Impact of Nutrient Type and Sequence on Glucose Tolerance: Physiological Insights and Therapeutic Implications

The exact contributions of postprandial and fasting glucose increments to overall hyperglycemia remain controversial. The discrepancies between the data published previously might be caused by the interference of several factors. To test the effect of overall glycemic control itself, we analyzed the diurnal glycemic profiles of type 2 diabetic patients investigated at different levels of HbA(1c). In 290 non-insulin- and non-acarbose-using patients with type 2 diabetes, plasma glucose (PG) concentrations were determined at fasting (8:00 A.M.) and during postprandial and postabsorptive periods (at 11:00 A.M., 2:00 P.M., and 5:00 P.M.). The areas under the curve above fasting PG concentrations (AUC(1)) and >6.1 mmol/l (AUC(2)) were calculated for further evaluation of the relative contributions of postprandial (AUC(1)/AUC(2), %) and fasting [(AUC(2) - AUC(1))/AUC(2), %] PG increments to the overall diurnal hyperglycemia. The data were compared over quintiles of HbA(1c). The relative contribution of postprandial glucose decreased progressively from the lowest (69.7%) to the highest quintile of HbA(1c) (30.5%, P < 0.001), whereas the relative contribution of fasting glucose increased gradually with increasing levels of HbA(1c): 30.3% in the lowest vs. 69.5% in the highest quintile (P < 0.001). The relative contribution of postprandial glucose excursions is predominant in fairly controlled patients, whereas the contribution of fasting hyperglycemia increases gradually with diabetes worsening. These results could therefore provide a unifying explanation for the discrepancies as observed in previous studies.

Impaired glucose tolerance is associated with increased rates of cardiovascular disease and conversion to type 2 diabetes mellitus. Interventions that may prevent or delay such occurrences are of great clinical importance. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to examine whether pioglitazone can reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults with impaired glucose tolerance. A total of 602 patients were randomly assigned to receive pioglitazone or placebo. The median follow-up period was 2.4 years. Fasting glucose was measured quarterly, and oral glucose tolerance tests were performed annually. Conversion to diabetes was confirmed on the basis of the results of repeat testing. Annual incidence rates for type 2 diabetes mellitus were 2.1% in the pioglitazone group and 7.6% in the placebo group, and the hazard ratio for conversion to diabetes in the pioglitazone group was 0.28 (95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.49; P<0.001). Conversion to normal glucose tolerance occurred in 48% of the patients in the pioglitazone group and 28% of those in the placebo group (P<0.001). Treatment with pioglitazone as compared with placebo was associated with significantly reduced levels of fasting glucose (a decrease of 11.7 mg per deciliter vs. 8.1 mg per deciliter [0.7 mmol per liter vs. 0.5 mmol per liter], P<0.001), 2-hour glucose (a decrease of 30.5 mg per deciliter vs. 15.6 mg per deciliter [1.6 mmol per liter vs. 0.9 mmol per liter], P<0.001), and HbA(1c) (a decrease of 0.04 percentage points vs. an increase of 0.20 percentage points, P<0.001). Pioglitazone therapy was also associated with a decrease in diastolic blood pressure (by 2.0 mm Hg vs. 0.0 mm Hg, P=0.03), a reduced rate of carotid intima-media thickening (31.5%, P=0.047), and a greater increase in the level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (by 7.35 mg per deciliter vs. 4.5 mg per deciliter [0.4 mmol per liter vs. 0.3 mmol per liter], P=0.008). Weight gain was greater with pioglitazone than with placebo (3.9 kg vs. 0.77 kg, P<0.001), and edema was more frequent (12.9% vs. 6.4%, P=0.007). As compared with placebo, pioglitazone reduced the risk of conversion of impaired glucose tolerance to type 2 diabetes mellitus by 72% but was associated with significant weight gain and edema. (Funded by Takeda Pharmaceuticals and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00220961.).

Abstract Gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) are the two primary incretin hormones secreted from the intestine on ingestion of glucose or nutrients to stimulate insulin secretion from pancreatic β cells. GIP and GLP‐1 exert their effects by binding to their specific receptors, the GIP receptor (GIPR) and the GLP‐1 receptor (GLP‐1R), which belong to the G‐protein coupled receptor family. Receptor binding activates and increases the level of intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate in pancreatic β cells, thereby stimulating insulin secretion glucose‐dependently. In addition to their insulinotropic effects, GIP and GLP‐1 play critical roles in various biological processes in different tissues and organs that express GIPR and GLP‐1R, including the pancreas, fat, bone and the brain. Within the pancreas, GIP and GLP‐1 together promote β cell proliferation and inhibit apoptosis, thereby expanding pancreatic β cell mass, while GIP enhances postprandial glucagon response and GLP‐1 suppresses it. In adipose tissues, GIP but not GLP‐1 facilitates fat deposition. In bone, GIP promotes bone formation while GLP‐1 inhibits bone absorption. In the brain, both GIP and GLP‐1 are thought to be involved in memory formation as well as the control of appetite. In addition to these differences, secretion of GIP and GLP‐1 and their insulinotropic effects on β cells have been shown to differ in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to healthy subjects. We summarize here the similarities and differences of these two incretin hormones in secretion and metabolism, their insulinotropic action on pancreatic β cells, and their non‐insulinotropic effects, and discuss their potential in treatment of type 2 diabetes. (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2010.00022.x, 2010)