Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12189441›Full record

ArticleDiabetologia2002

Defective amplification of the late phase insulin response to glucose by GIP in obese Type II diabetic patients.

T Vilsbøll, T Krarup, S Madsbad, J J Holst

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetologia, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 179 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
179citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00716170 completedstarted 2008, after this paper: background citation

The Role of GIP, GLP-1 and GLP-2 in Type 2 Diabetic Hyperglucagonemia

Ran2008Enrolled10Registered outcomes1Posted comparisons0ConditionsType 2 Diabetes MellitusArmsGlucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucagon-like peptide-2 (GLP-2)
Open the trial in the graph
NCT00529048 completednot on this mapstarted 2007, after this paper: background citation

Quantification of the Incretin Effect in Healthy Subjects and Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Using Increasing Amounts of Oral Glucose Challenges

TypeobservationalSponsorHerlev HospitalRan2007 to 2009Enrolled16ConditionsIncretin EffectArmsOral Glucose Tolerance Test, Isoglycemic clamp, Gastric emptying rate
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

179 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 511 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Effects of Exogenous GIP and GLP-2 on Bone Turnover in Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2024
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. GIP(3-30)NHDiabetologia · 2018
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

119 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

T VilsbøllDepartment of Internal Medicine F, Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Niels Andersens Vej 65, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark. tivi@gentoftehosp.kbhamt.dk
T Krarup
S Madsbad
J J Holst
Gentofte Hospital · DKHvidovre Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisGlucagon-like-peptide-1 (GLP-1) is strongly insulinotropic in patients with Type II (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus, whereas glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) is less effective. Our investigation evaluated "early" (protocol 1) - and "late phase" (protocol 2) insulin and C-peptide responses to GLP-1 and GIP stimulation in patients with Type II diabetes.

methodsProtocol 1: eight Type II diabetic patients and eight matched healthy subjects received i.v. bolus injections of GLP-1(2.5 nmol) or GIP(7.5 nmol) concomitant with an increase of plasma glucose to 15 mmol/l. Protocol 2: eight Type II diabetic patients underwent a hyperglycaemic clamp (15 mmol/l) with infusion (per kg body weight/min) of either: 1 pmol GLP-1 (7-36) amide (n=8), 4 pmol GIP (n=8), 16 pmol GIP (n=4) or no incretin hormone (n=5). For comparison, six matched healthy subjects were examined.

resultsProtocol 1: Type II diabetic patients were characterised by a decreased "early phase" response to both stimuli, but their relative response to GIP versus GLP-1 stimulation was exactly the same as in healthy subjects [insulin (C-peptide): patients 59+/-9% (74+/-6%) and healthy subjects 62+/-5% (71+/-9%)]. Protocol 2, "Early phase" (0-20 min) insulin response to glucose was delayed and reduced in the patients, but enhanced slightly and similarly by GIP and GLP-1. GLP-1 augmented the "late phase" (20-120 min) insulin secretion to levels similar to those observed in healthy subjects. In contrast, the "late phase" responses to both doses of GIP were not different from those obtained with glucose alone. Accordingly, glucose infusion rates required to maintain the hyperglycaemic clamp in the "late phase" period (20-120 min) were similar with glucose alone and glucose plus GIP, whereas a doubling of the infusion rate was required during GLP-1 stimulation. CONCLUSION/

interpretationLack of GIP amplification of the late phase insulin response to glucose, which contrasts markedly to the normalising effect of GLP-1, could be a key defect in insulin secretion in Type II diabetic patients.

Indexed as

ObesityAgedBlood GlucoseC-PeptideDiabetes MellitusDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Drug SynergismFemaleGlucagonGlucagon-Like Peptide 1GlucoseHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInjections, IntravenousInsulinMaleBlood GlucoseC-PeptideGlucagonGlucagon-Like Peptide 1GlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinPeptide FragmentsProtein Precursors

Identifiers

PMID12189441
OpenAlexW2067710447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.