Studies were done to determine whether the minimal model approach and the glucose clamp measure equivalent indices of insulin action. Euglycemic glucose clamps (glucose, G: 85 mg/dl) were performed at two rates of insulin (I) infusion (15 and 40 mU/min per m2) in 10 subjects (body mass index, BMI, from 21 to 41 kg/m2). Insulin sensitivity index (SI) from clamps varied from 0.15 to 3.15 (mean: 1.87 +/- 0.36 X 10(-2) dl/[min per m2] per microU/ml), and declined linearly with increasing adiposity (versus BMI: r = -0.97; P less than 0.001). SI from modeling the modified frequently sampled intravenous tolerance test varied from 0.66 to 7.34 X 10(-4) min-1 per microU/ml, and was strongly correlated with SIP(clamp) (r = 0.89; P less than 0.001). SI and SIP(clamp) were similar (0.046 +/- 0.008 vs. 0.037 +/- 0.007 dl/min per microU/ml, P greater than 0.35); the relation had a slope not different from unity (1.05 P greater than 0.70) and passed through the origin (P greater than 0.40). However, on a period basis, SI exceeded SIP(clamp) slightly, due to inhibition of hepatic glucose output during the FSIGT, not included in SIP(clamp). These methods are equivalent for assessment of overall insulin sensitivity in normal and insulin-resistant nondiabetic subjects.
Richard N. Bergman, Rudy Prager, Aage Volund, Jerrold M. Olefsky
Usage data is cumulative from June 2021 through June 2022.
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.