About: Insulin is a(n) research topic. Over the lifetime, 124295 publication(s) have been published within this topic receiving 5129734 citation(s). The topic is also known as: human insulin.
Papers published on a yearly basis
01 Jul 1985-Diabetologia
TL;DR: The correlation of the model's estimates with patient data accords with the hypothesis that basal glucose and insulin interactions are largely determined by a simple feed back loop.
Abstract: The steady-state basal plasma glucose and insulin concentrations are determined by their interaction in a feedback loop. A computer-solved model has been used to predict the homeostatic concentrations which arise from varying degrees beta-cell deficiency and insulin resistance. Comparison of a patient's fasting values with the model's predictions allows a quantitative assessment of the contributions of insulin resistance and deficient beta-cell function to the fasting hyperglycaemia (homeostasis model assessment, HOMA). The accuracy and precision of the estimate have been determined by comparison with independent measures of insulin resistance and beta-cell function using hyperglycaemic and euglycaemic clamps and an intravenous glucose tolerance test. The estimate of insulin resistance obtained by homeostasis model assessment correlated with estimates obtained by use of the euglycaemic clamp (Rs = 0.88, p less than 0.0001), the fasting insulin concentration (Rs = 0.81, p less than 0.0001), and the hyperglycaemic clamp, (Rs = 0.69, p less than 0.01). There was no correlation with any aspect of insulin-receptor binding. The estimate of deficient beta-cell function obtained by homeostasis model assessment correlated with that derived using the hyperglycaemic clamp (Rs = 0.61, p less than 0.01) and with the estimate from the intravenous glucose tolerance test (Rs = 0.64, p less than 0.05). The low precision of the estimates from the model (coefficients of variation: 31% for insulin resistance and 32% for beta-cell deficit) limits its use, but the correlation of the model's estimates with patient data accords with the hypothesis that basal glucose and insulin interactions are largely determined by a simple feed back loop.
01 Jul 1998-Diabetic Medicine
TL;DR: A WHO Consultation has taken place in parallel with a report by an American Diabetes Association Expert Committee to re‐examine diagnostic criteria and classification of diabetes mellitus and is hoped that the new classification will allow better classification of individuals and lead to fewer therapeutic misjudgements.
Abstract: The classification of diabetes mellitus and the tests used for its diagnosis were brought into order by the National Diabetes Data Group of the USA and the second World Health Organization Expert Committee on Diabetes Mellitus in 1979 and 1980. Apart from minor modifications by WHO in 1985, little has been changed since that time. There is however considerable new knowledge regarding the aetiology of different forms of diabetes as well as more information on the predictive value of different blood glucose values for the complications of diabetes. A WHO Consultation has therefore taken place in parallel with a report by an American Diabetes Association Expert Committee to re-examine diagnostic criteria and classification. The present document includes the conclusions of the former and is intended for wide distribution and discussion before final proposals are submitted to WHO for approval. The main changes proposed are as follows. The diagnostic fasting plasma (blood) glucose value has been lowered to > or =7.0 mmol l(-1) (6.1 mmol l(-1)). Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT) is changed to allow for the new fasting level. A new category of Impaired Fasting Glycaemia (IFG) is proposed to encompass values which are above normal but below the diagnostic cut-off for diabetes (plasma > or =6.1 to or =5.6 to <6.1 mmol l(-1)). Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) now includes gestational impaired glucose tolerance as well as the previous GDM. The classification defines both process and stage of the disease. The processes include Type 1, autoimmune and non-autoimmune, with beta-cell destruction; Type 2 with varying degrees of insulin resistance and insulin hyposecretion; Gestational Diabetes Mellitus; and Other Types where the cause is known (e.g. MODY, endocrinopathies). It is anticipated that this group will expand as causes of Type 2 become known. Stages range from normoglycaemia to insulin required for survival. It is hoped that the new classification will allow better classification of individuals and lead to fewer therapeutic misjudgements.
TL;DR: The possibility is raised that resistance to insulin-stimulated glucose uptake and hyperinsulinemia are involved in the etiology and clinical course of three major related diseases— NIDDM, hypertension, and CAD.
Abstract: Resistance to insulin-stimulated glucose uptake is present in the majority of patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and in ∼25% of nonobese individuals with normal oral glucose tolerance. In these conditions, deterioration of glucose tolerance can only be prevented if the β-cell is able to increase its insulin secretory response and maintain a state of chronic hyperinsulinemia. When this goal cannot be achieved, gross decompensation of glucose homeostasis occurs. The relationship between insulin resistance, plasma insulin level, and glucose intolerance is mediated to a significant degree by changes in ambient plasma free-fatty acid (FFA) concentration. Patients with NIDDM are also resistant to insulin suppression of plasma FFA concentration, but plasma FFA concentrations can be reduced by relatively small increments in insulin concentration.Consequently, elevations of circulating plasma FFA concentration can be prevented if large amounts of insulin can be secreted. If hyperinsulinemia cannot be maintained, plasma FFA concentration will not be suppressed normally, and the resulting increase in plasma FFA concentration will lead to increased hepatic glucose production. Because these events take place in individuals who are quite resistant to insulinstimulated glucose uptake, it is apparent that even small increases in hepatic glucose production are likely to lead to significant fasting hyperglycemia under these conditions. Although hyperinsulinemia may prevent frank decompensation of glucose homeostasis in insulin-resistant individuals, this compensatory response of the endocrine pancreas is not without its price. Patients with hypertension, treated or untreated, are insulin resistant, hyperglycemic, and hyperinsulinemic. In addition, a direct relationship between plasma insulin concentration and blood pressure has been noted. Hypertension can also be produced in normal rats when they are fed a fructose-enriched diet, an intervention that also leads to the development of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia. The development of hypertension in normal rats by an experimental manipulation known to induce insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia provides further support for the view that the relationship between the three variables may be a causal one. However, even if insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia are not involved in the etiology of hypertension, it is likely that the increased risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with hypertension and the fact that this risk if not reduced with antihypertensive treatment are due to the clustering of risk factors for CAD, in addition to high blood pressure, associated with insulin resistance. These include hyperinsulinemia, IGT, increased plasma triglyceride concentration, and decreased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration, all of which are associated with increased risk for CAD. It is likely that the same risk factors play a significant role in the genesis of CAD in the population as a whole. Based on these considerations the possibility is raised that resistance to insulin-stimulated glucose uptake and hyperinsulinemia are involved in the etiology and clinical course of three major related diseases— NIDDM, hypertension, and CAD.
TL;DR: Intensive insulin therapy to maintain blood glucose at or below 110 mg per deciliter reduces morbidity and mortality among critically ill patients in the surgical intensive care unit.
Abstract: Background Hyperglycemia and insulin resistance are common in critically ill patients, even if they have not previously had diabetes. Whether the normalization of blood glucose levels with insulin therapy improves the prognosis for such patients is not known. Methods We performed a prospective, randomized, controlled study involving adults admitted to our surgical intensive care unit who were receiving mechanical ventilation. On admission, patients were randomly assigned to receive intensive insulin therapy (maintenance of blood glucose at a level between 80 and 110 mg per deciliter) or conventional treatment (infusion of insulin only if the blood glucose level exceeded 215 mg per deciliter and maintenance of glucose at a level between 180 and 200 mg per deciliter). Results At 12 months, with a total of 1548 patients enrolled, intensive insulin therapy reduced mortality during intensive care from 8.0 percent with conventional treatment to 4.6 percent (P<0.04, with adjustment for sequential analyses). The ...
11 Sep 1998-The Lancet
TL;DR: The effects of intensive blood-glucose control with either sulphonylurea or insulin and conventional treatment on the risk of microvascular and macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes in a randomised controlled trial were compared.
Abstract: Background Improved blood-glucose control decreases the progression of diabetic microvascular disease, but the effect on macrovascular complications is unknown. There is concern that sulphonylureas may increase cardiovascular mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and that high insulin concentrations may enhance atheroma formation. We compared the effects of intensive blood-glucose control with either sulphonylurea or insulin and conventional treatment on the risk of microvascular and macrovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes in a randomised controlled trial.Methods 3867 newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes, median age 54 years (IQR 48-60 years), who after 3 months' diet treatment had a mean of two fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentrations of 6.1-15.0 mmol/L were randomly assigned intensive policy with a sulphonylurea (chlorpropamide, glibenclamide, or. glipizide) or with insulin, or conventional policy with diet. The aim in the intensive group was FPG less than 6 mmol/L. in the conventional group, the aim was the best achievable FPG with diet atone; drugs were added only if there were hyperglycaemic symptoms or FPG greater than 15 mmol/L. Three aggregate endpoints were used to assess differences between conventional and intensive treatment: any diabetes-related endpoint (sudden death, death from hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia, fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, stroke, renal failure, amputation [of at least one digit], vitreous haemorrhage, retinopathy requiring photocoagulation, blindness in one eye,or cataract extraction); diabetes-related death (death from myocardial infarction, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, renal disease, hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia, and sudden death); all-cause mortality. Single clinical endpoints and surrogate subclinical endpoints were also assessed. All analyses were by intention to treat and frequency of hypoglycaemia was also analysed by actual therapy.Findings Over 10 years, haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) was 7.0% (6.2-8.2) in the intensive group compared with 7.9% (6.9-8.8) in the conventional group-an 11% reduction. There was no difference in HbA(1c) among agents in the intensive group. Compared with the conventional group, the risk in the intensive group was 12% lower (95% CI 1-21, p=0.029) for any diabetes-related endpoint; 10% lower (-11 to 27, p=0.34) for any diabetes-related death; and 6% lower (-10 to 20, p=0.44) for all-cause mortality. Most of the risk reduction in the any diabetes-related aggregate endpoint was due to a 25% risk reduction (7-40, p=0.0099) in microvascular endpoints, including the need for retinal photocoagulation. There was no difference for any of the three aggregate endpoints the three intensive agents (chlorpropamide, glibenclamide, or insulin).Patients in the intensive group had more hypoglycaemic episodes than those in the conventional group on both types of analysis (both p<0.0001). The rates of major hypoglycaemic episodes per year were 0.7% with conventional treatment, 1.0% with chlorpropamide, 1.4% with glibenclamide, and 1.8% with insulin. Weight gain was significantly higher in the intensive group (mean 2.9 kg) than in the conventional group (p<0.001), and patients assigned insulin had a greater gain in weight (4.0 kg) than those assigned chlorpropamide (2.6 kg) or glibenclamide (1.7 kg).Interpretation Intensive blood-glucose control by either sulphonylureas or insulin substantially decreases the risk of microvascular complications, but not macrovascular disease, in patients with type 2 diabetes. None of the individual drugs had an adverse effect on cardiovascular outcomes. All intensive treatment increased the risk of hypoglycaemia.
Trending Questions (10)
Related Topics (5)
82.4K papers, 3.8M citations
169.2K papers, 6M citations
Type 2 diabetes
69.6K papers, 3M citations
54.6K papers, 2.5M citations
139.2K papers, 4.2M citations