C. Crofts, Mark C. Wheldon, C. Zinn, F. Merien, G. Schofield
{"title":"胰岛素反应模式的重复性特征和胰岛素抵抗的测量","authors":"C. Crofts, Mark C. Wheldon, C. Zinn, F. Merien, G. Schofield","doi":"10.4102/JIR.V4I1.44","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Hyperinsulinaemia is emerging as an independent risk factor for metabolic disease, but diagnostic measures are limited. It is plausible that insulin resistance measures, such as homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) type 2 variants, may model hyperinsulinaemia, but repeatability data are limited. Kraft and Hayashi insulin response patterns may not only add value in diagnosing hyperinsulinaemia, but also lack suitable repeatability data. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the repeatability of insulin response patterns, and fasting and dynamic measures of insulin resistance, and to determine whether these latter measures can predict the insulin response pattern. Setting: This study was conducted at Auckland University of Technology Millennium Institute’s sports performance laboratories. Methods: Oral glucose (100 g) tolerance tests were conducted weekly on eight people. Six people completed four tests, while two completed at least two tests. Each test assessed insulin resistance and response patterns. Insulin resistance measures included fasting tests (HOMA2, McAuley Index) and a dynamic test (oral glucose insulin sensitivity [OGIS]). The insulin response patterns were assessed with both Kraft and Hayashi methodologies. Repeatability characteristics of ordinal variables were assessed by Bland and Altman methods, while Fleiss’ κ was applied to categorical variables. Results: Fasting measures of insulin resistance recorded poor repeatability (HOMA2) or poor sensitivity (McAuley Index) compared to the dynamic measure (OGIS). Kraft insulin response patterns were more repeatable compared to Hayashi patterns, based on a combination of Fleiss’ κ (0.290 vs. 0.186,) p -value (0.15 vs. 0.798) and 95% confidence intervals. Conclusions: Both hyperinsulinaemia and insulin resistance should be dynamically assessed with a multi-sampled oral glucose tolerance test. Further investigations are required to confirm a preferred methodology.","PeriodicalId":32155,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Insulin Resistance","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Repeatability characteristics of insulin response patterns and measures of insulin resistance\",\"authors\":\"C. Crofts, Mark C. Wheldon, C. Zinn, F. Merien, G. Schofield\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/JIR.V4I1.44\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Hyperinsulinaemia is emerging as an independent risk factor for metabolic disease, but diagnostic measures are limited. It is plausible that insulin resistance measures, such as homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) type 2 variants, may model hyperinsulinaemia, but repeatability data are limited. Kraft and Hayashi insulin response patterns may not only add value in diagnosing hyperinsulinaemia, but also lack suitable repeatability data. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the repeatability of insulin response patterns, and fasting and dynamic measures of insulin resistance, and to determine whether these latter measures can predict the insulin response pattern. Setting: This study was conducted at Auckland University of Technology Millennium Institute’s sports performance laboratories. Methods: Oral glucose (100 g) tolerance tests were conducted weekly on eight people. Six people completed four tests, while two completed at least two tests. Each test assessed insulin resistance and response patterns. Insulin resistance measures included fasting tests (HOMA2, McAuley Index) and a dynamic test (oral glucose insulin sensitivity [OGIS]). The insulin response patterns were assessed with both Kraft and Hayashi methodologies. Repeatability characteristics of ordinal variables were assessed by Bland and Altman methods, while Fleiss’ κ was applied to categorical variables. Results: Fasting measures of insulin resistance recorded poor repeatability (HOMA2) or poor sensitivity (McAuley Index) compared to the dynamic measure (OGIS). Kraft insulin response patterns were more repeatable compared to Hayashi patterns, based on a combination of Fleiss’ κ (0.290 vs. 0.186,) p -value (0.15 vs. 0.798) and 95% confidence intervals. Conclusions: Both hyperinsulinaemia and insulin resistance should be dynamically assessed with a multi-sampled oral glucose tolerance test. Further investigations are required to confirm a preferred methodology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Insulin Resistance\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Insulin Resistance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/JIR.V4I1.44\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Insulin Resistance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/JIR.V4I1.44","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
背景:高胰岛素血症正在成为代谢性疾病的独立危险因素,但诊断措施有限。胰岛素抵抗测量,如体内平衡模型评估(HOMA) 2型变异,可能模拟高胰岛素血症,但可重复性数据有限。Kraft和Hayashi胰岛素反应模式可能不仅对诊断高胰岛素血症有价值,而且缺乏合适的可重复性数据。目的:本研究的目的是探讨胰岛素反应模式的可重复性,以及胰岛素抵抗的空腹和动态测量,并确定后者是否可以预测胰岛素反应模式。背景:本研究在奥克兰科技大学千禧研究所的运动表现实验室进行。方法:每周对8例患者进行口服葡萄糖(100 g)耐量试验。6人完成了4项测试,2人至少完成了2项测试。每个测试评估胰岛素抵抗和反应模式。胰岛素抵抗测量包括空腹测试(HOMA2, McAuley指数)和动态测试(口服葡萄糖胰岛素敏感性[OGIS])。胰岛素反应模式采用Kraft和Hayashi两种方法进行评估。顺序变量的重复性特征采用Bland和Altman法,分类变量的重复性特征采用Fleiss’k法。结果:与动态测量(OGIS)相比,空腹胰岛素抵抗测量的重复性(HOMA2)或敏感性(McAuley指数)较差。基于Fleiss ' κ (0.290 vs. 0.186) p值(0.15 vs. 0.798)和95%置信区间的组合,Kraft胰岛素反应模式与Hayashi模式相比更具可重复性。结论:高胰岛素血症和胰岛素抵抗均应通过多样本口服糖耐量试验进行动态评估。需要进一步的调查来确认首选的方法。
Repeatability characteristics of insulin response patterns and measures of insulin resistance
Background: Hyperinsulinaemia is emerging as an independent risk factor for metabolic disease, but diagnostic measures are limited. It is plausible that insulin resistance measures, such as homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) type 2 variants, may model hyperinsulinaemia, but repeatability data are limited. Kraft and Hayashi insulin response patterns may not only add value in diagnosing hyperinsulinaemia, but also lack suitable repeatability data. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the repeatability of insulin response patterns, and fasting and dynamic measures of insulin resistance, and to determine whether these latter measures can predict the insulin response pattern. Setting: This study was conducted at Auckland University of Technology Millennium Institute’s sports performance laboratories. Methods: Oral glucose (100 g) tolerance tests were conducted weekly on eight people. Six people completed four tests, while two completed at least two tests. Each test assessed insulin resistance and response patterns. Insulin resistance measures included fasting tests (HOMA2, McAuley Index) and a dynamic test (oral glucose insulin sensitivity [OGIS]). The insulin response patterns were assessed with both Kraft and Hayashi methodologies. Repeatability characteristics of ordinal variables were assessed by Bland and Altman methods, while Fleiss’ κ was applied to categorical variables. Results: Fasting measures of insulin resistance recorded poor repeatability (HOMA2) or poor sensitivity (McAuley Index) compared to the dynamic measure (OGIS). Kraft insulin response patterns were more repeatable compared to Hayashi patterns, based on a combination of Fleiss’ κ (0.290 vs. 0.186,) p -value (0.15 vs. 0.798) and 95% confidence intervals. Conclusions: Both hyperinsulinaemia and insulin resistance should be dynamically assessed with a multi-sampled oral glucose tolerance test. Further investigations are required to confirm a preferred methodology.