major differences in the patterns of C peptide secretion between the two subject groups. The bottom panel shows the relationship between the C peptide secretion rate and the plasma glucose concentration. Visual assessment suggests that the relationship between C peptide secretion and plasma glucose is linear during MTT and is confirmed by a linear regression analysis (P < 0.001 for each group; mean data). The plots have the form of a collapsed hysteresis loop, indicating that during MTT 1) the glucose concentration controls C peptide secretion without any delay (considering time resolution given by the sampling frequency); and 2) there is no temporal effect on C peptide secretion during MTT, i.e. increases and decreases in C peptide secretion are fully explained by the increases and decreases in the plasma glucose concentration without taking into consideration the effects of time or other hormones.



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 6. Summary results of the deconvolution analysis. The mean C peptide secretion is plotted against the mean plasma glucose levels in normal subjects (solid squares) and subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM (open squares). Arrows indicate the flow of time (solid line, plasma glucose increasing; dashed line, plasma glucose decreasing during MTT).

 

    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The proposed model calculates two indexes of pancreatic responsiveness during physiological stimulation by MTT. The model is able to quantify pancreatic responsiveness in healthy and disease states, indicates large intersubject variability in each study group, and confirms significant differences between normal subjects and subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM.

The quantification of pancreatic responsiveness to nutrients under physiological conditions allows ß-cell function in the normal state to be more accurately assessed than with various methods of IVGTT. The absence of time-dependent potentiation of insulin release by glucose during MTT illustrates the importance of a physiological study design. The proposed method should prove useful, for instance, in exploring pancreatic responsiveness with a variety of genetically based ß-cell disorders or in longitudinal studies. MTT is a widely used test with a relatively simple experimental protocol. A considerable amount of historical data exists and can be reanalyzed, reducing financial and human costs.

Validity and limitations of the model

From the model development point of view (13), the validity of the method is assessed and supported by the precision of parameter estimates, the distribution of normalized residuals, the nonsignificance of the Runs test, the deconvolution analysis, and the sensitivity analysis.

Parameter estimates were calculated with high precision (CV of parameter estimates = <15%) in both normal subjects and subjects with NIDDM. This suggests that a standard MTT results in data that allow a model-based assessment over a wide spectrum of pancreatic ß-cell responsiveness. At lower parameter values, model-based methods occasionally fail to give precise estimates, and modifications of the experimental protocol are then required (17). This seems not be the case with the proposed method, and it therefore follows that no modification of the MTT protocol is needed even at the maximally reduced values of pancreatic responsiveness seen in the NIDDM group, facilitating a uniform protocol design.

When plasma glucose is about to return to its fasting value, the dominating role of postprandial glucose to control C peptide secretion is likely to be reduced, and the control is shared to a greater extent with other time-varying hormones and stimuli. This may explain the reduction of the model fit toward the end of the study in normal subjects and was the rationale behind zero weighting C peptide measurements after plasma glucose returned to its fasting value.

Deconvolution analysis strongly supported the assumption that C peptide secretion is linearly related to plasma glucose concentration during MTT. A linear relationship has also been observed during a gradual infusion of exogenous glucose in normal subjects (18). Others have already employed the slope of the regression line between insulin secretion rates and blood glucose both during a meal and after oral glucose as a measure of ß-cell responsiveness or secretory capacity (19, 20). Compared to those approaches, the novelty of the present method is due to the use of a composite coherent model to describe both the secretion and elimination processes of C peptide.

The sensitivity analysis suggested that estimates of MI and M0 are insensitive to potential errors in transfer rate constants, k12 and k21. A proportional relationship between a change in k01 and a change in MI and M0 was observed. The model employs a regression model of C peptide kinetics approximating parameters from the subject’s age and category. The individual estimation of k01 (7) has the potential to improve the accuracy of MI and M0 estimates. The extent of improvement, however, is limited, as the error due to the population estimates has been shown to be, on the average, about 10% (10). An intraindividual variation in k01, k21, and k12 of similar magnitude was found by measuring these values in the same subjects on two or more occasions (10), suggesting that biological variability and/or experimental error are similar to the error due to the use of the regression model.

Gastric inhibitory polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1-(7–36 amide) are glucose- and fat-dependent gut hormones that may explain the greater insulin secretory response with oral compared to iv glucose (incretin effect) (21). The insulin response to oral glucose is augmented by the incretin effect in a dose-response fashion in normal subjects (22, 23).

MI is a composite index, and its strength is that it provides an overall measure of pancreatic responsiveness after meal ingestion and is directly related to day to day physiological conditions. This strength is also its weakness, as it does not allow defects in the net glucose effect and the incretin effect to be separated. It is currently unclear whether the size of the meal or the meal composition affects the calculated values of MI and M0. Further studies are required to assess whether MI and M0 can be compared across experimental designs that include different meal sizes and compositions and thus potentially different incretin effects.

Normal subjects vs. subjects with NIDDM

In subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM, pancreatic responsiveness was reduced in the fasting state by approximately 50% and during meal stimulation by approximately 80%. We further investigated the relationship between higher concentrations of plasma glucose and pancreatic responsiveness (24).

A linear regression analysis of the relationship between fasting plasma glucose and M0 and MI was carried out in diabetic subjects (Fig. 7Go). Strongly significant negative relationships indicated that progressively reduced pancreatic responsiveness is associated with chronic exposure to an elevated glucose concentration. Extrapolation to normoglycemia showed that M0 would attain 95% and MI 40% of the corresponding values observed in normal subjects.



View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 7. Relationships between fasting plasma glucose and postprandial sensitivity (MI; top panel) and basal sensitivity (M0; bottom panel) in subjects with newly diagnosed NIDDM.

 
The correlation between M0 and MI in subjects with NIDDM (see Fig. 3Go) is explained by a linear association of the two indexes with fasting plasma glucose. The association is very strong and seems to dominate over other possible relationships. In normal subjects, however, this association is weakened, as for an identical (normal) fasting glucose level there is a high intersubject variability in both M0 and MI. Other factors seems to step in and act, in totality, differently on the two indexes, as documented by the lack of correlation between the two indexes.

Several other simple tests measuring pancreatic ß-cell responsiveness are available. These employ an infusion of glucose with (4) or without a simultaneous insulin (6) or glucagon infusion (25). The Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA) approach is one of the simplest methods and calculates an index of ß-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin levels (5). All of these methods allow insulin sensitivity to be estimated simultaneously with pancreatic responsiveness. Hyperglycemic clamp, a more experimentally complicated method, allows simultaneous assessment of insulin sensitivity and secretion (26). No method is currently available that would provide an index of insulin action during MTT (or oral glucose tolerance test), and the present method to estimate pancreatic responsiveness therefore has to be combined with an additional experiment if insulin sensitivity is to be estimated.

In summary, a new methodology to measure pancreatic responsiveness during MTT has been developed. By enhancing the standard population model of C peptide kinetics with a model of C peptide secretion, the postprandial pancreatic ß-call responsiveness can be quantified from plasma glucose and C peptide levels.


    Footnotes
 
1 This work was supported by Glaxo Wellcome (Greenford, UK) and Novo Nordisk (Copenhagen, Denmark). Back

2 A Windows-based program that calculates indices M0 and MI can be obtained from the author. Back

Received May 15, 1997.

Revised October 20, 1997.

Accepted November 12, 1997.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. DeFronzo RA, Tobin JD, Andres R. 1979 Glucose clamp technique: a method for quantifying insulin secretion and resistance. Am J Physiol. 237:E214–E223.
  2. Toffolo G, De Grandi F, Cobelli C. 1995 Estimation of ß-cell sensitivity from intravenous glucose tolerance test C-peptide data: knowledge of the kinetics avoids errors in modeling the secretion. Diabetes. 44:845–854.[Abstract]
  3. Watanabe RM, Volund A, Roy S, Bergman RN. 1989 Prehepatic ß-cell secretion during the intravenous glucose tolerance test in humans: application of a combined model of insulin and C-peptide kinetics. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 69:790–797.[Abstract]
  4. Piatti PM, Monti LD, Caumo A, et al. 1995 The continuous low-dose insulin and glucose-infusion test: a simplified and accurate method for the evaluation of insulin sensitivity and insulin-secretion in population studies. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 80:34–40.[Abstract]
  5. Matthews DR, Hosker JP, Rudenski AS, Naylor BA, Treacher DF, Turner RC. 1985 Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and ß-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man. Diabetologia. 28:412–419.[CrossRef][Medline]
  6. Hosker JP, Matthews DR, Rudenski AS, et al. 1985 Continuous infusion of glucose with model assessment: measurement of insulin resistance and ß-cell function in man. Diabetologia. 28:401–411.[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Eaton RP, Allen RC, Schade DS, Erickson KM, Standefer J. 1980 Prehepatic insulin production in man: kinetic analysis using peripheral connecting peptide behaviour. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 51:520–528.[Abstract]
  8. Hovorka R, Jones RH. 1994 How to measure insulin secretion. Diabetes Metab Rev. 10:91–117.[Medline]
  9. Polonsky KS, Licinio-Paixao J, Given BD, et al. 1986 Use of biosynthetic human C-peptide in the measurement of insulin secretion rates in normal volunteers and type I diabetic patients. J Clin Invest. 77:98–105.
  10. Van Cauter E, Mestrez F, Sturis J, Polonsky KS. 1992 Estimation of insulin secretion rates from C-peptide levels: comparison of individual and standard kinetic parameters for C-peptide clearance. Diabetes. 41:368–377.[Abstract]
  11. Heding LG. 1973 Radioimmunological determination of human C-peptide in serum. Diabetologia. 11:541–548.
  12. Andersen L, Dinesen B, Jorgensen PN, Poulsen F, Roder ME. 1993 Enzyme immunoassay for intact human insulin in serum or plasma. Clin Chem. 39:578–582.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Carson ER, Cobelli C, Finkelstein L. 1983 The mathematical modeling of metabolic and endocrine systems. New York: Wiley and Sons.
  14. Hovorka R, Young MA, Soons PA. 1996 ISEC: a program to calculate insulin secretion. Comput Methods Progr Biomed. 50:253–264.
  15. Twomey S. 1965 The application of numerical filtering to the solution of integral equations encountered in indirect sensing measurements. J Franklin Inst. 279:95–109.[CrossRef]
  16. Zar JH. 1984 Biostatistical analysis, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
  17. Yang YJ, Youn JH, Bergman RN. 1987 Modified protocols improve insulin sensitivity estimation using the minimal model. Am J Physiol. 253:E595–E602.
  18. Byrne MM, Sturis J, Polonsky KS. 1995 Insulin secretion and clearance during low-dose graded glucose infusion. Am J Physiol. 268:E21–E27.
  19. Bech K, Damsbo P, Eldrup E, et al. 1996 ß-Cell function, and glucose and lipid oxidation in graves-disease. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 44:59–66.[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Christiansen E, Andersen HB, Rasmussen K, et al. 1993 Pancreatic beta-cell function and glucose metabolism in human segmental pancreas and kidney transplantation. Am J Physiol. 264:E441–E449.
  21. Thorens B. 1995 Glucagon-like peptide-1 and control of insulin-secretion. Diabetes Metab. 21:311–318.
  22. Nauck MA, Homberger E, Siegel EG, et al. 1986 Incretin effects of increasing glucose loads in man calculated from venous insulin and C-peptide responses. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 63:492–498.[Abstract]
  23. Nauck MA, Bartels E, Orskov C, Ebert R, Creutzfeldt W. 1993 Additive insulinotropic effects of exogenous synthetic human gastric-inhibitory polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1-(7–36) amide infused at near-physiological insulinotropic hormone and glucose- concentrations. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 76:912–917.[Abstract]
  24. DeFronzo RA, Bonadonna RC, Ferrannini E. 1992 Pathogenesis of NIDDM. A balanced overview. Diabetes Care. 15:318–368.[Abstract]
  25. Castillo MJ, Scheen AJ, Lefebvre PJ. 1995 Modified glucagon test allowing simultaneous estimation of insulin-secretion and insulin sensitivity: application to obesity, insulin-dependent diabetes-mellitus, and noninsulin-dependent diabetes-mellitus. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 80:393–399.[Abstract]
  26. Elahl D. 1996 In praise of the hyperglycemic clamp: a method for assessment of ß-cell sensitivity and insulin-resistance. Diabetes Care. 19:278–286.[Abstract]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
R. Hovorka, H. Jayatillake, E. Rogatsky, V. Tomuta, T. Hovorka, and D. T. Stein
Calculating glucose fluxes during meal tolerance test: a new computational approach
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, August 1, 2007; 293(2): E610 - E619.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
M. Campioni, G. Toffolo, L. T. Shuster, F. J. Service, R. A. Rizza, and C. Cobelli
Incretin effect potentiates beta-cell responsivity to glucose as well as to its rate of change: OGTT and matched intravenous study
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, January 1, 2007; 292(1): E54 - E60.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur J EndocrinolHome page
W. S. Shim, S. K. Kim, H. J. Kim, E. S. Kang, C. W. Ahn, S. K. Lim, H. C. Lee, and B. S. Cha
Decrement of postprandial insulin secretion determines the progressive nature of type-2 diabetes.
Eur. J. Endocrinol., October 1, 2006; 155(4): 615 - 622.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
DiabetesHome page
A. E. Panteleon, M. Loutseiko, G. M. Steil, and K. Rebrin
Evaluation of the effect of gain on the meal response of an automated closed-loop insulin delivery system.
Diabetes, July 1, 2006; 55(7): 1995 - 2000.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
DiabetesHome page
S. Camastra, M. Manco, A. Mari, S. Baldi, A. Gastaldelli, A. V. Greco, G. Mingrone, and E. Ferrannini
{beta}-Cell Function in Morbidly Obese Subjects During Free Living: Long-Term Effects of Weight Loss
Diabetes, August 1, 2005; 54(8): 2382 - 2389.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
A. Caumo and L. Luzi
First-phase insulin secretion: does it exist in real life? Considerations on shape and function
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, September 1, 2004; 287(3): E371 - E385.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
DiabetesHome page
G. M. Steil, C.-m. Hwu, R. Janowski, F. Hariri, S. Jinagouda, C. Darwin, S. Tadros, K. Rebrin, and M. F. Saad
Evaluation of Insulin Sensitivity and {beta}-Cell Function Indexes Obtained From Minimal Model Analysis of a Meal Tolerance Test
Diabetes, May 1, 2004; 53(5): 1201 - 1207.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
A. Mari, O. Schmitz, A. Gastaldelli, T. Oestergaard, B. Nyholm, and E. Ferrannini
Meal and oral glucose tests for assessment of beta -cell function: modeling analysis in normal subjects
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, December 1, 2002; 283(6): E1159 - E1166.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
DiabetesHome page
A. Mari, A. Tura, A. Gastaldelli, and E. Ferrannini
Assessing Insulin Secretion by Modeling in Multiple-Meal Tests: Role of Potentiation
Diabetes, February 1, 2002; 51(90001): S221 - 226.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
DiabetesHome page
E. Breda, G. Toffolo, K. S. Polonsky, and C. Cobelli
Insulin Release in Impaired Glucose Tolerance: Oral Minimal Model Predicts Normal Sensitivity to Glucose but Defective Response Times
Diabetes, February 1, 2002; 51(90001): S227 - 233.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
A. I. Albarrak, S. D. Luzio, L. J. Chassin, R. A. Playle, D. R. Owens, and R. Hovorka
Associations of Glucose Control with Insulin Sensitivity and Pancreatic {beta}-Cell Responsiveness in Newly Presenting Type 2 Diabetes
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., January 1, 2002; 87(1): 198 - 203.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
S. D. Luzio, D. M. Anderson, and D. R. Owens
Effects of Timing of Administration and Meal Composition on the Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Characteristics of the Short-Acting Oral Hypoglycemic Agent Nateglinide in Healthy Subjects
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2001; 86(10): 4874 - 4880.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
DiabetesHome page
E. Breda, M. K. Cavaghan, G. Toffolo, K. S. Polonsky, and C. Cobelli
Oral Glucose Tolerance Test Minimal Model Indexes of {beta}-Cell Function and Insulin Sensitivity
Diabetes, January 1, 2001; 50(1): 150 - 158.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hovorka, R.
Right arrow Articles by Owens, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hovorka, R.
Right arrow Articles by Owens, D. R.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals