Evaluation of fasting plasma insulin and proxy measurements to assess insulin sensitivity in horses.


Journal

BMC veterinary research
ISSN: 1746-6148
Titre abrégé: BMC Vet Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101249759

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
15 Feb 2021
Historique:
received: 09 11 2020
accepted: 31 01 2021
entrez: 16 2 2021
pubmed: 17 2 2021
medline: 3 8 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Proxies are mathematical calculations based on fasting glucose and/or insulin concentrations developed to allow prediction of insulin sensitivity (IS) and β-cell response. These proxies have not been evaluated in horses with insulin dysregulation. The first objective of this study was to evaluate how fasting insulin (FI) and proxies for IS (1/Insulin, reciprocal of the square root of insulin (RISQI) and the quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI)) and β-cell response (the modified insulin-to-glucose ratio (MIRG) and the homeostatic model assessment of β-cell function (HOMA-β)) were correlated to measures of IS (M index) using the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC) in horses with insulin resistance (IR) and normal IS. A second objective was to evaluate the repeatability of FI and proxies in horses based on sampling on consecutive days. The last objective was to investigate the most appropriate cut-off value for the proxies and FI. Thirty-four horses were categorized as IR and 26 as IS based on the M index. The proxies and FI had coefficients of variation (CVs) ≤ 25.3 % and very good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.89). All proxies and FI were good predictors of the M index (r = 0.76-0.85; P < 0.001). The proxies for IS had a positive linear relationship with the M index whereas proxies for β-cell response and FI had an inverse relationship with the M index. Cut-off values to distinguish horses with IR from horses with normal IS based on the M index were established for all proxies and FI using receiver operating characteristic curves, with sensitivity between 79 % and 91 % and specificity between 85 % and 96 %. The cut-off values to predict IR were < 0.32 (RISQI), < 0.33 (QUICKI) and > 9.5 µIU/mL for FI. All proxies and FI provided repeatable estimates of horses' IS. However, there is no advantage of using proxies instead of FI to estimate IR in the horse. Due to the heteroscedasticity of the data, proxies and FI in general are more suitable for epidemiological studies and larger clinical studies than as a diagnostic tool for measurement of IR in individual horses.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Proxies are mathematical calculations based on fasting glucose and/or insulin concentrations developed to allow prediction of insulin sensitivity (IS) and β-cell response. These proxies have not been evaluated in horses with insulin dysregulation. The first objective of this study was to evaluate how fasting insulin (FI) and proxies for IS (1/Insulin, reciprocal of the square root of insulin (RISQI) and the quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI)) and β-cell response (the modified insulin-to-glucose ratio (MIRG) and the homeostatic model assessment of β-cell function (HOMA-β)) were correlated to measures of IS (M index) using the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC) in horses with insulin resistance (IR) and normal IS. A second objective was to evaluate the repeatability of FI and proxies in horses based on sampling on consecutive days. The last objective was to investigate the most appropriate cut-off value for the proxies and FI.
RESULTS RESULTS
Thirty-four horses were categorized as IR and 26 as IS based on the M index. The proxies and FI had coefficients of variation (CVs) ≤ 25.3 % and very good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.89). All proxies and FI were good predictors of the M index (r = 0.76-0.85; P < 0.001). The proxies for IS had a positive linear relationship with the M index whereas proxies for β-cell response and FI had an inverse relationship with the M index. Cut-off values to distinguish horses with IR from horses with normal IS based on the M index were established for all proxies and FI using receiver operating characteristic curves, with sensitivity between 79 % and 91 % and specificity between 85 % and 96 %. The cut-off values to predict IR were < 0.32 (RISQI), < 0.33 (QUICKI) and > 9.5 µIU/mL for FI.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
All proxies and FI provided repeatable estimates of horses' IS. However, there is no advantage of using proxies instead of FI to estimate IR in the horse. Due to the heteroscedasticity of the data, proxies and FI in general are more suitable for epidemiological studies and larger clinical studies than as a diagnostic tool for measurement of IR in individual horses.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33588833
doi: 10.1186/s12917-021-02781-5
pii: 10.1186/s12917-021-02781-5
pmc: PMC7885592
doi:

Substances chimiques

Insulin 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

78

Références

Am J Vet Res. 2016 Mar;77(3):300-9
pubmed: 26919602
Domest Anim Endocrinol. 2018 Jul;64:49-58
pubmed: 29751248
Vet J. 2018 Jan;231:33-40
pubmed: 29429485
BMC Vet Res. 2016 Sep 09;12(1):196
pubmed: 27613127
J Vet Intern Med. 2019 Mar;33(2):335-349
pubmed: 30724412
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2008 Nov;10 Suppl 4:63-76
pubmed: 18834434
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 09;8(9):e73990
pubmed: 24040139
J Clin Invest. 1981 Dec;68(6):1456-67
pubmed: 7033284
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Jan;294(1):E15-26
pubmed: 17957034
Acta Vet Scand. 2016 Oct 20;58(Suppl 1):64
pubmed: 27766982
J Vet Intern Med. 2017 Sep;31(5):1541-1550
pubmed: 28796307
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Oct;281(4):E693-703
pubmed: 11551845
Equine Vet J. 2020 Jan;52(1):126-130
pubmed: 30980682
Equine Vet J. 2014 Jan;46(1):103-12
pubmed: 24033478
Equine Vet J. 2019 Nov;51(6):733-737
pubmed: 30887546
J Vet Intern Med. 2005 Nov-Dec;19(6):883-8
pubmed: 16355685
Vet J. 2019 Oct;252:105351
pubmed: 31554591
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006 May 15;228(10):1538-45
pubmed: 16677122
Domest Anim Endocrinol. 2014 Apr;47:101-7
pubmed: 24308928
J Vet Intern Med. 2016 May;30(3):885-91
pubmed: 27013065
Am J Vet Res. 2005 Dec;66(12):2114-21
pubmed: 16379656
Vet J. 2018 May;235:83-89
pubmed: 29704944
Equine Vet J. 2017 Sep;49(5):570-576
pubmed: 28543410
Diabetes. 1993 Nov;42(11):1663-72
pubmed: 8405710
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2000 Jul;85(7):2402-10
pubmed: 10902785
Diabetes Care. 2004 Jun;27(6):1487-95
pubmed: 15161807
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2015 Jun 05;25(2):141-51
pubmed: 26110027

Auteurs

Sanna Lindåse (S)

Department of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7054, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden. sanna.lindase@slu.se.

Katarina Nostell (K)

Department of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7054, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.

Peter Bergsten (P)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Medical Cell Biology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Anders Forslund (A)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

Johan Bröjer (J)

Department of Clinical Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7054, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.

Articles similaires

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male
Humans Meals Time Factors Female Adult

Classifications MeSH