ライフサイエンスコーパス: oral glucose tolerance

1 a levels of GLP-1 and insulin and diminished oral glucose tolerance.

2 aired fasting plasma glucose and/or impaired oral glucose tolerance.

3 index and individuals with normal or altered oral glucose tolerance.

4 Oral glucose tolerance and brachial artery flow-mediated

5 gotes for ABCA1 mutations exhibited enhanced oral glucose tolerance and dramatically increased beta-c

6 Oral glucose tolerance and insulin levels were measured.

7 F508 mutants had lower body weight, improved oral glucose tolerance, and a trend toward higher insuli

8 , Simple Index Assessing Insulin Sensitivity Oral Glucose Tolerance, and HOMA-IR were high, and did n

9 tein can use RT to improve body composition, oral glucose tolerance, and skeletal muscle aPKC zeta/la

10 mic-hyperinsulinemic clamp) 442% (P < 0.01), oral glucose tolerance (area under the curve for 3-h ora

11 We assessed oral glucose tolerance at baseline and after 4 weeks of

12 The RT-induced improvement in oral glucose tolerance (decreased area under the curve,

13 polypeptide (GIP), and insulin, and improved oral glucose tolerance in an RU486-insensitve manner in

14 The impaired oral glucose tolerance in diet-induced obese mice was al

15 GB-IL(dist) improves oral glucose tolerance in mice made obese with high-fat

16 insulin sensitivity, beta cell function, and oral glucose tolerance in nondiabetic obese adults.

17 DJB has been shown to improve oral glucose tolerance in normal rats and a genetic diab

18 GB-IL induced weight loss and improved oral glucose tolerance in Tgr5(-/-), but not Fxr(Delta/E

19 However, the improvement in oral glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity, and overall

20 eight, visceral and subcutaneous fat depots, oral glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity, and the pla

21 tor for 10 d was well tolerated and improved oral glucose tolerance, it increased the expression of t

22 lation-based Ely Study, had glycemic status (oral glucose tolerance), lipids, insulin, anthropometry,

23 nt in those with diabetes; those with normal oral glucose tolerance lost 9.1+/-3.7 kg of fat (18+/-3

24 ts of mirabegron treatment included improved oral glucose tolerance (P < 0.01), reduced hemoglobin A1

25 Slowed gastric emptying and improved oral glucose tolerance produced by a nanomolar-potency i

26 with lower CNS penetration, and activity in oral glucose tolerance studies was demonstrated.

27 ycemia, preferred strategies were the 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (100% effectiveness; $390 pe

28 spectroscopy, and glucose turnover during an oral glucose tolerance test ([14C]glucose given with the

29 4 and glucose area under the curve during an oral glucose tolerance test (additive model, P = 0.022;

30 d increased fasting plasma insulin during an oral glucose tolerance test (all P < 0.01), as well as a

31 38; P = .03), plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test (Hedges g = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.

32 icting to identifying IGT/NODAT using 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (n = 66), fructosamine was t

33 emic insulin-clamp (40 mU/m(2) . min) and an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) (75 g) on separate da

34 years from prediabetes onset and the average oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) 2-h glucose measureme

35 en and women aged 50-65 were subjected to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and a mixed-meal test

36 In this prospective clinical study, an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and an intravenous gl

37 Study participants were phenotyped by an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and an intravenous gl

38 mpared beta-cell function assessed during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and an isoglycemic in

39 20 type 2 diabetic patients received a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and euglycemic insuli

40 s with varying glucose tolerance received an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and euglycemic insuli

41 ipids, hemoglobin A1C, body composition, the oral glucose tolerance test (oGTT) and the Sweet Taste T

42 cose tracer and labeled glucose infusion and oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) before and 6 months a

43 owing glucose beverage consumption during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) for 400 northern Euro

44 litus (GDM) is conventionally confirmed with oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in 24 to 28 weeks of

45 venous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and by oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in 3 different sessio

46 , based on insulin levels measured during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in 552 nondiabetic pa

47 c evaluation of biochemical changes after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in a community-based

48 on lower (P < 0.05) during the meal than the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in all subgroups rega

49 exhibited pronounced in vivo efficacy in an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in lean mice.

50 as a compound that displayed activity in an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in normal and diabeti

51 fasting and postprandial lipids and after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in the European Ather

52 All individuals underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in which we measured

53 ell function and insulin sensitivity from an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) over a 4-year period

54 e obtained, in addition to 0-hour and 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results, with measure

55 We analyzed the results of an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) routinely performed b

56 The aim of this study was to use an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) to risk stratify for

57 zed by the following: 1) associations with 5 oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) traits in 427 nondiab

58 The 5-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed to asse

59 h positive O'Sullivan test (POT) results, an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed to diag

60 An oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was used to evaluate

61 ons of glucose, insulin, and GLP-1 during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) were analyzed in indi

62 the insulin-to-glucose ratio (IGR) at 30-min oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), a frequently used su

63 atched control participants and underwent an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), a hypoglycemia quest

64 Diagnosis is usually performed using an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), although a non-fasti

65 at reducing peak glucose levels in an acute oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), but this effect was

66 e in blood glucose measured 2 h after a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), compared first betwe

67 s with wild-type genotype (CC) underwent 5-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), isoglycemic intraven

68 nrelated controls were evaluated using a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), with 7 samples of pl

69 Herein we describe oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)-modeled beta-cell fun

70 se >/= 11.1 mmol/L (>/= 200 mg/dL) during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

71 ized fashion subcutaneously 30 min before an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

72 lucose-lowering actions were tested after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

73 dices of beta-cell function derived from the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

74 insulin required to clear glucose during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

75 A total of 319 subjects were studied with an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

76 ging and glucose and insulin responses to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

77 frank diabetes based on the rarely utilized oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

78 g) or placebo (PLC) 30 minutes before a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

79 At wk 15, pigs were subjected to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT); blood glucose increa

80 nal age at delivery, parity, maternal age at oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT); Model 2 adjusted for

81 with glucose area under the curve during an oral glucose tolerance test (P = 0.035 and 0.013, respec

82 n in the insulinogenic index derived from an oral glucose tolerance test (risk allele homozygotes hav

83 even normal/five abnormal glucose tolerance (oral glucose tolerance test 1-h glucose >=155 and 2-h gl

84 o glucose during the first 30 minutes of the oral glucose tolerance test 2 years later.

85 560887 was significantly associated with the oral glucose tolerance test 30-min incremental insulin r

86 ly diagnosed diabetes by 2-h glucose from an oral glucose tolerance test [OGTT] [DM2h], n = 80; newly

87 ts and 10 healthy control subjects to a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test and a corresponding isoglyce

88 estionnaire, color Doppler echocardiography, oral glucose tolerance test and blood biomarkers analyse

89 d as the suppression of plasma FFA during an oral glucose tolerance test and by a low-dose insulin in

90 were gestational diabetes (diagnosed with an oral glucose tolerance test and by criteria from the Int

91 jection not only improved the response to an oral glucose tolerance test and corrected insulin signal

92 All underwent an oral glucose tolerance test and fasting lipoprotein subc

93 ose tissue biopsy, in addition to metabolic (oral glucose tolerance test and hyperinsulinemic euglyce

94 a, and disposition index were measured after oral glucose tolerance test and isoglycemic IV glucose i

95 All participants underwent a standard oral glucose tolerance test and provided detailed clinic

96 Participants underwent an oral glucose tolerance test and retinal imaging at 26-28

97 ith family history of T2DM (FH+) received an oral glucose tolerance test and two-step hyperglycemic c

98 o glucose during the first 30 minutes of the oral glucose tolerance test and using the area under the

99 ant recipients without diabetes underwent an oral glucose tolerance test and were observed until prim

100 Furthermore, the oral glucose tolerance test appears to be a more sensiti

101 termediate hyperglycaemia defined without an oral glucose tolerance test as impaired fasting glucose

102 es of maternal metabolism obtained during an oral glucose tolerance test at approximately 28 weeks' g

103 Participants underwent an oral glucose tolerance test at baseline and after 2 year

104 total body surface area burned, underwent an oral glucose tolerance test at discharge.

105 ucose and insulin will be measured during an oral glucose tolerance test at weeks 0 and 12.

106 glucose below 7 mmol/L, 2 hour glucose after oral glucose tolerance test below 11.1 mmol/L, and glyca

107 utcome measures were difference in change in oral glucose tolerance test between the groups and betwe

108 lin level, Matsuda index, and area under the oral glucose tolerance test curve (AUC) of insulin.

109 e and glucose area under the curve on 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test differed across arms (1-way

110 mes were glucose tolerance (measured with an oral glucose tolerance test given after 90 min) and meal

111 y homeostasis model assessment, and 2-h post-oral glucose tolerance test glucose and insulin levels.

112 bese adolescents with high-"normal" 2-h post-oral glucose tolerance test glucose levels display defec

113 ur plasma glucose >/=200 mg/dL during a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test had a definite diagnosis of

114 enge test (GCT) followed by a 75-gram 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test if GCT result was >/=7.8 mmo

115 -5.2]) and with 30-min plasma insulin during oral glucose tolerance test in 287 nondiabetic individua

116 bomed Nemos) with sham stimulation during an oral glucose tolerance test in a randomized, single-blin

117 ivo activity in rodents and was active in an oral glucose tolerance test in mice following oral admin

118 gnificantly reduced glucose levels during an oral glucose tolerance test in normal mice.

119 ervous system activity at rest and during an oral glucose tolerance test in obese metabolic syndrome

120 creased plasma GLP-1 concentration during an oral glucose tolerance test in rats.

121 proved half-life and glucose tolerance in an oral glucose tolerance test in rodents.

122 efficacious in lowering blood glucose in an oral glucose tolerance test in ZDF rats.

123 A 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test of >=140 mg/dL remains the m

124 nge in glucose tolerance estimated by a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test result.

125 On the basis of oral glucose tolerance test results, participants were g

126 = 292), and Hispanics (n = 34) underwent an oral glucose tolerance test to assess whole-body insulin

127 e levels in healthy adults during a standard oral glucose tolerance test via exhaled VOC analysis.

128 An oral glucose tolerance test was administered at discharg

129 f insulin resistance (HOMA-IR); and a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test was administered.

130 Oral glucose tolerance test was considered the gold stan

131 Oral glucose tolerance test was performed within 2 weeks

132 sensitivity and rate sensitivity during the oral glucose tolerance test were measured with the model

133 perinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and a 3-hour oral glucose tolerance test were performed to evaluate i

134 and 2-hour glucose levels measured during an oral glucose tolerance test were used to assess glycemic

135 control participants underwent a 6-hour 75-g oral glucose tolerance test with ECG recording and blood

136 A total of 1,437 individuals underwent an oral glucose tolerance test with measurements of circula

137 of NAFLD patients underwent liver biopsy, an oral glucose tolerance test with minimal model analysis

138 okines, and cytokeratin-18 fragments, and an oral glucose tolerance test with minimal model analysis

139 150 min, 30 min before and during the entire oral glucose tolerance test with stimulation cycles of 3

140 cose tolerance (area under the curve for 3-h oral glucose tolerance test) 28% (P < 0.05), and plasma

141 r-the curve for glucose, and insulin from an oral glucose tolerance test) analysed in the intention-t

142 (including results of a 26-28 week gestation oral glucose tolerance test) of women from the Born in B

143 G) ingested a labeled meal and 75 g glucose (oral glucose tolerance test) on separate occasions.

144 rum resistin levels in 113 nondiabetic (75-g oral glucose tolerance test) Pima Indians (ages 29 +/- 7

145 c insulin extraction from a mixed-meal or an oral glucose tolerance test).

146 cases were diagnosed (49.1% on the basis of oral glucose tolerance test).

147 Of 1319 people who were screened with an oral glucose tolerance test, 196 (15%) had impaired gluc

148 All underwent an oral glucose tolerance test, a liver panel, and a lipid

149 y insulin area under the curve (AUC) from an oral glucose tolerance test, aerobic fitness (peak oxyge

150 se in the glucose area under the curve in an oral glucose tolerance test, and AcAc predicted the conv

151 glucose and lipid levels, the results of an oral glucose tolerance test, and blood pressure were use

152 ulation (O-BP) using a clinical examination, oral glucose tolerance test, and gene expression and DNA

153 glucose (G-AUC) area under the curve during oral glucose tolerance test, and the Belfiore and Stumvo

154 bA1c and plasma glucose concentrations in an oral glucose tolerance test, and thus impaired beta cell

155 rwent clinical laboratory testing, including oral glucose tolerance test, and ultrasonographic invest

156 lucose sensitivity) were derived from a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test, and whole-body insulin sens

157 g insulin and glucagon concentrations during oral glucose tolerance test, and, in vitro, by measuring

158 were evaluated annually for 4 years with an oral glucose tolerance test, applying American Diabetes

159 RSM with three predonation RFs (oral glucose tolerance test, basal insulin, fasting plas

160 tom recognition is crucial, and the modified oral glucose tolerance test, but not gastric emptying te

161 hour glucose (beta = 0.46, P = 0.00090) post oral glucose tolerance test, but only the latter passed

162 glucose area under the curve (AUC) during an oral glucose tolerance test, correlated with MFAUp (r=0.

163 ucose levels, plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test, fasting plasma insulin leve

164 ucose levels, plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test, fasting plasma insulin leve

165 In the oral glucose tolerance test, IL-1betaAb-treated CDs-HSD

166 During the oral glucose tolerance test, overfeeding significantly i

167 clinical and anthropometric examinations, an oral glucose tolerance test, overnight urine collection,

168 n this score was combined with results of an oral glucose tolerance test, the AUC reached 82.4% (80.9

169 In the oral glucose tolerance test, the chloroform extract exer

170 ulin clearance were estimated by means of an oral glucose tolerance test, whereas peripheral insulin

171 tly associated with glucose levels during an oral glucose tolerance test, with the same SNP (rs642734

172 odel assessment of insulin resistance and an oral glucose tolerance test-based index (Matsuda insulin

173 with euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp- and oral glucose tolerance test-based measures of insulin re

174 In the independent cohort, only oral glucose tolerance test-derived indexes were associa

175 ting glucose, fasting glucose or insulin, or oral glucose tolerance test-derived measures.

176 of the measures assessed by using a standard oral glucose tolerance test.

177 C-glucose) in the basal state and during an oral glucose tolerance test.

178 51 and 629 women, respectively, completed an oral glucose tolerance test.

179 Insulin sensitivity was assessed by oral glucose tolerance test.

180 ncentration also increases in response to an oral glucose tolerance test.

181 ce or impaired fasting glucose determined by oral glucose tolerance test.

182 sulin concentrations were measured during an oral glucose tolerance test.

183 llary blood glucose test, and a confirmatory oral glucose tolerance test.

184 All subjects had a standard oral glucose tolerance test.

185 with insulin and glucose levels during a 3-h oral glucose tolerance test.

186 Subjects were categorized based on a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test.

187 relatively normal glucose disposal during an oral glucose tolerance test.

188 ls and improved glycemic excursion during an oral glucose tolerance test.

189 tion (JDF) units or more, and a non-diabetic oral glucose tolerance test.

190 dmission for blood and urine sampling and an oral glucose tolerance test.

191 s obtained in the fasting state or during an oral glucose tolerance test.

192 and underwent hemoglobin A1c testing and an oral glucose tolerance test.

193 ic IR phenotypes were derived from a 5-point oral glucose tolerance test.

194 eversal of diabetes; mice were then given an oral glucose tolerance test.

195 le, and 2-hour glucose was measured after an oral glucose tolerance test.

196 glucose homeostasis measured by means of an oral glucose tolerance test.

197 ed glucose tolerance after oral dosing in an oral glucose tolerance test.

198 clamp with measurement of glucose turnover; oral glucose tolerance test; and a liver biopsy.

199 rves of glucose and insulin levels during an oral glucose tolerance test; levels of low-density lipop

200 r flowmetry), and glucose metabolism status (oral glucose tolerance test; normal glucose metabolism [

201 rimester of pregnancy (2-h glucose after the oral glucose tolerance test; r(s) </= -0.21, P < 0.05).

202 ated with improved insulin response after an oral glucose-tolerance test (P = 9.8 x 10(-5)), whereas

203 tes mellitus (i.e., an abnormal result on an oral glucose-tolerance test but a fasting glucose level

204 After 6 wk, a 75-g oral-glucose-tolerance test (13C-labeled) and a subseque

205 28; aged 26 +/- 2 y) were tested with a 5-h oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) and a euvolemic, euen

206 Intravenous-glucose-tolerance tests and oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) and hyperinsulinemic-

207 (n = 273), and whose mothers had a 2-h 75-g oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) at 26-28 weeks of ges

208 itivity was measured by fasting and 2-h post-oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) insulin, the homeosta

209 g/m(2)) of 22.4 +/- 0.8 were subjected to an oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) on 4 separate days wi

210 At each visit, an oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) was performed.

211 f a ketone monoester (KE) drink before a 2-h oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) would lower blood glu

212 Postinfusion, a 240-min oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT; 75 g) was administere

213 consumption (P = 0.07) and glycemia after an oral-glucose-tolerance test (P = 0.10) trended toward be

214 he curve of insulin and glucose after a 75-g oral-glucose-tolerance test after 4 mo of treatment.

215 Participants (n = 170) underwent a 3-h oral-glucose-tolerance test at 30 wk (95% CI: 25, 33 wk)

216 inistered questionnaires, by fasting and 2-h oral-glucose-tolerance test blood glucose measurement at

217 (P = 0.02), and the fasting insulin and the oral-glucose-tolerance test insulin area under the curve

218 ept for a reduced insulinemic response to an oral-glucose-tolerance test over time with daily breakfa

219 An oral-glucose-tolerance test was performed pre- and posti

220 and 2-h glucose and insulin areas during the oral-glucose-tolerance test were similar across treatmen

221 NAFLD patients underwent a liver biopsy, an oral-glucose-tolerance test with minimal model analysis

222 glycemia (glucose area under the curve in an oral-glucose-tolerance test).

223 , a fasting blood glucose measurement, a 2-h oral-glucose-tolerance test, and record linkage to a rei

224 assessed by using the Matsuda method from an oral-glucose-tolerance test.

225 or glucose and insulin were assessed with an oral-glucose-tolerance test.

226 fasting insulin resistance index and with an oral-glucose-tolerance test.

227 0.0011), and 120 min (P = 0.0007) during the oral-glucose-tolerance test.

228 inistered questionnaires; by fasting and 2-h oral-glucose-tolerance-test blood glucose measurement at

229 Oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) has been mooted as

230 .3 kg/m(2), 66 women, 35 men) underwent 75-g oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT), body composition

231 All animals underwent oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT).

232 screening in the early postpartum period via oral glucose tolerance testing after GDM, which is a tim

233 g to identify high risk women for subsequent oral glucose tolerance testing improves dysglycemia dete

234 definition, despite not requiring the use of oral glucose tolerance testing or measures of IR or micr

235 is unique because diabetes was determined by oral glucose tolerance testing rather than by self-repor

236 ment was associated with the need to perform oral glucose tolerance testing upon study completion, by

237 athyroid hormone, vitamin D, and response to oral glucose tolerance testing were similar.

238 Oral glucose tolerance testing with glucose, insulin, an

239 According to oral glucose tolerance testing, approximately 14% of pat

240 tly correlated with glucose responses during oral glucose tolerance testing, HbA1c, beta-cell functio

241 lipids, we performed lipid profiling during oral glucose tolerance testing, pharmacologic interventi

242 However, the glycemic response to oral glucose tolerance testing, the acute insulin respon

243 ea under the curve for glucose during 2-hour oral glucose tolerance testing.

244 The latter is detected by oral glucose tolerance testing.

245 hropometry, and plasma glucose levels during oral glucose tolerance testing.

246 remained glucose intolerant as determined by oral glucose tolerance testing.

247 ow-up for 2 years that included 2-hour, 75-g oral glucose tolerance testing; anthropometry; and inter

248 15 centers in nine countries underwent 75-g oral glucose-tolerance testing at 24 to 32 weeks of gest

249 Diabetes was diagnosed by annual oral-glucose-tolerance testing and semiannual fasting pl

250 tor antagonist exendin(9-39)NH(2) During 4-h oral glucose tolerance tests (75 g) combined with an ad

251 abetic renal transplant recipients underwent oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) in 2005 to 2006 (bas

252 after death and who had undergone 2 or more oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) using grouped analys

253 pharmacodynamic endpoints were explored with oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT), serum lipid profile

254 Oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) and intravenous glu

255 person research visits including 2-hour 75-g oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) at study baseline (

256 Oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) from differing stat

257 their associations with glucose levels from oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) in pregnancy have n

258 subjects with the E/E genotype underwent 5-h oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs), graded glucose inf

259 n of postchallenge change in glucagon during oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs), hypothesizing that

260 tralizing antibody was administered prior to oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs).

261 fasting blood glucose concentrations and 2-h oral glucose tolerance tests among a cross-section of ad

262 Before and after beta3-AR agonist treatment, oral glucose tolerance tests and euglycemic clamps were

263 insulinemia, by combining microdialysis with oral glucose tolerance tests and euglycemic-hyperinsulin

264 nd enhanced suppression of plasma FFA during oral glucose tolerance tests and insulin clamp in obese

265 Oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline and after 1 yea

266 insulin, and C-peptide concentrations during oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline and study end.

267 Oral glucose tolerance tests at discharge revealed that

268 All women underwent 75-g oral glucose tolerance tests at ~26 weeks of gestation;

269 us adipose tissue biopsies were obtained and oral glucose tolerance tests conducted.

270 n CHD at baseline and had > or =2 (mean 4.2) oral glucose tolerance tests during follow-up.

271 and demonstrated blood glucose reductions in oral glucose tolerance tests in both C57BL/6J mice and h

272 significantly improved glycemic response to oral glucose tolerance tests in CNTF(Ax15)-treated UCP1-

273 sma glucose responses were higher during the oral glucose tolerance tests in patients with IDCM (p <

274 We studied this progression using biennial oral glucose tolerance tests performed in the Baltimore

275 All underwent oral glucose tolerance tests pre-LTx and serially post-L

276 Oral glucose tolerance tests revealed that male Znt7 KO

277 Oral glucose tolerance tests were administered at the sa

278 od samples were collected in the morning and oral glucose tolerance tests were done in accordance wit

279 Oral glucose tolerance tests were performed annually on

280 Fasting glucose was measured quarterly, and oral glucose tolerance tests were performed annually.

281 Physical examinations and oral glucose tolerance tests were performed at baseline

282 ropometric parameters and frequently sampled oral glucose tolerance tests were performed before and a

283 Oral glucose tolerance tests were performed in the 43 pa

284 In oral glucose tolerance tests with diet-induced obese mic

285 et of questionnaires, clinical measurements, oral glucose tolerance tests, and laboratory examination

286 ed insulin sensitivity, show improvements in oral glucose tolerance tests, display reduced adipose ti

287 asting or non-fasting plasma glucose levels, oral glucose tolerance tests, hemoglobin A1C levels, and

288 Oral glucose tolerance tests, mixed-meal tolerance tests

289 16.6 mumol/L v 131.7 mumol/L; P = 0.09), and oral glucose tolerance tests.

290 Insulin kinetics were calculated from oral glucose tolerance tests.

291 linemic-euglycemic clamp and intravenous and oral glucose tolerance tests.

292 ype 1 diabetes was performed with the use of oral glucose-tolerance tests at 6-month intervals.

293 Participants were diagnosed by 75 g oral glucose-tolerance tests.

294 h measures collected from frequently sampled oral-glucose-tolerance tests (OGTTs).Twenty-seven of 29

295 se, insulin, and C-peptide measured by using oral-glucose-tolerance tests at the end of each diet.

296 resistance and sensitivity were defined from oral-glucose-tolerance tests in 86 overweight and obese

297 Diabetes status was assessed by using oral-glucose-tolerance tests.

298 diabetes were verified by record tracing and oral-glucose-tolerance tests.

299 a low-fat diet were genotyped and underwent oral-glucose-tolerance tests.

300 Enhanced oral glucose tolerance was noted in TG mice by a reduced