ArticleCardiovascular diabetology2024
Insulin sensitivity estimates and their longitudinal association with coronary artery disease in type 1 diabetes. Does it matter?
Article in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations of the TyG index, remnant cholesterol levels, and the severity of coronary artery disease: findings from a retrospective study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Estimated glucose disposal rate and risk of cardiovascular events in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Review
- Association of obesity- and insulin resistance-related indices with subclinical carotid atherosclerosis in type 1 diabetes: a cross-sectional study.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Article
- The association between triglyceride glucose index and the risk of cardiovascular disease in obstructive sleep apnea.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInsulin resistance and chronic kidney disease are both associated with increased coronary artery disease risk. Many formulae estimating glucose disposal rate in type 1 diabetes infer insulin sensitivity from clinical data. We compare associations and performance relative to traditional risk factors and kidney disease severity between three formulae estimating the glucose disposal rate and coronary artery disease in people with type 1 diabetes.
methodsThe baseline glucose disposal rate was estimated by three (Williams, Duca, and Januszewski) formulae in FinnDiane Study participants and related to subsequent incidence of coronary artery disease, by baseline kidney status.
resultsIn 3517 adults with type 1 diabetes, during median (IQR) 19.3 (14.6, 21.4) years, 539 (15.3%) experienced a coronary artery disease event, with higher rates with worsening baseline kidney status. Correlations between the three formulae estimating the glucose disposal rate were weak, but the lowest quartile of each formula was associated with higher incidence of coronary artery disease. Importantly, only the glucose disposal rate estimation by Williams showed a linear association with coronary artery disease risk in all analyses. Of the three formulae, Williams was the strongest predictor of coronary artery disease. Only age and diabetes duration were stronger predictors. The strength of associations between estimated glucose disposal rate and CAD incidence varied by formula and kidney status.
conclusionsIn type 1 diabetes, estimated glucose disposal rates are associated with subsequent coronary artery disease, modulated by kidney disease severity. Future research is merited regarding the clinical usefulness of estimating the glucose disposal rate as a coronary artery disease risk factor and potential therapeutic target.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.