ライフサイエンスコーパス: glucose tolerance test

1 ulin extraction from a mixed-meal or an oral glucose tolerance test).

2 est (e.g., a glucose clamp or an intravenous glucose tolerance test).

3 s were diagnosed (49.1% on the basis of oral glucose tolerance test).

4 mia (glucose area under the curve in an oral-glucose-tolerance test).

5 al of diabetes; mice were then given an oral glucose tolerance test.

6 d 629 women, respectively, completed an oral glucose tolerance test.

7 nofixation, fasting glucose measurement, and glucose tolerance test.

8 sulin sensitivity as measured by intravenous glucose tolerance test.

9 ration also increases in response to an oral glucose tolerance test.

10 vels and continued through a 3-h intravenous glucose tolerance test.

11 sured using the insulin-modified intravenous glucose tolerance test.

12 istance was confirmed through an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

13 derived from frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

14 impaired fasting glucose determined by oral glucose tolerance test.

15 concentrations were measured during an oral glucose tolerance test.

16 nd 2-hour glucose was measured after an oral glucose tolerance test.

17 lin secretion was measured by an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

18 blood glucose test, and a confirmatory oral glucose tolerance test.

19 men with type 2 diabetes before and after a glucose tolerance test.

20 essed using a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

21 ion index [DI]) were measured by intravenous glucose tolerance test.

22 els in vivo were assessed by intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test.

23 by using the Frequently Sampled Intravenous Glucose Tolerance Test.

24 oglycemia but dispose glucose less well in a glucose tolerance test.

25 ose homeostasis measured by means of an oral glucose tolerance test.

26 All subjects had a standard oral glucose tolerance test.

27 by a skeletal muscle biopsy and intravenous glucose tolerance test.

28 ulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

29 ucose tolerance after oral dosing in an oral glucose tolerance test.

30 e measures assessed by using a standard oral glucose tolerance test.

31 ucose) in the basal state and during an oral glucose tolerance test.

32 nimals were then subjected to an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

33 SI was determined by intravenous glucose tolerance test.

34 y the disposition index after an intravenous-glucose-tolerance test.

35 sed by using the Matsuda method from an oral-glucose-tolerance test.

36 reatment using both the oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests.

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

38 Insulin kinetics were calculated from oral glucose tolerance tests.

39 aset acquired from human subjects undergoing glucose tolerance tests.

40 tolerance was evaluated with intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests.

41 betes, restoring a physiological response to glucose tolerance tests.

42 d 53 controls underwent oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests.

43 uced phosphorylation of insulin receptor and glucose tolerance tests.

44 by nonfasting blood glucose measurements and glucose tolerance tests.

45 ic-euglycemic clamp and intravenous and oral glucose tolerance tests.

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

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

48 was measured by nonfasting blood glucose and glucose tolerance testing.

49 r beta-cell function, which was evaluated by glucose tolerance testing.

50 tion index (DI) were assessed by intravenous glucose tolerance testing.

51 The latter is detected by oral glucose tolerance testing.

52 etry, and insulin resistance was assessed by glucose tolerance testing.

53 d IR in the obese subjects was documented by glucose tolerance testing.

54 metry, and plasma glucose levels during oral glucose tolerance testing.

55 der the curve for glucose during 2-hour oral glucose tolerance testing.

56 ransplant recipients underwent standard 2-hr glucose tolerance test 10 weeks after transplantation.

57 a, preferred strategies were the 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (100% effectiveness; $390 per cas

58 f 1319 people who were screened with an oral glucose tolerance test, 196 (15%) had impaired glucose t

59 cose during the first 30 minutes of the oral glucose tolerance test 2 years later.

60 7 was significantly associated with the oral glucose tolerance test 30-min incremental insulin respon

61 linemia (insulin area under the curve during glucose tolerance test 609 +/- 103 vs. 313 +/- 66 ng mL(

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

63 ulin area under the curve (AUC) from an oral glucose tolerance test, aerobic fitness (peak oxygen con

64 ning in the early postpartum period via oral glucose tolerance testing after GDM, which is a time-con

65 rve of insulin and glucose after a 75-g oral-glucose-tolerance test after 4 mo of treatment.

66 nd glucose disappearance rate on intravenous glucose tolerance test, all of which worsened minimally

67 d 10 healthy control subjects to a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test and a corresponding isoglycemic i

68 nnaire, color Doppler echocardiography, oral glucose tolerance test and blood biomarkers analyses wer

69 the suppression of plasma FFA during an oral glucose tolerance test and by a low-dose insulin infusio

70 gestational diabetes (diagnosed with an oral glucose tolerance test and by criteria from the Internat

71 on not only improved the response to an oral glucose tolerance test and corrected insulin signaling b

72 r vehicle at the start of an intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test and during hyperinsulinemic-eugly

73 All underwent an oral glucose tolerance test and fasting lipoprotein subclasse

74 issue biopsy, in addition to metabolic (oral glucose tolerance test and hyperinsulinemic euglycemic c

75 ion using the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test and insulin sensitivity using the

76 A glucose tolerance test and insulin tolerance test showed

77 in sensitivity, as insulin levels during the glucose tolerance test and insulin, leptin, and adiponec

78 d disposition index were measured after oral glucose tolerance test and isoglycemic IV glucose inject

79 amined with a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test and meal tolerance test to derive

80 ), which were determined from an intravenous glucose tolerance test and minimal modeling.

81 sensitivity index (S(I)) with an intravenous glucose tolerance test and minimal modeling.

82 The intravenous glucose tolerance test and mixed meal tolerance test may

83 All participants underwent a standard oral glucose tolerance test and provided detailed clinical, s

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

85 cose during the first 30 minutes of the oral glucose tolerance test and using the area under the curv

86 ecipients without diabetes underwent an oral glucose tolerance test and were observed until primary o

87 Subjects underwent oral and intravenous glucose tolerance testing and arginine stimulation testi

88 inemia, by combining microdialysis with oral glucose tolerance tests and euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic

89 serum porcine C peptide, near normal in vivo glucose tolerance tests and HbA1c levels, and intact mic

90 t blockade of insulin secretion were used in glucose tolerance tests and in positron emission tomogra

91 hanced suppression of plasma FFA during oral glucose tolerance tests and insulin clamp in obese NGT a

92 Metabolism investigations showed abnormal glucose tolerance tests and low HDL values in some patie

93 Diabetes was diagnosed by annual oral-glucose-tolerance testing and semiannual fasting plasma

94 Intravenous-glucose-tolerance tests and oral-glucose-tolerance test

95 nges in Si (measured by using an intravenous glucose tolerance test) and cardiovascular risk factors.

96 the glucose area under the curve in an oral glucose tolerance test, and AcAc predicted the conversio

97 ng by mixed meal tolerance test, intravenous glucose tolerance test, and arginine stimulation test ev

98 ose and lipid levels, the results of an oral glucose tolerance test, and blood pressure were used to

99 on (O-BP) using a clinical examination, oral glucose tolerance test, and gene expression and DNA meth

100 ose (G-AUC) area under the curve during oral glucose tolerance test, and the Belfiore and Stumvoll in

101 and plasma glucose concentrations in an oral glucose tolerance test, and thus impaired beta cell func

102 clinical laboratory testing, including oral glucose tolerance test, and ultrasonographic investigati

103 ulin and glucagon concentrations during oral glucose tolerance test, and, in vitro, by measuring gluc

104 in (HbA1c), serum porcine C peptide, in vivo glucose tolerance tests, and histologic analyses of host

105 by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, glucose tolerance tests, and plasma analyses.

106 We used fasting plasma glucose, glucose tolerance tests, and self-reported diabetes diag

107 asting blood glucose measurement, a 2-h oral-glucose-tolerance test, and record linkage to a reimburs

108 p with measurement of glucose turnover; oral glucose tolerance test; and a liver biopsy.

109 lucose and insulin during an intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test; and Glut4 and ApoE expression in

110 for 2 years that included 2-hour, 75-g oral glucose tolerance testing; anthropometry; and interviews

111 maternal metabolism obtained during an oral glucose tolerance test at approximately 28 weeks' gestat

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

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

114 Glucose tolerance testing at discharge offers an opportu

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

116 Oral glucose tolerance tests at discharge revealed that metfo

117 ellitus (GDM) during pregnancy from clinical glucose tolerance tests at median 28.1 weeks gestation.

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

119 nsulin, and C-peptide measured by using oral-glucose-tolerance tests at the end of each diet.

120 ed with area under the curve-intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test (AUC-IPGTT).

121 RSM with three predonation RFs (oral glucose tolerance test, basal insulin, fasting plasma gl

122 assessment of insulin resistance and an oral glucose tolerance test-based index (Matsuda insulin sens

123 euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp- and oral glucose tolerance test-based measures of insulin resista

124 ce, they were less hyperinsulinemic during a glucose tolerance test because of reduced insulin secret

125 Participants also underwent glucose tolerance tests before and after intervention.

126 se below 7 mmol/L, 2 hour glucose after oral glucose tolerance test below 11.1 mmol/L, and glycated h

127 e measures were difference in change in oral glucose tolerance test between the groups and between ba

128 ered questionnaires, by fasting and 2-h oral-glucose-tolerance test blood glucose measurement at re-e

129 ered questionnaires; by fasting and 2-h oral-glucose-tolerance-test blood glucose measurement at re-e

130 ellitus (i.e., an abnormal result on an oral glucose-tolerance test but a fasting glucose level below

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

132 In vivo, the intravenous glucose tolerance test characterized oxyntomodulin-induc

133 The glucose tolerance test clarified that the complex retain

134 exhibited fasting hyperglycemia and impaired glucose tolerance test compared with wild-type mice.

135 ipose tissue biopsies were obtained and oral glucose tolerance tests conducted.

136 ps had a significantly higher area under the glucose tolerance test curves than controls (1,845 +/- 3

137 CBV at rest and during an intravenous glucose tolerance test demonstrated a sustained increase

138 Glucose tolerance tests demonstrated significantly highe

139 Glucose tolerance tests demonstrated that ATGL knockdown

140 In the independent cohort, only oral glucose tolerance test-derived indexes were associated w

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

142 glucose area under the curve on 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test differed across arms (1-way ANCOV

143 sulin sensitivity, show improvements in oral glucose tolerance tests, display reduced adipose tissue

144 sessed with a frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance test, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

145 The analysis used metabolic cages, glucose tolerance tests, euglycemic and hyperglycemic cl

146 levels, plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test, fasting plasma insulin levels, i

147 levels, plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test, fasting plasma insulin levels, i

148 asured by the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (four cohorts) or euglycemic clam

149 ange in SI by frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test from entry to week 12.

150 ubmitted to a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT) with the stimulator on an

151 lin-modified, frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT), we estimated hepatic ver

152 e STM and by frequently sampling intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT).

153 ulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT).

154 ere glucose tolerance (measured with an oral glucose tolerance test given after 90 min) and meal size

155 eostasis model assessment, and 2-h post-oral glucose tolerance test glucose and insulin levels.

156 adolescents with high-"normal" 2-h post-oral glucose tolerance test glucose levels display defects in

157 omen had oral (oGTT) and intravenous (ivGTT) glucose tolerance tests, glucose clamps, and body compos

158 During glucose tolerance tests, glucose disposal was enhanced i

159 king the A(2B)R on insulin sensitivity using glucose tolerance tests (GTTs) and hyperinsulinemic-eugl

160 Epm2a-/- mice and observed no differences in glucose tolerance tests (GTTs) or insulin tolerance test

161 asma glucose >/=200 mg/dL during a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test had a definite diagnosis of type

162 orrelated with glucose responses during oral glucose tolerance testing, HbA1c, beta-cell function, an

163 = .03), plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test (Hedges g = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.16 to

164 g or non-fasting plasma glucose levels, oral glucose tolerance tests, hemoglobin A1C levels, and/or a

165 olerance during oral but not intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests, highlighting the involvement of

166 test (GCT) followed by a 75-gram 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test if GCT result was >/=7.8 mmol/L.

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

168 cantly reduced glucose levels during an oral glucose tolerance test in normal mice.

169 s system activity at rest and during an oral glucose tolerance test in obese metabolic syndrome (MetS

170 ed plasma GLP-1 concentration during an oral glucose tolerance test in rats.

171 d half-life and glucose tolerance in an oral glucose tolerance test in rodents.

172 ulin stainings and performed intraperitoneal glucose tolerance testing in transgenic mice overexpress

173 emonstrated blood glucose reductions in oral glucose tolerance tests in both C57BL/6J mice and high-f

174 d intraperitoneal sensors during intravenous glucose tolerance tests in eight swine.

175 orated glucose excursions in intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests in mice with streptozotocin-indu

176 e measured longitudinally by intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests in NOD/ShiLtJ and BALB/cJ mice 6

177 tance and sensitivity were defined from oral-glucose-tolerance tests in 86 overweight and obese subje

178 bited lower fasting glucose levels, improved glucose tolerance test, increased lactate levels, reduce

179 A study with human volunteers undergoing glucose tolerance tests indicates that this lag uncertai

180 and developed systemic insulin resistance in glucose tolerance tests, insulin tolerance tests, and hy

181 responses (FPIRs) during the intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test (IPGTT) declined before loss of g

182 erance was measured using an intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test (IPGTT).

183 and subsequently assessed by intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test (IPGTT).

184 Intravenous glucose tolerance test IVGTT and OGTT insulin secretion

185 hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC), by intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and by oral glucose toler

186 e assessed glucose metabolism by intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and euglycemic-hyperinsul

187 The intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and hyperglycemic clamp c

188 nd minimal model analysis of the intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) to document progression o

189 tion in humans during an in-vivo Intravenous Glucose Tolerance Test (IVGTT).

190 ation of glucose disposal during intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTT) remains critical for str

191 esponses to intravenous (I.V.) glucose (I.V. glucose tolerance test [IVGTT]), arginine and glucose-po

192 into the third ventricle during intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs).

193 mps), and insulin secretion [via intravenous-glucose-tolerance tests (IVGTTs)].Fifty-four participant

194 of glucose and insulin levels during an oral glucose tolerance test; levels of low-density lipoprotei

195 Frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance tests measured insulin sensitivity (SI

196 llenge glucose levels were assessed during a glucose tolerance test (n = 2,264).

197 g to identifying IGT/NODAT using 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (n = 66), fructosamine was the mo

198 wmetry), and glucose metabolism status (oral glucose tolerance test; normal glucose metabolism [n=126

199 Plasma samples from intravenous glucose tolerance tests of 2.5- and 5-month-old GIPR(dn)

200 uding results of a 26-28 week gestation oral glucose tolerance test) of women from the Born in Bradfo

201 from prediabetes onset and the average oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) 2-h glucose measurement ov

202 d beta-cell function assessed during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and an isoglycemic intrave

203 h varying glucose tolerance received an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and euglycemic insulin cla

204 tracer and labeled glucose infusion and oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) before and 6 months after

205 glucose beverage consumption during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) for 400 northern European

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

207 s glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and by oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in 3 different sessions.

208 luation of biochemical changes after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in a community-based popul

209 bited pronounced in vivo efficacy in an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in lean mice.

210 compound that displayed activity in an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in normal and diabetic mic

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

212 unction and insulin sensitivity from an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) over a 4-year period among

213 ained, in addition to 0-hour and 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results, with measurement

214 We analyzed the results of an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) routinely performed before

215 The 5-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed to assess ce

216 itive O'Sullivan test (POT) results, an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed to diagnose

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

218 f glucose, insulin, and GLP-1 during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) were analyzed in individua

219 d control participants and underwent an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), a hypoglycemia questionna

220 educing peak glucose levels in an acute oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), but this effect was lost

221 blood glucose measured 2 h after a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), compared first between th

222 h wild-type genotype (CC) underwent 5-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), isoglycemic intravenous g

223 Herein we describe oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)-modeled beta-cell function

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

225 e-lowering actions were tested after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

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

227 k diabetes based on the rarely utilized oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

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

229 = 11.1 mmol/L (>/= 200 mg/dL) during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

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

231 ge at delivery, parity, maternal age at oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT); Model 2 adjusted for Mode

232 Oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) has been mooted as an a

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

234 c renal transplant recipients underwent oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) in 2005 to 2006 (baseline

235 r death and who had undergone 2 or more oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) using grouped analyses an

236 acodynamic endpoints were explored with oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT), serum lipid profiles, ma

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

238 )) of 22.4 +/- 0.8 were subjected to an oral-glucose-tolerance test (OGTT) on 4 separate days with th

239 Oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) from differing states of

240 r associations with glucose levels from oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) in pregnancy have not be

241 cts with the E/E genotype underwent 5-h oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs), graded glucose infusion

242 postchallenge change in glucagon during oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs), hypothesizing that high

243 zing antibody was administered prior to oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs).

244 sures collected from frequently sampled oral-glucose-tolerance tests (OGTTs).Twenty-seven of 29 recru

245 centrations were assessed by intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests on days 1, 16, and 18 of pregnan

246 ues in response to a glucose load applied in glucose tolerance tests on different days, promoted gluc

247 function, we performed oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests on mutation carriers and matched

248 or a reduced insulinemic response to an oral-glucose-tolerance test over time with daily breakfast re

249 cal and anthropometric examinations, an oral glucose tolerance test, overnight urine collection, a 12

250 mption (P = 0.07) and glycemia after an oral-glucose-tolerance test (P = 0.10) trended toward being l

251 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests performed at 1, 2, and 3 or more

252 Results of intravenous glucose tolerance tests performed on day 56 were signifi

253 ds, we performed lipid profiling during oral glucose tolerance testing, pharmacologic interventions,

254 All underwent oral glucose tolerance tests pre-LTx and serially post-LTx.

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

256 n glucose tolerance estimated by a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test result.

257 ormoglycemic throughout the study, and their glucose tolerance test results were similar to control C

258 On the basis of oral glucose tolerance test results, participants were groupe

259 In addition, body weight records and a glucose tolerance test revealed no differences between W

260 s by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and a glucose tolerance test revealed no differences in insuli

261 Hyperglycemic-euglycemic clamp studies and glucose tolerance testing revealed insulin resistance.

262 Oral glucose tolerance tests revealed that male Znt7 KO mice

263 The glucose tolerance test showed major improvement of the g

264 ta obtained during a frequently sampled i.v. glucose tolerance test showed that the antidiabetic effe

265 Glucose tolerance tests showed that Syn-1A-betaKO mice e

266 irst-phase insulin release on an intravenous glucose tolerance test that was higher than the threshol

267 In the oral glucose tolerance test, the chloroform extract exerted t

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

269 in adults and frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests using Bergman minimal model in c

270 nsulin secretion, as measured by intravenous glucose tolerance tests, using up to 5,567 individuals w

271 times (<4.2 min) in response to intravenous glucose tolerance tests versus burst NO-releasing and co

272 An oral glucose tolerance test was administered at discharge.

273 ulin resistance (HOMA-IR); and a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test was administered.

274 Oral glucose tolerance test was considered the gold standard

275 Intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed at baseline and at

276 An intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed during steady state

277 Oral glucose tolerance test was performed within 2 weeks afte

278 A frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test was used to obtain precise measur

279 itivity and rate sensitivity during the oral glucose tolerance test were measured with the model by M

280 ulinemic-euglycemic clamp and an intravenous glucose tolerance test were performed.

281 Oral glucose tolerance tests were administered at the same ti

282 mples were collected in the morning and oral glucose tolerance tests were done in accordance with a s

283 glucose levels and oral and intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests were normal.

284 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests were performed 2 weeks after sur

285 ing glucose was measured quarterly, and oral glucose tolerance tests were performed annually.

286 Physical examinations and oral glucose tolerance tests were performed at baseline and a

287 Frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests were performed before and after

288 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests were performed before and after

289 glucose, plasma insulin, and intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests were performed in 8-week-old mic

290 Insulin and glucose tolerance tests were undertaken and hepatic AMPK

291 -h glucose and insulin areas during the oral-glucose-tolerance test were similar across treatment gro

292 clearance were estimated by means of an oral glucose tolerance test, whereas peripheral insulin sensi

293 able to KC islet grafts, postintrapertioneal glucose tolerance testing, whereas SC recipients remaine

294 ol participants underwent a 6-hour 75-g oral glucose tolerance test with ECG recording and blood samp

295 total of 1,437 individuals underwent an oral glucose tolerance test with measurements of circulating

296 FLD patients underwent liver biopsy, an oral glucose tolerance test with minimal model analysis to yi

297 s, and cytokeratin-18 fragments, and an oral glucose tolerance test with minimal model analysis to yi

298 Oral glucose tolerance testing with glucose, insulin, and C-p

299 In oral glucose tolerance tests with diet-induced obese mice, NT

300 D patients underwent a liver biopsy, an oral-glucose-tolerance test with minimal model analysis of gl