help button home button Endocrine Society JCEM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ferrannini, E.
Right arrow Articles by DeFronzo, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ferrannini, E.
Right arrow Articles by DeFronzo, R. A.
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 88, No. 7 3251-3257
Copyright © 2003 by The Endocrine Society

Influence of Ethnicity and Familial Diabetes on Glucose Tolerance and Insulin Action: A Physiological Analysis

Ele Ferrannini, Amalia Gastaldelli, Masafumi Matsuda, Yoshinori Miyazaki, Maura Pettiti, Leonard Glass and Ralph A. DeFronzo

Metabolism Unit (E.F., A.G., M.P.), National Research Council Institute of Clinical Physiology and Department of Internal Medicine, University of Pisa School of Medicine, Pisa 56100, Italy; and Diabetes Division (E.F., A.G., M.M., Y.M., L.G., R.A.D.), University of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas 78229

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: E. Ferrannini, M.D., National Research Council Institute of Clinical Physiology, Via Savi, 8, 56100 Pisa, Italy. E-mail: ferranni{at}ifc.cnr.it.


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Both ethnicity and familial diabetes (FHD) confer risk for type 2 diabetes [diabetes mellitus (DM)], but their relative influence has not been established. To analyze the separate impact of ethnicity, Mexican-American vs. Caucasian, and FHD on the physiological determinants of glucose tolerance, we measured insulin sensitivity of glucose uptake (ISGU) (by the clamp technique), endogenous glucose production (by 3-[3H]glucose infusion), and insulin secretory response (to oral glucose) in 172 Mexican-Americans and 60 Caucasians with normal glucose tolerance (NGT) or DM. ISGU was markedly reduced in diabetics vs. NGT (3.9 ± 0.2 vs. 8.4 ± 0.5 ml·min-1·kgffm-1, P < 0.0001), and lower in Mexican-Americans than in Caucasians (5.3 ± 0.3 vs. 7.3 ± 0.7 ml·min-1·kgffm-1, P < 0.003; ffm, fat-free mass). In a multivariate analysis including both ethnicity and FHD (and adjusting for body mass index, age, and diabetes), ethnicity was still a significant (P = 0.02) independent correlate of ISGU. Insulin resistance of glucose production was increased in diabetics (14 ± 1 mmol·min-1·[µU/ml], P < 0.0001 vs. 9 ± 1 of NGT), whereas the 30' insulin/glucose ratio was decreased (16 ± 1 µU/mg, P < 0.0001 vs. 60 ± 5). In multivariate models, neither ethnicity nor FHD were significant independent correlates of glucose production and early insulin response.

We conclude that the primary physiological target of the propensity to diabetes of Mexican-Americans is insulin resistance of glucose uptake.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
PREVALENCE RATES OF type 2 diabetes [diabetes mellitus (DM)] vary widely across populations (1), as do secular trends in its incidence (2). In addition to environmental factors, inheritance is thought to contribute to these differences. Ethnicity and familial clustering of diabetes are regarded as expressions of the predisposition to the disease, although either factor may rather stand for a lifestyle pattern than convey a true genetic predisposition. Several studies have explored the influence of ethnicity on aspects of glucose homeostasis. For example, Chiu et al. (3) in a study of 77 nondiabetic subjects using the hyperglycemic clamp technique reported significant differences in insulin sensitivity among four ethnic groups (Asian-Americans, Mexican-Americans, African-Americans, and Caucasians). Mexican-Americans have a 3-fold excess risk of DM (4). Among nondiabetic Mexican-Americans, hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance are strong risk factors for the development of diabetes (5). In a small, case-control study in lean nondiabetic subjects, Haffner et al. (6) found a significant decrease in insulin sensitivity and an increase in insulin secretion in Mexican-Americans compared with non-Hispanic whites (by minimal model analysis of intravenous glucose tolerance test [ivGTT] data). However, the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study, a tri-ethnic study of African-Americans, Hispanics, and non-Hispanic white subjects with normal glucose tolerance, impaired glucose tolerance, or overt diabetes, found that the difference in insulin resistance between nondiabetic Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites (also by minimal model analysis of the ivGTT) was due to greater adiposity, body fat distribution, and behavioral factors in the San Louis Valley Study (7). In the San Antonio center, however, Hispanics were more insulin resistant than non-Hispanic whites after adjustment for obesity and physical activity. In this cohort (8), the severity of insulin resistance in the subjects with DM was similar among Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites. On the other hand, in the San Antonio Heart Study, a population-based survey, use of the homeostasis model assessment approach to estimate insulin sensitivity in the whole population led to the conclusion that Mexican-Americans have increased insulin resistance relative to non-Hispanic whites (9). Whether the hyperinsulinemia that is characteristic of Mexican-Americans (5, 6, 7, 8, 9) solely represents a compensatory response to the insulin resistance, or whether ethnicity exerts a separate effect on insulin secretion has not been ascertained.

Although in several studies the presence of diabetes in one or more first-degree relatives was associated with some degree of insulin resistance in the offspring (10, 11), the influence of familial diabetes (FHD) on insulin resistance is still somewhat controversial (12, 13). In any event, FHD is a significant confounder in interethnic comparisons of insulin sensitivity, particularly in ethnic groups such as Mexican-Americans in whom the prevalence of FHD is increased. Finally, the impact of either ethnicity or FHD on endogenous glucose production has not been previously analyzed. The present study was therefore undertaken to compare insulin sensitivity (by the euglycemic clamp technique), endogenous glucose production, and the relationship between insulin resistance and insulin secretion in diabetic and nondiabetic Mexican-Americans and Caucasian subjects living in the same area. Sufficient observations were collected to allow a separate analysis of FHD while taking adequate account of relevant confounders such as sex, age, and obesity.


   Subjects and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Subjects

The study group included 232 subjects (172 Mexican-Americans and 60 Caucasians) recruited at the Clinical Research Center of the University of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio, TX, through advertising within the Medical Center and in local newspapers. Subjects responding to the advertisement were screened by a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), and were invited to participate in the clamp study and to refer their relatives to the Clinical Research Center. The studies were conducted over a period of 5 yr, during which nondiabetic and diabetic subjects, Mexican-American or Caucasian, were studied in no particular order. The diagnosis of diabetes was based on the OGTT according to the criteria of the American Diabetes Association (14). History of diabetes in first-degree relatives (FHD) was obtained from all subjects, and categorized as positive if one or more family members were reported diabetic. The clinical and metabolic characteristics of the study group are given in Table 1Go. None of the diabetic patients was treated with insulin, metformin, or troglitazone. Other than sulfonylureas, patients were not taking any other drugs known to affect glucose tolerance; the proportion of Caucasians and Mexican-American on sulfonylureas was 17% and 15%, respectively (P = ns by {chi}2), and sulfonylureas were withdrawn 2 d before the metabolic studies. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, and informed written consent was obtained from each subject before participation.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1. Clinical characteristics

 
Experimental protocol

Height was measured to the nearest centimeter, and weight to the nearest 0.5 kg. The waist-to-hip circumference ratio (WHR) was determined by measuring the waist circumference at the narrowest part of the torso, and the hip circumference in a horizontal plane at the level of the maximal extension of the buttocks. Fat-free mass (FFM) was measured using the tritiated water technique (in 41 subjects), underwater weighing (in 75 subjects) or by electrical bioimpedance (in 75 subjects); the equivalence of these methods has been documented (15). In the remaining 41 subjects, FFM was estimated using Hume’s formula in its gender-specific version, which has previously been shown to have comparable accuracy as the direct methods (16). In the present series of subjects, the values of FFM calculated by Hume’s formula were strongly correlated with the corresponding values directly measured by each of the three direct methods (with r values of 0.7–0.9). For uniformity purposes, Hume’s FFM was calculated and used for the whole group. For the OGTT, subjects were fasted overnight, and blood samples were collected at -30, -15, 0, 30, 60, 90, and 120 min for the measurement of plasma glucose, free fatty acids (FFA), and insulin concentrations. For the euglycemic insulin clamp, subjects were admitted to the Clinical Research Center at 0700 h, after an overnight fast. A polyethylene cannula was inserted into an antecubital vein for the infusion of all test substances. A second catheter was inserted retrogradely into an ipsilateral wrist vein on the dorsum of the hand for blood sampling and the hand was kept in a heated box at 65 C. A primed (20 µCi)-continuous (0.20 µCi/min) infusion of 3-[3H]glucose (NEN Life Science Products, Boston, MA) was administered for 180 min in diabetic patients and for 120 min in control and IGT subjects. In diabetic subjects, the prime was adjusted to the elevation of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) as follows: 20 µCi·FPG/90 mg/dl. During the last 30 min of the basal equilibration period, plasma samples were taken at 5- to 10-min intervals for the determination of plasma glucose, FFA, and insulin concentration, and tritiated glucose specific activity. After the basal equilibration period, insulin was administered as a primed-continuous infusion at the rate of 40 mU·min-1·m-2 for 120 min. The plasma glucose concentration was measured every 5 min after the start of the insulin infusion, and a variable infusion of 20% glucose was adjusted based on the negative feedback principle to maintain the plasma glucose level at 90–100 mg/dl with a coefficient of variation less than 5%. After the start of insulin in the diabetic subjects, the plasma glucose concentrations was allowed to decrease to approximately 100 mg/dl, at which level it was then maintained. Plasma samples were collected every 15 min from 0–90 min and every 5–10 min from 90–120 min for the determination of plasma glucose, FFA, and insulin concentration, and tritiated glucose specific activity (13).

Analytical techniques

Plasma glucose was measured by the glucose oxidase reaction (Glucose Analyzer, Beckman, Fullerton, CA). Plasma insulin concentrations were measured by RIA using a specific kit (Linco Research, Inc., St. Louis, MO). Plasma FFA were assayed spectrophotometrically. Plasma 3-[3H]glucose levels were measured in Somogyi precipitates as previously described (13).

Data analysis

Insulin-mediated glucose uptake (M value) was expressed per FFM because this normalization has been shown to minimize differences due to sex, obesity, and age (17). During the baseline period, both the plasma glucose concentrations and plasma 3-[3H]glucose specific activity were stable during the last 30 min of tracer infusion in all subjects. Therefore, total endogenous glucose production (EGP) was calculated as the ratio of the 3-[3H]glucose infusion rate to the plasma 3-[3H]glucose specific activity (mean of four to five determinations). During the insulin clamp, total glucose rates of appearance and disappearance were calculated using Steele’s equation. EGP was then obtained as the difference between total glucose rate of appearance and the exogenous glucose infusion rate. To correct for small interindividual differences in steady-state plasma glucose and insulin concentrations, we calculated insulin sensitivity of glucose uptake (ISGU) as the insulin-mediated glucose clearance (= the ratio of total glucose rate of disappearance to steady-state plasma glucose concentrations during the last 40 min of the clamp) normalized at a plasma insulin concentration of 75 µU/ml (i.e. the average steady-state plasma insulin concentration for the whole group). Glucose and insulin areas under the OGTT curve were calculated by the trapezium rule. Because fasting insulin concentration is a strong inhibitory stimulus for EGP (18), and fasting hyperinsulinemia may therefore mask hepatic insulin resistance, an index of the insulin resistance of EGP (IRGP) was calculated as the product of fasting EGP and fasting plasma insulin (FPI) concentration. According to the same rationale, an index of the resistance of lipolysis to insulin inhibition (IRLL) was calculated as the product of fasting FFA (normalized by fat mass to account for individual differences in fat stores) and FPI concentration.

Data are given as the mean ± SE. A preliminary analysis of the separate influence of ethnicity and diabetes on metabolic variables was performed by two-way ANOVA. Assessment of the contribution of multiple factors to the measured variables was carried out by multivariate analysis by using mixed models with both continuous [e.g. age and body mass index (BMI)] and categorical variables (e.g. sex, FHD, diabetes status, and ethnicity); in these models, categorical differences were tested as contrasts.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
Independent of ethnicity, subjects with diabetes were older and heavier (with a more central fat distribution) than NGT subjects (Table 1Go). Independently of diabetes status, Mexican-Americans were more obese (BMI and percent fat mass) and had a stronger FHD than Caucasians.

Response to oral glucose

Figure 1Go plots the plasma glucose, insulin, and FFA responses to oral glucose in the NGT and diabetic groups, whereas the corresponding statistical analysis is reported in Table 2Go. In comparison with NGT, diabetes was characterized by higher fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations, a reduced total (as the area-under-curve) and early (as the insulin/glucose ratio at 30 min) plasma insulin response, and a less suppressed plasma FFA response (in Mexican-Americans only). Both FPI levels and the insulin/glucose ratio at 30' were significantly higher in Mexican-Americans than in Caucasians. BMI was a strong positive correlate of both insulin area and the insulin/glucose ratio at 30' (P < 0.0001 for both); when simultaneously accounting for sex, age, BMI, and diabetic status, neither ethnicity nor FHD had any independent influence on these indices of insulin release (Table 3Go).



View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1. Plasma glucose, insulin, and FFA concentrations in Mexican-Americans and Caucasians with normal glucose tolerance (top panels) or DM (bottom panels). Data are mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis of the data is reported in Table 2Go.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 2. Metabolic data and indices

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 3. Multivariate analysis of metabolic indices

 
Glucose uptake

Both M value and ISGU were reduced by approximately 50% on average in diabetics vs. NGT, and both were significantly lower in Mexican-Americans than in Caucasians (Table 2Go). For M, the interethnic difference was larger in NGT (24%) than in diabetic subjects (13%). In a multiple regression model including family history of diabetes (in addition to sex, age, and BMI) (Table 3Go), the significant independent correlates of ISGU were age, BMI, diabetes status, and ethnicity, which together explained 48% of the observed variance of ISGU. In particular, the model predicted that the strongest independent effect on ISGU was that of diabetes, which was associated with an average decrement in ISGU of 3.1 ± 0.5 ml·min-1·kgffm-1 (mean ± SE regression coefficient); Mexican-American ethnicity was independently associated with a further decrement of 1.4 ± 0.6 ml·min-1·kgffm-1.

In both NGT and diabetics, ISGU was inversely related to the insulin area as well as the insulin/glucose ratio at 30' (Fig. 2Go). In each group, this relationship could be described by a power function. In the diabetic groups, the functions were shifted downward relative to the NGT groups (P < 0.0001), indicating that at any given level of insulin sensitivity the insulin responses to glucose, both the total and early one, were markedly depressed in diabetics despite their higher BMI. The slopes of the relationships, however, were not significantly different between NGT and diabetics; this indicates that, within each group a more severe degree of insulin resistance was associated with a higher insulin response to oral glucose. Moreover, in both NGT and diabetic subjects, the slopes were similar in Mexican-Americans and Caucasians, suggesting an equivalent degree of compensatory hyperinsulinemia (early-phase and total) in both ethnic groups.



View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 2. Relationship between total insulin response (as the area under the OGTT curve) or early insulin response (as the insulin/glucose ratio at 30' on the OGTT) and ISGU in control and diabetic subjects. The r values are 0.62 and 0.41 (in controls and diabetics, respectively, P < 0.0001 for both) for the relationships in the upper panel, and 0.51 and 0.34 (in controls and diabetics, respectively, P < 0.0001 for both) for the relationships in the lower panel.

 
Glucose production

Fasting EGP was higher in diabetics than NGT (P = 0.003) and slightly lower in Mexican-Americans than in Caucasians (P = 0.02) (Table 2Go). In the whole dataset, EGP was positively related to FPG (r = 0.34, P < 0.0001) as well as to FPI concentrations (r = 0.16, P = 0.01). IRGP was still markedly elevated in diabetics vs. NGT (indicating hepatic insulin resistance), but no longer different between Mexican-Americans and Caucasians, suggesting that the lower EGP values in the former were due to their higher FPI concentrations. In a multivariate model accounting for sex, age, ethnicity, BMI, FHD, and diabetes status, the male sex, BMI, and diabetes status were significant independent correlates of IRGP, together accounting for 36% of its observed variability (Table 3Go). During the clamp, suppression of EGP was 70 ± 4% in NGT and 51 ± 4% in diabetic subjects (P = 0.01 for the effect of diabetes, with no difference between Mexican-Americans and Caucasians). IRGP and ISGU were reciprocally related to one another, with controls and diabetics falling on the same regression line (Fig. 3Go), indicating that insulin resistance in peripheral tissues is coupled with insulin resistance in the liver.



View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 3. Relationship between IRGP and ISGU in NGT and diabetic subjects (r = 0.69, P < 0.0001). The regression lines for nondiabetic and diabetic subjects are superimposable on one another.

 
Clamp plasma FFA concentrations and IRLL were both significantly elevated in diabetics compared with controls, without differences between ethnic groups. By multivariate analysis, only sex in addition to diabetes status was an independent correlate of IRLL (Table 3Go).

In a complete regression model, ISGU, IRGP, IRLL, and the insulin/glucose ratio at 30' were independent determinants of the glucose area (Table 4Go), accounting for 64% of its observed variability (sex, age, BMI, ethnicity, and FHD being no longer significant correlates).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 4. Multivariate analysis of glucose area

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
The present study aimed at a comprehensive analysis of insulin action in Mexican-Americans and Caucasians living in an urban area in Southern Texas. A relatively large proportion of these subjects had a history of diabetes in first-degree relatives; this high prevalence likely reflects a positive selection bias in a clinic (a population-based screen). It was thus possible to examine the separate influence of ethnicity and FHD in a large set of observations including normal glucose tolerance and manifest diabetes. The main findings were that 1) insulin resistance was more severe in Mexican-Americans than in Caucasians; and 2) when simultaneously accounting for ethnicity and FHD, ethnicity was a more consistent and a stronger correlate of insulin resistance than FHD. Importantly, this result was unchanged when differences in sex distribution, age, and obesity were accounted for. With the proviso that our study cohort was not population-based, we conclude that Mexican-Americans are an inherently insulin resistant population regardless of FHD or current diabetes and at any age and level of obesity. The ethnic factor was quantitatively modest, as compared, for example, to the impact of diabetes, and was equivalent to an excess BMI of approximately 7 U. Nevertheless, this impairment in insulin action is a likely physiological correlate of the high prevalence of DM in Mexican-Americans (4). Whether ethnicity conveys a true genetic predisposition or rather stands for a lifestyle pattern (or an interaction between the two) cannot be ascertained from this study.

Other physiological determinants of glucose homeostasis were not affected by ethnicity or FHD. Thus, neither the insulin response to oral glucose (insulin area) nor the early insulin release (insulin/glucose ratio at 30') differed significantly between Mexican-Americans and Caucasians—or between individuals with or without diabetes in their family—when accounting for obesity, i.e. the strongest determinant of these insulin secretory indices. Moreover, when the ability of the ß-cell to cope with the prevailing degree of insulin resistance was analyzed by regressing the insulin area or the insulin/glucose ratio at 30' on insulin sensitivity (19), there was no evidence that in Mexican-Americans compensatory hyperinsulinemia was any different from that of Caucasians, nor was there any detectable change in slope according to presence of FHD. Even among diabetic patients, more insulin-resistant subjects had relatively higher insulin responses (early and total) despite the fact that both their insulin sensitivity and insulin responses were severely impaired in comparison with NGT subjects (Fig. 2Go). Thus, our analysis, while clearly bringing out the adaptive coupling of insulin release to insulin action in both NGT and diabetes, does not show a direct, independent influence of either ethnicity or FHD on the insulin response to oral glucose (early or total).

Fasting EGP was elevated in diabetics vs. NGT but was significantly lower in Mexican-Americans compared with Caucasians (Table 2Go). In the diabetic groups, FPI concentrations were increased by 50% compared with NGT subjects. We have previously shown that such an increase would per se reduce EGP detectably in normal subjects (19). Therefore, to account for the tonic inhibition of fasting EGP by fasting insulin levels, we used an index of insulin resistance of glucose production, i.e. the product of EGP and fasting insulin. This index was still markedly higher in diabetic subjects than NGT but no longer differed by ethnicity. Thus, IRGP accompanied ISGU across diabetes status; the two defects were similar in degree (Fig. 3Go), and BMI was a common deteriorating circumstance (Table 3Go). However, both in univariate and multivariate analysis, neither ethnicity nor FHD had any influence on IRGP. Likewise, when assessing insulin resistance of lipolysis (through IRLL as well as the extent of FFA suppression during euglycemic hyperinsulinemia), there was a clear impairment in this action of insulin in diabetics as compared with NGT, but no independent influence of ethnicity or FHD was evident in the data. These findings support the conclusion that the primary physiological target of the propensity to diabetes of Mexican-Americans is insulin resistance of glucose uptake in peripheral (muscle) tissues. In contrast, in this ethnic group insulin sensitivity of glucose production and insulin secretion (both in amount and time dynamics) only show adaptive changes, i.e. secondary to the insulin resistance and obesity. Although our study cohort was not a population-based sample, the frequency of FHD was higher among Mexican-Americans. This may partially reflect sampling from greater family size. In addition, the higher rate of insulin resistance in previous generations of Mexican-Americans may be responsible for their greater family history.

With regard to obesity, it should be mentioned that in the present dataset fat distribution, estimated as the WHR, had little additional impact on the metabolic variables whenever BMI was included in the analysis. On the other hand, plentiful evidence shows that central fat accumulation has a negative impact on insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance that is independent of overall fatness. In our own laboratory, a case-control study comparing Mexican-American with Caucasian women with NGT found no difference in insulin sensitivity when subjects were matched for visceral fat mass (measured by magnetic resonance imaging) (20). Thus, WHR, if a useful indicator of fat distribution in epidemiological surveys (6), is a rather poor correlate of visceral fat mass (21). Furthermore, we have previously shown that WHR increases linearly with BMI in the low range (below ~28 kg/m2) and levels off in the obese range (22). This suggests that fat distribution carries more impact in lean individuals than it does in obese subjects. The series of subjects here reported had a mean BMI of 31 kg/m2 (only 13% of subjects had a BMI <= 25 kg/m2), and this may have overshadowed any independent effect of WHR.

Of interest is the fact that IRGP, despite being an estimate of insulin inhibition of fasting glucose output, was as strongly related to oral glucose tolerance (as the glucose area) as was ISGU (Table 4Go); this presumably reflects the circumstance that, during an OGTT, the residual rate of EGP is closely related to the basal rate of EGP, in nondiabetic as well as diabetic subjects (23, 24). Thus, ISGP may also reflect the contribution of residual EGP to the glucose excursion following oral glucose.

Finally, in the complete multivariate model (Table 4Go), ISGU, IRGP, IRLL, and early insulin response were each an independent correlate of glucose area, together explaining two thirds of its observed variability. Thus, only the indices of insulin action and early release were independent predictors of glucose tolerance, whereas anthropometric characteristics (sex, age, BMI) and ethno-familial traits had little residual effect. Therefore, from the present analysis we can conclude that ethnicity (Mexican-American vs. Caucasian) is an intermediate phenotype, which exerts its influence on glucose tolerance through insulin resistance of glucose uptake. From the physiological standpoint, however, this conclusion is itself partial. The data in fact admit the more general conclusion, that tolerance to oral glucose is quantitatively explained by a metabolic phenotype, consisting of a mix of inefficient disposition and excessive production of glucose, unrestrained lipolysis, and a deficient early insulin response to glucose. Stated otherwise, insulin actions and insulin release alone appear to underlie or mediate much of the influence that constitutive (sex, ethnicity, FHD) or acquired (age and obesity) factors exert on glucose tolerance in humans.


   Acknowledgments
 
We thank our nurses (Magda Ortiz, Dianne Frantz, Socorro Mejorado, Janet Shapiro, John Kinkaid, John King, Norma Diaz, and Patricia Wolf) for their assistance in performing the insulin clamp and OGTT studies.


   Footnotes
 
This work was supported by NIH Grant DK-24092, NIH General Clinical Research Centers Grant MOI-RR-01346, a Veterans Affairs Merit Award, funds from the Veterans Affairs Research Foundation, and funds from the Italian Ministry of University and Scientific Research (MURST).

Abbreviations: BMI, Body mass index; DM, type 2 diabetes (diabetes mellitus); EGP, endogenous glucose production; FFA, free fatty acids; FFM, fat-free mass; FHD, familial diabetes; FPI, fasting plasma insulin; IRGP, insulin resistance of EGP (EGP x FPI); IRLL, insulin resistance of lipolysis (fasting FFA-kgfm x FPI); ISGU, insulin sensitivity of glucose uptake; M value, insulin-mediated glucose uptake; NGT, normal glucose tolerance; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test; WHR, waist-to-hip circumference ratio.

Received November 26, 2002.

Accepted March 12, 2003.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Shaw JE, Zimmet PZ, McCarty D, de Courten M 2000 Type 2 diabetes worldwide according to the new classification and criteria. Diabetes Care 23 (Suppl 2):B5–B10
  2. Kenny SJ, Aubert RE, Geiss LS 1995 Prevalence and incidence of non-insulin-dependent diabetes. In: Diabetes in America. 2nd ed. NIH Publication No. 95-1468; 47–67
  3. Chiu KC, Cohan P, Lee NP, Chuang LM 2000 Insulin sensitivity differs among ethnic groups with a compensatory response in ß-cell function. Diabetes Care 23:1353–1358[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Haffner SM, Hazuda HP, Mitchell BD, Patterson JK, Stern MP 1991 Increased incidence of type II diabetes mellitus in Mexican Americans. Diabetes Care 14:102–108[Abstract]
  5. Haffner SM, Stern MP, Hazuda HP, Pugh SA, Patterson SK 1986 Hyperinsulinemia in a population at high risk of non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 315:220–224[Abstract]
  6. Haffner SM, Stern MP, Dunn J, Mobley M, Blackwell J, Bergman RN 1990 Diminished insulin sensitivity and increased insulin response in nonobese, nondiabetic Mexican Americans. Metabolism 39:842–847[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Haffner SM, D’Agostino R, Saad MF, Rewers M, Mykkanen L, Selby J, Howard G, Savage PJ, Hamman RF, Wagenknecht LE, et al 1996 Increased insulin resistance and insulin secretion in nondiabetic African-Americans and Hispanics compared with non-Hispanic whites. The Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study. Diabetes 45:742–748[Abstract]
  8. Haffner SM, Howard G, Mayer E, Bergman RN, Savage Pj, Rewers M, Mykkanen L, Karter AJ, Hamman R, Saad MF 1997 Insulin sensitivity and acute insulin response in African-Americans, non-Hispanic whites, and Hispanics with NIDDM: the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study. Diabetes 46:63–69[Abstract]
  9. Haffner SM, Miettinen H, Stern MP 1997 The homeostasis model in the San Antonio Heart Study. Diabetes Care 20:1087–1092[Abstract]
  10. Eriksson J, Franssila-Kallunki A, Ekstrand A, Saloranta C, Widen E, Schalin C, Groop L 1989 Early metabolic defects in persons at increased risk for non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 321:337–343[Abstract]
  11. Gulli G, Ferrannini E, Stern M, Haffner S, DeFronzo RA 1992 The metabolic profile of NIDDM is fully established in glucose-tolerant offspring of two Mexican-American NIDDM parents. Diabetes 41:1575–1586[Abstract]
  12. Ferrannini E 1998 Insulin resistance versus insulin deficiency in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: problems and prospects. Endocr Rev 19:477–490[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Gerich JE 1998 The genetic basis of type 2 diabetes mellitus: impaired insulin secretion versus impaired insulin sensitivity. Endocr Rev 19:491–503[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. 1997 Report of the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care 20:1183–1197
  15. Tagliabue A, Cena H, Deurenberg P 1996 Comparative study of the relationship between multi-frequency impedence and body water compartments in two European populations. Br J Nutr 75:11–19[Medline]
  16. Hume R 1966 Prediction of lean body mass from height and weight. J Clin Pathol 19:389–391[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Natali A, Toschi E, Camastra S, Gastaldelli A, Groop L, Ferrannini E 2000 Determinants of postabsorptive endogenous glucose output in non-diabetic subjects. Diabetologia 43:1266–1272[CrossRef][Medline]
  18. Groop LC, Bonadonna RC, DelPrato S, Ratheiser K, Zyck K, Ferrannini E, DeFronzo RA 1989 Glucose and free fatty acid metabolism in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Evidence for multiple sites of insulin resistance. J Clin Invest 84:205–213
  19. Kahn SE, Prigeon RL, McCulloch DK, Boyko EJ, Bergman RN, Schwartz MW, Neifing JL, Ward WK, Beard JC, Palmer JP, Porte Jr D 1993 Quantification of the relationship between insulin sensitivity and ß-cell function in human subjects. Evidence for a hyperbolic function. Diabetes 42:1663–1672[Abstract]
  20. Bonora E, Gulli G, Bonadonna R, Del Prato S, Solini A, DeFronzo RA 1995 Insulin sensitivity is not impaired in Mexican-American women without a family history of diabetes. Diabetes Care 18:825–833[Abstract]
  21. Busetto L, Baggio MB, Zurlo F, Carraro R, Digito M, Enzi G 1992 Assessment of abdominal fat distribution in obese patients: anthropometry versus computerized tomography. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 16:731–736[Medline]
  22. Ferrannini E, Natali A, Bell P, Cavallo-Perin P, Lalic N, Mingrone G 1997 Insulin resistance and hypersecretion in obesity. European Group for the Study of Insulin Resistance (EGIR). J Clin Invest 100:1166–1173[Medline]
  23. Ferrannini E, Bjorkman O, Reichard Jr GA, Pilo A, Olsson M, Wahren J, DeFronzo RA 1985 The disposal of an oral glucose load in healthy subjects. A quantitative study. Diabetes 34:580–588[Abstract]
  24. Ferrannini E, Simonson DC, Katz LD, Reichard Jr G, Bevilacqua S, Barrett EJ, Olsson M, DeFronzo RA 1988 The disposal of an oral glucose load in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes. Metabolism 37:79–85[CrossRef][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
M. Pendergrass, A. Bertoldo, R. Bonadonna, G. Nucci, L. Mandarino, C. Cobelli, and R. A. DeFronzo
Muscle glucose transport and phosphorylation in type 2 diabetic, obese nondiabetic, and genetically predisposed individuals
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, January 1, 2007; 292(1): E92 - E100.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
C. K. Welt, G. Arason, J. A. Gudmundsson, J. Adams, H. Palsdottir, G. Gudlaugsdottir, G. Ingadottir, and W. F. Crowley
Defining Constant Versus Variable Phenotypic Features of Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Using Different Ethnic Groups and Populations
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., November 1, 2006; 91(11): 4361 - 4368.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
E. Ferrannini, A. Gastaldelli, Y. Miyazaki, M. Matsuda, A. Mari, and R. A. DeFronzo
{beta}-Cell Function in Subjects Spanning the Range from Normal Glucose Tolerance to Overt Diabetes: A New Analysis
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., January 1, 2005; 90(1): 493 - 500.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ferrannini, E.
Right arrow Articles by DeFronzo, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ferrannini, E.
Right arrow Articles by DeFronzo, R. A.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals