Biomarker models as surrogates for the disposition index in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study.

AIMS: Insulin sensitivity and acute insulin response measure key components of Type 2 diabetes aetiology that contribute independently to risk in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study. As insulin sensitivity and acute insulin response are not routinely measured in a clinical setting, we evaluated three fasting biomarker models, homeostasis model assessment of insulin sensitivity (HOMA-%S), ß-cell function (HOMA-%B) and a Diabetes Risk Score, as potential surrogates for risk associated with insulin sensitivity, acute insulin response and the interaction of these two measures, the disposition index. METHODS: Models were calculated from baseline plasma biomarker concentrations for 664 participants who underwent a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. To assess relationships among biomarker models and test measures, we calculated improvement in risk estimation gained by combining each fasting measure with each frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test measure using logistic regression. RESULTS: The strongest correlates of acute insulin response, insulin sensitivity and disposition index were HOMA-%B (r(s)(2) = 0.23), HOMA-%S (r(s)(2) = 0.48) and Diabetes Risk Score (r(s)(2) = 0.34), respectively. Individual areas under the curves for prediction of diabetes were 0.549 (HOMA-%B), 0.694 (HOMA-%S), 0.700 (insulin sensitivity), 0.714 (acute insulin response), 0.756 (Diabetes Risk Score) and 0.817 (disposition index). Models combining acute insulin response with Diabetes Risk Score (area under the curve 0.798) or HOMA-%S (area under the curve 0.805) nearly equalled disposition index, outperforming other individual measures (P < 0.05). Insulin sensitivity plus Diabetes Risk Score (area under the curve 0.760) was better than insulin sensitivity (P = 0.03), but not better than Diabetes Risk Score alone. HOMA-%S plus insulin sensitivity (area under the curve 0.704) was not significantly better than either alone. CONCLUSIONS: The Diabetes Risk Score and HOMA-%S were excellent surrogates for insulin sensitivity, capturing the predictive power of insulin sensitivity. Diabetes Risk Score captured some of the additional predictive power of acute insulin response, but the HOMA models did not. No fasting model was as predictive as disposition index, but the Diabetes Risk Score was the best surrogate.

Comparison of early exercise treadmill test and oral dipyridamole thallium-201 tomography for the identification of jeopardized myocardium in patients receiving thrombolytic therapy for acute Q-wave myocardial infarction.

Thrombolytic therapy has become the treatment of choice for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Researchers are not yet able to identify patients with salvage of myocardium who are at risk for recurrent coronary events. Thus, a prospective trial was performed in 46 patients with myocardial infarction (28 anterior and 18 inferior) who received thrombolytic therapy to determine if early thallium tomography (4.7 days) using oral dipyridamole would identify more patients with residual ischemia than early symptom-limited exercise treadmill tests (5.5 days). There were no complications during the exercise treadmill tests or oral dipyridamole thallium tomography. Mean duration of exercise was 11 +/- 3 minutes and the peak heart rate was 126 beats/min. Thirteen patients had positive test results. After oral dipyridamole all patients had abnormal thallium uptake on the early images. Positive scans with partial "filling in" of the initial perfusion defects were evident in 34 patients. Angina developed in 13 patients and was easily reversed with intravenous aminophylline. Both symptom-limited exercise treadmill tests and thallium tomography using oral dipyridamole were safely performed early after myocardial infarction in patients receiving thrombolytic therapy. Thallium tomography identified more patients with residual ischemia than exercise treadmill tests (74 vs 28%). Further studies are required to determine whether the results of thallium tomography after oral dipyridamole can be used to optimize patient management and eliminate the need for coronary angiography in some patients.

Comparison of coronary angiographic features and oral dipyridamole thallium 201 tomography.

Coronary angiography and left ventriculography is commonly used to identify those patients with incomplete infarctions and therefore, a need for revascularization. The authors compared coronary angiography and left ventriculography with thallium 201 tomography using oral dipyridamole to identify patients with potential ischemia in the infarct zone indicating viable tissue. Forty-five patients (37 men, 8 women) with acute myocardial infarctions (29 anterior, 16 inferior) who received intravenous thrombolytic therapy were studied. On the basis of the left ventriculograms, only 16 patients were judged to have residual function in the infarct zone. Six of these patients had no thallium redistribution in the infarct zone, indicating lack of residual ischemia. Of the 29 patients with no residual function in the infarct zone, 18 had redistribution in the infarct zone, suggesting residual ischemic myocardium and thus viable tissue. Among the 32 patients with open infarct vessels, 15 had no redistribution in the infarct zone, but of the remaining 13 patients with occluded infarct vessels, 9 had redistribution in the infarct zone indicating residual ischemia and thus viable tissue. The authors' data suggest that neither wall motion analysis by left ventriculography nor the angiographic status of the infarct vessel identifies those patients with residual ischemia as evidenced by thallium tomography using oral dipyridamole.