17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Normal meal tolerance test is preferable to the glucagon stimulation test in patients with type 2 diabetes that are not in a hyperglycemic state: Comparison with the change of C‐peptide immunoreactivity

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims/Introduction

          The aim of the present study was to evaluate the properties of the glucagon stimulation test ( GST) and the normal meal tolerance test ( NMTT) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

          Materials and Methods

          We enrolled 142 patients with type 2 diabetes, and carried out a GST and a NMTT. We carried out the NMTT using a calorie‐controlled meal based on an intake of 30 kcal/kg ideal bodyweight/day. We calculated the change in C‐peptide immunoreactivity (Δ CPR) by subtracting fasting CPR from the CPR 6 min after the 1‐mg glucagon injection ( GST) or 120 min after the meal ( NMTT).

          Results

          Mean Δ CPR for the GST was 2.0 ng/ mL, and for the NMTT was 3.1 ng/ mL. A total of 104 patients had greater Δ CPR in the NMTT than the GST, and the mean Δ CPR was significantly greater in the NMTT than the GST ( P < 0.05). To exclude any influence of antidiabetic drugs, we examined 42 individuals not taking antidiabetic agents, and found the mean Δ CPR was significantly greater in the NMTT than the GST ( GST 2.4 ng/ mL, NMTT 4.3 ng/ mL; P < 0.05). To consider the influence of glucose toxicity, we carried out receiver operating characteristic analyses with fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin. The optimal cut‐off levels predicting GST Δ CPR to be larger than NMTT Δ CPR were fasting plasma glucose 147 mg/ dL and glycated hemoglobin 9.0% (fasting plasma glucose: sensitivity 0.64, specificity 0.76, area under the curve 0.73; glycated hemoglobin: sensitivity 0.56, specificity 0.71, area under the curve 0.66).

          Conclusions

          The NMTT is a reliable insulin secretion test in patients with type 2 diabetes, except for those in a hyperglycemic state.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Index for rating diagnostic tests.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            International clinical harmonization of glycated hemoglobin in Japan: From Japan Diabetes Society to National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program values

            In 1999, the Japan Diabetes Society (JDS) launched the previous version of the diagnostic criteria of diabetes mellitus, in which JDS took initiative in adopting glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as an adjunct to the diagnosis of diabetes. In contrast, in 2009 the International Expert Committee composed of the members of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) manifested the recommendation regarding the use of HbA1c in diagnosing diabetes mellitus as an alternative to glucose measurements based on the updated evidence showing that HbA1c has several advantages as a marker of chronic hyperglycemia 2–4 . The JDS extensively evaluated the usefulness and feasibility of more extended use of HbA1c in the diagnosis of diabetes based on Japanese epidemiological data, and then the ‘Report of the Committee on the Classification and Diagnostic Criteria of Diabetes Mellitus’ was published in the Journal of Diabetes Investigation 5 and Diabetology International 6 . The new diagnostic criterion in Japan came into effect on 1 July 2010. According to the new version of the criteria, HbA1c (JDS) ≥6.1% is now considered to indicate a diabetic type, but the previous diagnosis criteria of high plasma glucose (PG) levels to diagnose diabetes mellitus also need to be confirmed. Those are as follows: (i) FPG ≥126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L); (ii) 2‐h PG ≥200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L) during an oral glucose tolerance test; or (iii) casual PG ≥200 mg/dL (11.1 mmol/L). If both PG criteria and HbA1c in patients have met the diabetic type, those patients are immediately diagnosed to have diabetes mellitus 5,6 . In the report, the HbA1c measurements in Japan are well calibrated with Japanese‐Clinical‐Laboratory‐Use Certified Reference Material (JCCRM). The certified values are determined by a high‐resolution type ion‐exchange high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) (KO 500 method) and certified using the designated comparison method (DCM) of the Japan Society of Clinical Chemistry (JSCC) and the JDS. After incorporating a proportional bias correction to the value anchored to the peptide mapping method of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC), the DCM actually measures β‐N‐mono‐deoxyfructosyl hemoglobin and has an intercept approximately equal to zero against the peptide mapping method of IFCC in measuring fresh raw human blood samples. Furthermore, standardization of HbA1c in Japan was initiated in 1993, and the serial reference materials from JDS Lot 1 to JDS Lot 4 are well certified using the DCM until now. In the new diagnosis criteria 5,6 , the new cut‐point of HbA1c (JDS) for diagnosis of diabetes mellitus is 6.1%, which is equivalent to the internationally‐used HbA1c (National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program [NGSP]) 6.5%, as HbA1c (NGSP)(%) is reported to be equivalent to 1.019 × HbA1c (JDS)% + 0.3%, which is reasonably estimated by the equation of HbA1c (JDS)% + 0.4%, as the difference between the two equations is within error of HbA1c measurements (2∼3%). However, on 1 October 2011, the Reference Material Institute for Clinical Chemistry Standards (ReCCS, Kanagawa, Japan) was certified as an Asian Secondary Reference Laboratory (ASRL) using the KO 500 method and the reference materials JCCRM411‐2 (JDS Lot 4) after successful completion of NGSP network laboratory certification. Therefore, the HbA1c unit is now traceable to the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) reference method. The comparison was carried out with the Central Primary Reference Laboratory (CPRL) in the University of Missouri School of Medicine. The conversion equation from HbA1c (JDS) to HbA1c (NGSP) units is officially certified as follows: NGSP (%) = 1.02 × JDS (%) + 0.25%; conversely, JDS (%) = 0.980 × NGSP (%) – 0.245%. Based on this equation, in the range of JDS values ≤4.9%, NGSP (%) = JDS (%) + 0.3%; in the range of JDS 5.0∼9.9%, NGSP (%) = JDS (%) + 0.4%; and in the range of JDS 10∼14.9%, NGSP (%) = JDS (%) + 0.5%. These results show that the previous equation of NGSP (%) = JDS (%) + 0.4% is also confirmed in the present equation, considering a 2∼3% error of HbA1c measurements. The council meeting of the JDS finally decided to use HbA1c (NGSP) values in clinical practice from 1 April 2012, although HbA1c (JDS) values will be included until people become familiar with the new expression. Finally, it is also important to emphasize that the new HbA1c (NGSP) values can be directly measured and printed out from 1 April 2012. However, both new diagnostic reference values and target values of glycemic control have been adjusted to those equivalent values of HbA1c (JDS), as shown in the Table 1. Table 1  Differences in glycated hemoglobin values between Japan Diabetes Society and National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program for assessments of diagnosis and treatment of diabetes mellitus (a) Diagnostic reference values of HbA1c (NGSP) and HbA1c (JDS) Diagnostic reference values HbA1c (NGSP) HbA1c (JDS) Standard range (%) 4.6–6.2 4.3–5.8 Diabetes range (%) ≥6.5 ≥6.1 Possible diabetes range (%) 6.0–6.4 5.6–6.0 High risk range for diabetes (%) 5.6–5.9 5.2–5.5 (b) Assessments of the glycemic control using HbA1c Assessment of control state HbA1c (NGSP) HbA1c (JDS) Excellent (%) <6.2 <5.8 Good (%) 6.2–6.8 5.8–6.4 Fair  Inadequate (%) 6.9–7.3 6.5–6.9  Not good (%) 7.4–8.3 7.0–7.9 Poor (%) ≥8.4 ≥8.0 HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; JDS, Japan Diabetes Society; NGSP, National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              C-peptide is the appropriate outcome measure for type 1 diabetes clinical trials to preserve beta-cell function: report of an ADA workshop, 21-22 October 2001.

              The underlying cause of type 1 diabetes, loss of beta-cell function, has become the therapeutic target for a number of interventions in patients with type 1 diabetes. Even though insulin therapies continue to improve, it remains difficult to achieve normal glycemic control in type 1 diabetes, especially long term. The associated risks of hypoglycemia and end-organ diabetic complications remain. Retention of beta-cell function in patients with type 1 diabetes is known to result in improved glycemic control and reduced hypoglycemia, retinopathy, and nephropathy. To facilitate the development of therapies aimed at altering the type 1 diabetes disease process, an American Diabetes Association workshop was convened to identify appropriate efficacy outcome measures in type 1 diabetes clinical trials. The following consensus emerged: While measurements of immune responses to islet cells are important in elucidating pathogenesis, none of these measures have directly correlated with the decline in endogenous insulin secretion. HbA(1c) is a highly valuable clinical measure of glycemic control, but it is an insensitive measure of beta-cell function, particularly with the currently accepted standard of near-normal glycemic control. Rates of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic complications ultimately will be improved by therapies that are effective at preserving beta-cell function but as primary outcomes require inordinately large and protracted trials. Endogenous insulin secretion is assessed best by measurement of C-peptide, which is cosecreted with insulin in a one-to-one molar ratio but unlike insulin experiences little first pass clearance by the liver. Measurement of C-peptide under standardized conditions provides a sensitive, well accepted, and clinically validated assessment of beta-cell function. C-peptide measurement is the most suitable primary outcome for clinical trials of therapies aimed at preserving or improving endogenous insulin secretion in type 1 diabetes patients. Available data demonstrate that even relatively modest treatment effects on C-peptide will result in clinically meaningful benefits. The development of therapies for addressing this important unmet clinical need will be facilitated by trials that are carefully designed with beta-cell function as determined by C-peptide measurement as the primary efficacy outcome.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ohkura@grape.med.tottori-u.ac.jp
                Journal
                J Diabetes Investig
                J Diabetes Investig
                10.1111/(ISSN)2040-1124
                JDI
                Journal of Diabetes Investigation
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2040-1116
                2040-1124
                19 June 2017
                March 2018
                : 9
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1111/jdi.2018.9.issue-2 )
                : 274-278
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Division of Molecular Medicine and Therapeutics Department of Multidisciplinary Internal Medicine Tottori University Yonago, Tottori Japan
                [ 2 ] Department of Regional Medicine Faculty of Medicine Tottori University Yonago, Tottori Japan
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Tsuyoshi Okura

                Tel.: +81‐859‐38‐6517

                Fax: +81‐859‐38‐6519

                E‐mail address: ohkura@ 123456grape.med.tottori-u.ac.jp

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7852-5857
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3713-6617
                Article
                JDI12692
                10.1111/jdi.12692
                5835464
                28494143
                bcf7ff49-1465-4f6b-b54f-1fca819402c7
                © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Diabetes Investigation published by Asian Association for the Study of Diabetes (AASD) and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

                History
                : 12 February 2017
                : 22 April 2017
                : 01 May 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Pages: 5, Words: 3629
                Categories
                Original Article
                Articles
                Clinical Science and Care
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                jdi12692
                March 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.3.2.2 mode:remove_FC converted:04.03.2018

                c‐peptide,glucagon stimulation test,meal tolerance test

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content88

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors1,265