Insulin resistance is a significant risk factor in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes. This article presents pilot study results of the dynamic insulin sensitivity and secretion test (DISST), a high-resolution, low-intensity test to diagnose insulin sensitivity (IS) and characterize pancreatic insulin secretion in response to a (small) glucose challenge. This pilot study examines the effect of glucose and insulin dose on the DISST, and tests its repeatability.
Methods:
DISST tests were performed on 16 subjects randomly allocated to low (5 g glucose, 0.5 U insulin), medium (10 g glucose, 1 U insulin) and high dose (20 g glucose, 2 U insulin) protocols. Two or three tests were performed on each subject a few days apart.
Results:
Average variability in IS between low and medium dose was 10.3% (p = .50) and between medium and high dose 6.0% (p = .87). Geometric mean variability between tests was 6.0% (multiplicative standard deviation (MSD) 4.9%). Geometric mean variability in first phase endogenous insulin response was 6.8% (MSD 2.2%). Results were most consistent in subjects with low IS.
Conclusions:
These findings suggest that DISST may be an easily performed dynamic test to quantify IS with high resolution, especially among those with reduced IS.
DeFronzoRAFerranniniE. Insulin resistance. A multifaceted syndrome responsible for NIDDM, obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Diabetes Care.1991; 14 (3): 173–94.
2.
FerranniniE. Insulin resistance is central to the burden of diabetes. Diabetes Metab Rev.1997; 13 (2): 81–6.
3.
MartinBCWarramJHKrolewskiASBergmanRSoeldnerJSKahnCR. Role of glucose and insulin resistance in development of type 2 diabetes mellitus: Results of a 25-year follow-up study. Lancet.1992; 340 (8825): 925–9.
4.
McLaughlinTAbbasiFLamendolaCReavenG. Heterogeneity in prevalence of risk factors for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes in obese individuals: Effect of differences in insulin sensitivity. Arch Intern Med.2007; 167 (7): 642–8.
5.
ScheenAJPaquotNCastilloMJLefebvrePJ. How to measure insulin action in vivo. Diabetes Metab Rev.1994; 10 (2): 151–88.
6.
RadziukJ. Insulin sensitivity and its measurement: Structural commonalities among the methods. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.2000; 85 (12): 4426–33.
7.
DeFronzoRATobinJDAndresR. Glucose clamp technique: A method for quantifying insulin secretion and resistance. Am J Physiol.1979; 237 (3): E214–23.
8.
FerranniniEMariA. How to measure insulin sensitivity. J Hypertens.1998; 16 (7): 895–906.
9.
BonoraEMoghettiPZancanaroCCigoliniMQuerenaMCacciatoriVCorgnatiAMuggeoM. Estimates of in vivo insulin action in man: Comparison of insulin tolerance tests with euglycemic and hyperglycemic glucose clamp studies. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.1989; 68 (2): 374–8.
10.
PaciniGBergmanRN. MINMOD: A computer program to calculate insulin sensitivity and pancreatic responsivity from the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. Comput Methods Programs Biomed.1986; 23 (2): 113–22.
11.
SaadMFAndersonRLLawsAWatanabeRMKadesWWChenYSandsREPeiDSavagePJBergmanRN. A comparison between the minimal model and the glucose clamp in the assessment of insulin sensitivity across the spectrum of glucose tolerance. Diabetes.1994; 43 (9): 1114–21.
12.
GalvinPWardGWaltersJPestellRKoschmannMVaagAMartinIBestJDAlfordF. A simple method for quantitation of insulin sensitivity and insulin release form an intravenous glucose tolerance test. Diabet Med.1992; 9 (10): 921–8.
13.
CaumoAViciniPZachwiejaJJAvogaroAYarasheskiKBierDMCobelliC. Undermodeling affects minimal model indexes: Insights from a two-compartment model. Am J Physiol.1999; 276 (6 Pt 1): E1171–93.
14.
MatthewsDRHoskerJPRudenskiASNaylorBATreacherDFTurnerRC. Homeostasis model assessment: Insulin resistance and beta-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man. Diabetologia.1985; 28 (7): 412–9.
15.
KatzANambiSSMatherKBaronADFollmannDASullivanGQuonMJ. Quantitative insulin sensitivity check index: A simple, accurate method for assessing insulin sensitivity in humans. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.2000; 85 (7): 2402–010.
16.
American Diabetes Association. Economic consequences of diabetes mellitus in the U.S. in 1997. Diabetes Care.1998; 21 (2): 296–309.
17.
McAuleyKAMannJIChaseJGLotzTFShawGM. Point: HOMA -Satisfactory for the time being: HOMA: The best bet for the simple determination of insulin sensitivity, until something better comes along. Diabetes Care.2007; 30 (9): 2411–3.
18.
LotzTChaseJGMcAuleyKAShawGMWongJLinJLecompteAHannCEMannJI. Monte Carlo analysis of a new model-based method for insulin sensitivity testing. Comput Methods Programs Biomed.2008; 89 (3): 215–25.
19.
American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care.2006; 29 (Suppl 1): S43–S48.
20.
LotzTChaseJGLinJWongXWHannCEMcAuleyKAAndreassenS, editors. Integral-based identification of a physiological insulin and glucose model on euglycaemic clamp trials. In: 14th IFAC Symposium on System identification (SYSID 2006); 2006 Mar 29–31; Newcastle, Australia: IFAC; 2006.
21.
LotzT. High resolution clinical model-based assessment of insulin sensitivity [Ph.D. Thesis]. Christchurch, New Zealand: University of Canterbury; 2007.
22.
EdsbergBHerlyDHildebrandtPKuhlC. Insulin bolus given by a sprinkler needle: Effect on absorption and glycaemic response to a meal. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed).1987; 294 (6584): 1373–6.
23.
CobelliCPaciniGToffoloGSaccàL. Estimation of insulin sensitivity and glucose clearance from minimal model: New insights from labeled IVGTT. Am J Physiol.1986; 250 (5 Pt 1): E591–8.
24.
KrudysKMKahnSEViciniP. Population approaches to estimate minimal model indexes of insulin sensitivity and glucose effectiveness using full and reduced sampling schedules. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab.2006; 291 (4): E716–23.
25.
PrigeonRLRøderMEPorteDJrKahnSE. The effect of insulin dose on the measurement of insulin sensitivity by the minimal model technique. Evidence for saturable insulin transport in humans. J Clin Invest.1996; 97 (2): 501–7.
26.
ChaseJGShawGMLinJDoranCVBloomfieldMWakeGCBroughtonBHannCLotzT. Impact of insulin-stimulated glucose removal saturation on dynamic modelling and control of hyperglycaemia. IJISTA.2004; 1 (1/2): 79–94.
27.
ChaseJShawGMWongXWLotzTLinJHannCE. Model-based glycaemic control in critical care — A review of the state of the possible. Biomed Signal Process Control.2006; 1 (1): 3–21.
MinakerKLFlierJSLandsbergLYoungJBMoxleyRTKingstonWJMeneillyGSRoweJW. Phenytoin-induced improvement in muscle cramping and insulin action in three patients with the syndrome of insulin resistance, acanthosis nigricans, and acral hypertrophy. Arch Neurol.1989; 46 (9): 981–5.
30.
Van CauterEPolonskyKSScheenAJ. Roles of circadian rhythmicity and sleep in human glucose regulation. Endocr Rev.1997; 18 (5): 716–38.
31.
HollenbeckCBReavenG. Treatment of patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: Diabetic control and insulin secretion and action after different treatment modalities. Diabet Med.1987; 4 (4): 311–6.
32.
Van den Berghe G, Wilmer A, Hermans G, Meersseman W, Wouters PJ, Milants I, Van Wijngaerden E, Bobbaers H, Bouillon R. Intensive insulin therapy in the medical ICU. N Engl J Med.;2006; 354 (5): 449–61.
33.
TroutKKHomkoCTkacsNC. Methods of measuring insulin sensitivity. Biol Res Nurs.2007; 8 (4): 305–18.
34.
NishidaYTokuyamaKNagasakaSHigakiYShiraiYKiyonagaAShindoMKusakaINakamuraTIshibashiSTanakaH. Effect of moderate exercise training on peripheral glucose effectiveness, insulin sensitivity, and endogenous glucose production in healthy humans estimated by a two-compartment-labeled minimal model. Diabetes.2004; 53 (2): 315–20.
35.
O'GormanDJKarlssonHKMcQuiadSYousifORahmanYGasparroDGlundSChibalinAVZierathJRNolanJJ. Exercise training increases insulin-simulated glucose disposal and GLUT4 (SLC2A4) protein content in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia.2006; 49 (12): 2983–92.
36.
HannCEChaseJGLinJLotzTDoranCVShawGM. Integral-based parameter identification for long-term dynamic verification of a glucose-insulin system model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed.2005; 77 (3): 259–70.
37.
JeffersonLSCherringtonA. The endocrine pancreas and regulation of metabolism.GoodmanHM, editor. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.
38.
HauschkeDKieserMDilettiEBurkeM. Sample size determination for proving equivalence based on the ratio of two means for normally distributed data. Stat Med.1999; 18 (1): 93–105.
39.
BergmanRNIderYZBowdenCRCobelliC. Quantitative estimation of insulin sensitivity. Am J Physiol.1979; 236 (6): E667–77.
40.
CallegariTCaumoACobelliC. Bayesian two-compartment and classic single-compartment minimal models: Comparison on insulin modified IVGTT and effect of experiment reduction. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng.2003; 50 (12): 1301–9.
41.
RegittnigWTrajanoskiZLeisHJEllmererMWutteASendlhoferGSchauppLBrunnerGAWachPPieberTR. Plasma and interstitial glucose dynamics after intravenous glucose injection: Evaluation of the single-compartment glucose distribution assumption in the minimal models. Diabetes.1999; 48 (5): 1070–81.
42.
CaumoAViciniPCobelliC. Is the minimal model too minimal?Diabetologia.1996; 38 (8): 997–1000.
43.
CaumoACobelliC. Hepatic glucose production during the labeled IVGTT: Estimation by deconvolution with a new minimal model. Am J Physiol.1993; 264 (5 Pt 1): E829–41.
44.
HovorkaRShojaee-MoradieFCarrollPVChassinLJGowrieIJJacksonNCTudorRSUmplebyAMJonesRH. Partitioning glucose distribution/transport, disposal, and endogenous production during IVGTT. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab.2002; 282 (5): E992–1007.
45.
QuonMJCochranCTaylorSIEastmanRC. Non-insulin-mediated glucose disappearance in subjects with IDDM. Discordance between experimental results and minimal model analysis. Diabetes.1994; 43 (7): 890–6.
46.
Del PratoSMatsudaMSimonsonDCGroopLCSheehanPLeonettiFBonadonnaTCDeFronzoRA. Studies on the mass action effects of glucose in NIDDM and IDDM: Evidence for glucose resistance. Diabetologia.1997; 40 (6): 687–97.
47.
BestJDKahnSEAderMWatanabeRMNiTCBergmanRN. Role of glucose effectiveness in the determination of glucose tolerance. Diabetes Care.1996; 19 (9): 1018–30.
48.
ViciniPCaumoACobelliC. Glucose effectiveness and insulin sensitivity from the minimal models: Consequences of undermodeling assessed by Monte Carlo simulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng.1999; 46 (2): 130–7.
49.
VellaAReedASCharkoudianNShahPBasuRBasuAJoynerMJRizzaRA. Glucose-induced suppression of endogenous glucose production: Dynamic response to differing glucose profiles. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab.2003; 285 (1): E25–30.
50.
GudbjörnsdóttirSSjöstrandMStrindbergLWahrenJLönnrothP. Direct measurements of the permeability surface area for insulin and glucose in human skeletal muscle. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.2003; 88 (10): 4559–64.
51.
SjöstrandMHolmängALönnrothP. Measurement of interstitial insulin in human muscle. Am J Physiol.1999; 276 (1 Pt 1): E151–4.
52.
ToffoloGCampioniMBasuRRizzaRACobelliC. A minimal model of insulin secretion and kinetics to assess hepatic insulin extraction. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab.2006; 290 (1): E169–E176.
53.
ThorsteinssonB. Kinetic models for insulin disappearance from plasma in man. Dan Med Bull.1990; 37 (2): 143–53.
54.
FerranniniEWahrenJFaberOKFeligPBinderCDeFronzoRA. Splanchnic and renal metabolism of insulin in human subjects: A dose-response study. Am J Physiol.1983; 244 (6): E517–27.
55.
PillonettoGSparacinoGMagniPBellazziRCobelliC. Minimal model S(I)=0 problem in NIDDM subjects: Nonzero Bayesian estimates with credible confidence intervals. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab.2002; 282 (3): E564–73.
56.
EatonR PAllenRCSchadeDSEricksonKMStandeferJ. Prehepatic insulin production in man: Kinetic analysis using peripheral connecting peptide behavior. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.1980; 51 (3): 520–8.
57.
Van CauterEMestrezFSturisJPolonskyKS. Estimation of insulin secretion rates from C-peptide levels. Comparison of individual and standard kinetic parameters for C-peptide clearance. Diabetes.1992; 41 (3): 368–77.
