2009
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2008-1348
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Glucoregulatory Physiology in Subjects with Low-Normal, High-Normal, or Impaired Fasting Glucose

Abstract: Compared with persons with low-NFG, those with IFG or combined IFG-IGT have significant alteration of glucoregulatory physiology, whereas high-NFG (pre-prediabetes) status might portend nascent glucoregulatory perturbations.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
31
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some discordance between these studies may result from the use of surrogate markers (for example, HOMA IR -and OGTT-derived parameters), rather than direct measurements of insulin sensitivity (euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp). However, findings remain conflicting when limiting consideration to clamp studies, showing both lower 14,31,34 and comparable 8,10,13 insulin sensitivity in IFG compared with NGT subjects. A possible explanation for these discrepancies, in addition to differences in methodology, could be the differences in clinical staging (for example, number of years with IGM) and the (in)comparability of study groups; in many previous reports subjects with IGM were older, had higher body weight and more metabolic abnormalities compared with the control group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some discordance between these studies may result from the use of surrogate markers (for example, HOMA IR -and OGTT-derived parameters), rather than direct measurements of insulin sensitivity (euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp). However, findings remain conflicting when limiting consideration to clamp studies, showing both lower 14,31,34 and comparable 8,10,13 insulin sensitivity in IFG compared with NGT subjects. A possible explanation for these discrepancies, in addition to differences in methodology, could be the differences in clinical staging (for example, number of years with IGM) and the (in)comparability of study groups; in many previous reports subjects with IGM were older, had higher body weight and more metabolic abnormalities compared with the control group.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A close relationship exists between FPG and beta cell function, and increasing levels of NFPG have been associated with a 32% decrease in the beta cell function of adults [7,17]. Recently, DI has been shown to be predictive of the development of diabetes over 10 years [9].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been demonstrated that impaired fasting glucose (IFG) is a clinical condition associated with a threefold increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus [3][4][5][6][7], and IFG status acts as a good marker of the acute insulin response and the disposition index (DI) [8,9]. Although the established thresholds for defining IFG may be considered to be quite low, recent reports have suggested that fasting plasma glucose (FPG) within the normal range (NFPG) is a significant risk factor for future development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults [3][4][5][6][7].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The elevations of FPG [17][18][19], within normal range and from normal glucose range to impaired fasting glucose and to diabetic range, are consistent with decline in β cell function relative to insulin sensitivity. A curvilinear relationship between FPG and the relative β cell volume (and presumably the β cell mass) has been reported in human autopsy study [20].…”
Section: Declaration Of Interestmentioning
confidence: 59%