ライフサイエンスコーパス: intravenous glucose tolerance

1 had normal levels of fasting blood glucose, intravenous glucose tolerance, and HbA1c, and 15 of 16 s

2 asurements of fasting plasma glucose, HbA1c, intravenous glucose tolerance, and insulin secretory res

3 Neither oral nor intravenous glucose tolerance changed significantly from

4 minimal model analyses of frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance (FSIGT) from the Insulin R

5 ous adipose biopsies, and frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance (FSIGT) testing were perfo

6 vity index (SI), disposition index (DI), and intravenous glucose tolerance (kg) were compared for eac

7 tion was assessed using a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (first-phase insulin

8 aits were measured by the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (four cohorts) or eug

9 ients were submitted to a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT) with the stim

10 rom the insulin-modified, frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT), we estimated

11 The insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGTT) with minimal

12 ) was determined during a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGTT).

13 ex (SI) calculated from a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT) after the m

14 lowing tests: 1) frequently sampled 0.3-g/kg intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT) with MinMod

15 ated from the STM and by frequently sampling intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT).

16 using an insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT).

17 euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC), by intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and by oral g

18 condition, we assessed glucose metabolism by intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and euglycemi

19 The intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and hyperglyc

20 exes with analogous indexes obtained from an intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and hyperglyc

21 An intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) in the contro

22 sing clamp and minimal model analysis of the intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) to document p

23 spike detection in humans during an in-vivo Intravenous Glucose Tolerance Test (IVGTT).

24 ted with insulin secretion as measured by an intravenous glucose tolerance test (r = 0.35).

25 dministration of exogenous insulin during an intravenous glucose tolerance test allows the use of the

26 ivity index (S(i)) from a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test among African-America

27 nsitivity (S(i)) from the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test among African-America

28 easured directly from the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test among black, Hispanic

29 an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and an intravenous glucose tolerance test and by a dual-energy

30 sulin secretion using the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test and insulin sensitivi

31 ects were examined with a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test and meal tolerance te

32 ulin sensitivity (determined by the modified intravenous glucose tolerance test and minimal model ana

33 were determined by the tolbutamide-modified intravenous glucose tolerance test and minimal modeling,

34 veness (S(G)), which were determined from an intravenous glucose tolerance test and minimal modeling.

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

36 The intravenous glucose tolerance test and mixed meal tolera

37 second phase insulin release in response to intravenous glucose tolerance test and suppressed postpr

38 x ml(-1)), estimated by a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test and the minimal model

39 vity (SI), estimated by a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test and the minimal model

40 C-peptide increment to glucose during intravenous glucose tolerance test at days 90-120 after

41 ixed meal and underwent a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test before and after 2 ye

42 In contrast, postmeal and intravenous glucose tolerance test change over time in i

43 In vivo, the intravenous glucose tolerance test characterized oxyntom

44 CBV at rest and during an intravenous glucose tolerance test demonstrated a sustai

45 point was change in SI by frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test from entry to week 12

46 mal model analysis of the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test in 1,625 men and wome

47 ulin sensitivity (S(I)) was measured with an intravenous glucose tolerance test in obese HIV+ women r

48 tance was measured with a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test in the Insulin Resist

49 The change over time in postmeal and intravenous glucose tolerance test insulin and C-peptide

50 Intravenous glucose tolerance test IVGTT and OGTT insuli

51 ulin action (Si), measured with the meal and intravenous glucose tolerance test models, was highly co

52 y and an insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test on the second day.

53 K-values of an intravenous glucose tolerance test performed on day 14 w

54 Blood glucose profiles were normal, as were intravenous glucose tolerance test profiles.

55 l model analysis with the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test provides an effective

56 of EXN during mixed meal tolerance test and intravenous glucose tolerance test results in improved f

57 Intravenous glucose tolerance test revealed that the rat

58 = 389) had first-phase insulin release on an intravenous glucose tolerance test that was higher than

59 Intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed at base

60 An intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed during

61 A frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test was used to obtain pr

62 , a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and an intravenous glucose tolerance test were performed.

63 lucose levels, urine glucose levels, and the intravenous glucose tolerance test were used to monitor

64 n sensitivity (SI) by the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test with analysis by the

65 th a validated, 12-sample, insulin-enhanced, intravenous glucose tolerance test with minimal model an

66 the tolbutamide-modified, frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test with minimal modeling

67 mes were changes in Si (measured by using an intravenous glucose tolerance test) and cardiovascular r

68 changes of portal insulin (as measured by an intravenous glucose tolerance test) versus slow changes

69 rinsulinemic clamp), insulin secretion (25-g intravenous glucose tolerance test), and endogenous gluc

70 ntravenous test (e.g., a glucose clamp or an intravenous glucose tolerance test).

71 in secretory response (AIR; assessed by 25-g intravenous glucose tolerance test).

72 the curve and glucose disappearance rate on intravenous glucose tolerance test, all of which worsene

73 abolic testing by mixed meal tolerance test, intravenous glucose tolerance test, and arginine stimula

74 (S(I)) was measured by a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test, and CRP was measured

75 [AIR]), as derived from a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test, as well as common ca

76 The offspring had a baseline intravenous glucose tolerance test, at which time they w

77 Insulin sensitivity, measured by intravenous glucose tolerance test, decreased with age (

78 index (SI) assessed by a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test, insulin secretion ra

79 ic clamp), acute insulin response (AIR, 25-g intravenous glucose tolerance test, n = 118 normal gluco

80 ive insulin) had higher DRs than first-phase intravenous glucose tolerance test-derived incremental i

81 (S(I)), as assessed by a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

82 sulin sensitivity (SI) was measured using an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

83 tation and animals were then subjected to an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

84 Insulin sensitivity as measured by an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

85 stimulation index of 4.02 in response to an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

86 SI was determined by intravenous glucose tolerance test.

87 sample, insulin-modified, frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

88 ponse and insulin sensitivity as measured by intravenous glucose tolerance test.

89 the insulin curve in the first 10 min of the intravenous glucose tolerance test.

90 ady-state levels and continued through a 3-h intravenous glucose tolerance test.

91 vity was measured using the insulin-modified intravenous glucose tolerance test.

92 Insulin resistance was confirmed through an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

93 e (AIR) were derived from frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

94 , acute insulin secretion was measured by an intravenous glucose tolerance test.

95 vity was assessed using a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

96 on (disposition index [DI]) were measured by intravenous glucose tolerance test.

97 was assessed by using the Frequently Sampled Intravenous Glucose Tolerance Test.

98 est followed by a skeletal muscle biopsy and intravenous glucose tolerance test.

99 from the insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

100 sent and 41 underwent the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

101 directly measured using a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

102 d, and insulin sensitivity was determined by intravenous glucose tolerance test.

103 sample, insulin-enhanced, frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

104 itivity was determined by frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

105 vely, as assessed using a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

106 x, both obtained from the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test.

107 phy, respectively; S(i) was assessed with an intravenous-glucose-tolerance test and minimal modeling.

108 were measured by using a frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance test and minimal modeling.

109 nemic-euglycemic glucose clamp technique and intravenous-glucose-tolerance test have indicated that i

110 tion were assessed with a frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance test, dual-energy X-ray ab

111 ty was estimated with the frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance test.

112 -sample, insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance test.

113 s measured by the disposition index after an intravenous-glucose-tolerance test.

114 were measured by using a frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance test.

115 asured insulin sensitivity index (S(I)) from intravenous glucose tolerance testing among African-Amer

116 Subjects underwent oral and intravenous glucose tolerance testing and arginine stimu

117 d first-phase insulin release in response to intravenous glucose tolerance testing, was observed afte

118 and disposition index (DI) were assessed by intravenous glucose tolerance testing.

119 virtually identical to that obtained during intravenous glucose tolerance tests (71.6+/-6.1% of tota

120 lerance tests (OGTTs) and frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests (FSIGTs) were conduc

121 ch subject underwent four frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests (FSIGTT), one with t

122 such as glucose clamps or frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests (FSIGTTs).

123 and normalization of glucose disposal during intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTT) remains crit

124 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs) for assessm

125 dlimb lymph insulin profile during simulated intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs) in anesthet

126 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs) were perfor

127 Paired insulin-modified intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs) were perfor

128 Oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) and intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs) were perfor

129 were infused into the third ventricle during intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs).

130 l antibody-negative women underwent oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests (OGTT; IVGTT), hyper

131 Oral and frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs and FSIGTs),

132 administration protocols, we performed three intravenous glucose tolerance tests in each of seven obe

133 We performed hyperglycemic clamps and intravenous glucose tolerance tests in eight normal dogs

134 cutaneous and intraperitoneal sensors during intravenous glucose tolerance tests in eight swine.

135 Plasma samples from intravenous glucose tolerance tests of 2.5- and 5-month-

136 ed beta-cell function, we performed oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests on mutation carriers

137 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests performed at 1, 2, a

138 Results of intravenous glucose tolerance tests performed on day 56

139 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests showed a rapid gluco

140 emic clamps in adults and frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests using Bergman minima

141 r sensor lag times (<4.2 min) in response to intravenous glucose tolerance tests versus burst NO-rele

142 ity (SI) as determined by frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests was measured over a

143 Normal intravenous glucose tolerance tests were observed at day

144 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests were performed 2 wee

145 Intravenous glucose tolerance tests were performed befor

146 Frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests were performed befor

147 abetic, non-Amish subjects (n = 48), in whom intravenous glucose tolerance tests were performed, and

148 n levels returned to normal, and K values of intravenous glucose tolerance tests were significantly h

149 insulin secretion rates during both oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests were used to generat

150 BCF) were determined from frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance tests, and total body fat

151 During intravenous glucose tolerance tests, tritiated glucose (

152 irst-phase insulin secretion, as measured by intravenous glucose tolerance tests, using up to 5,567 i

153 with normal glucose profiles in response to intravenous glucose tolerance tests.

154 f assigned treatment using both the oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests.

155 xpansion, and 53 controls underwent oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests.

156 e <126 mg/dl and were phenotyped by oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests.

157 glycemic clamps), and insulin secretion [via intravenous-glucose-tolerance tests (IVGTTs)].Fifty-four

158 Intravenous-glucose-tolerance tests and oral-glucose-tol

159 Frequently sampled intravenous-glucose-tolerance tests measured insulin sen

160 Intravenous glucose tolerance was measured as the glucos

161 Intravenous glucose tolerance was reduced transiently fo