Klee, George G.

OBJECTIVE—We sought to determine whether, and if so the mechanism by which, testosterone replacement improves carbohydrate tolerance. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Fifty-five elderly men with relative testosterone deficiency ingested a labeled mixed meal and underwent a frequently sampled labeled intravenous glucose tolerance test before and after either placebo or treatment with testosterone patch (5 mg/day) for 2 years. RESULTS—Despite restoring bioavailable testosterone to values observed in young men, the change (24 months minus baseline values) in fasting and postprandial glucose, insulin, and C-peptide concentrations and meal appearance, glucose disposal, and endogenous glucose production were virtually identical to those observed after 2 years of placebo. The change over time in insulin and C-peptide concentrations post–intravenous glucose injection also did not differ. Furthermore, the change over time in insulin action and glucose effectiveness (measured with the unlabeled and labeled “oral” and “intravenous” minimal models), as well as insulin secretion and hepatic insulin clearance (measured with the C-peptide model), did not differ in the testosterone and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS—We conclude that 2 years of treatment with testosterone in elderly men does not improve carbohydrate tolerance or alter insulin secretion, insulin action, glucose effectiveness, hepatic insulin clearance, or the pattern of postprandial glucose metabolism. Thus, testosterone deficiency is unlikely the cause of the age-associated deterioration in glucose tolerance commonly observed in elderly men.

OBJECTIVE The American Diabetes Association (ADA) has recommended that the fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level used to diagnose diabetes be changed from 7.8 mmol/l (the level recommended by the National Diabetes Data Group [NDDG] in 1979) to 7.0 mmol/l. We examined the impact of this change on rates of progression to overt diabetes from different levels of FPG. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Using the laboratory database of Mayo Clinic, we assembled a cohort of 8,098 nondiabetic Olmsted County residents 40 years of age or older on 1 July 1983. Subjects were followed for a median of 9 years. RESULTS Among 7,567 individuals with follow-up FPG data, 778 (10.3%) progressed to ADA diabetes and 513 (6.8%; P < 0.0001) progressed to NDDG diabetes. The risk of developing ADA diabetes was 7, 19, and 39% for individuals with initial FPG values in the ranges of <5.6, 5.6–6.0, and 6.1–6.9 mmol/l, respectively. For progression to NDDG diabetes, the respective risks were 3, 11, and 25%. A clear gradient of risk was observed within the “normal” range of FPG (<5.6 mmol/l). Among the 793 individuals who developed ADA diabetes, 222 (29%) developed NDDG diabetes simultaneously and 291 (37%) developed NDDG diabetes later. In all FPG subgroups, progression to ADA diabetes occurred ∼7 years sooner than progression to NDDG diabetes. CONCLUSIONS The baseline level of FPG is a major predictor of an individual's risk of developing diabetes. The proposed change in the diagnostic criteria for diabetes will lead to earlier diagnosis among individuals who are destined to develop the disease.

To determine if dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) replacement improves insulin secretion, insulin action, and/or postprandial glucose metabolism, 112 elderly subjects with relative DHEA deficiency ingested a labeled mixed meal and underwent a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test before and after 2 years of either DHEA or placebo. Despite restoring DHEA sulphate concentrations to values observed in young men and women, the changes over time in fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations, meal appearance, glucose disposal, and endogenous glucose production were identical to those observed after 2 years of placebo. The change over time in postmeal and intravenous glucose tolerance test insulin and C-peptide concentrations did not differ in men treated with DHEA or placebo. In contrast, postmeal and intravenous glucose tolerance test change over time in insulin and C-peptide concentrations were greater (P < 0.05) in women after DHEA than after placebo. However, since DHEA tended to decrease insulin action, the change over time in disposition indexes did not differ between DHEA- and placebo-treated women, indicating that the slight increase in insulin secretion was a compensatory response to a slight decrease in insulin action. We conclude that 2 years of replacement of DHEA in elderly men and women does not improve insulin secretion, insulin action, or the pattern of postprandial glucose metabolism.

AbstractBackground: Zn-α2 glycoprotein (ZAG) is a relatively abundant glycoprotein that has potential as a biomarker for prostate cancer. We present a high-flow liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for measuring serum ZAG concentrations by proteolytic cleavage of the protein and quantification of a unique peptide.Methods: We selected the ZAG tryptic peptide 147EIPAWVPEDPAAQITK162 as the intact protein for quantification and used a stable isotope-labeled synthetic peptide with this sequence as an internal standard. Standards using recombinant ZAG in bovine serum albumin, 50 g/L, and a pilot series of patient sera were denatured, reduced, alkylated, and digested with trypsin. The concentration of ZAG was calculated from a dose–response curve of the ratio of the relative abundance of the ZAG tryptic peptide to internal standard.Results: The limit of detection for ZAG in serum was 0.08 mg/L, and the limit of quantification was 0.32 mg/L with a linear dynamic range of 0.32 to 10.2 mg/L. Replicate digests from pooled sera run during a period of 3 consecutive days showed intraassay imprecision (CV) of 5.0% to 6.3% and interassay imprecision of 4.4% to 5.9%. Mean (SD) ZAG was higher in 25 men with prostate cancer [7.59 (2.45) mg/L] than in 20 men with nonmalignant prostate disease [6.21 (1.65) mg/L, P = 0.037] and 6 healthy men [3.65 (0.71) mg/L, P = 0.0007].Conclusions: This LC-MS/MS assay is reproducible and can be used to evaluate the clinical utility of ZAG as a cancer biomarker.

To determine the effects of age and sex on the regulation of postprandial glucose metabolism, glucose turnover, insulin secretion, insulin action, and hepatic insulin extraction were concurrently measured in 145 healthy elderly (aged 70 ± 1 years) and in 58 young (aged 28 ± 1 years) men and women before and after ingestion of a mixed meal containing [1-13C]glucose. At the time of meal ingestion, [6-3H]glucose and [6,6-2H2]glucose were infused intravenously to enable concurrent measurement of the rates of postprandial endogenous glucose production (EGP), meal appearance, and glucose disappearance. Fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations were higher (P < 0.001) in both elderly women and elderly men compared with young individuals of the same sex. The higher postprandial glucose concentrations in the elderly than young women were caused by higher rates of meal appearance (P < 0.01) and slightly lower (P < 0.05) rates of glucose disappearance immediately after eating. In contrast, higher glucose concentrations in the elderly than young men were solely due to decreased (P < 0.001) glucose disappearance. Although postprandial glucose concentrations did not differ in elderly women and elderly men, rates of meal appearance and glucose disappearance rates both were higher (P < 0.001) in the women. Fasting EGP was higher (P < 0.05) in elderly than young subjects of both sexes and in women than men regardless of age. On the other hand, postprandial suppression of EGP was rapid all groups. Insulin action and secretion were lower (P < 0.001) in the elderly than young men but did not differ in the elderly and young women. This resulted in lower (P < 0.001) meal disposition indexes in elderly than young men but no difference in elderly and young women. Total meal disposition indexes were lower (P < 0.05) in elderly men than elderly women, indicating impaired insulin secretion, whereas disposition indexes were higher (P < 0.05) in young men than young women. Hepatic insulin clearance was greater (P < 0.001) in the elderly than young subjects of both sexes but did not differ between men and women regardless of age. In contrast, the ability of glucose to facilitate its own uptake (glucose effectiveness) was higher (P < 0.001) in women than men but did not differ in elderly and young subjects. Thus, age and sex impact on insulin secretion, insulin action, hepatic insulin extraction, and glucose effectiveness, resulting in substantial differences in the regulation of postprandial glucose metabolism in men and women and in elderly and young subjects.

Abstract A group of investigators met at a Specialized Programs of Research Excellence Workshop to discuss key issues in the translation of biomarker discovery to the development of useful laboratory tests for cancer care. Development and approval of several new markers and technologies have provided informative examples that include more specific markers for prostate cancer, more sensitive tests for ovarian cancer, more objective analysis of tissue architecture and an earlier indication of response to treatment in breast cancer. Although there is no clear paradigm for biomarker development, several principles are clear. Marker development should be driven by clinical needs, including early cancer detection, accurate pretreatment staging, and prediction of response to treatment, as well as monitoring disease progression and response to therapy. Development of a national repository that uses carefully preserved, well-annotated tissue specimens will facilitate new marker development. Reference standards will be an essential component of this process. Both hospital-based and commercial laboratories can play a role in developing biomarkers from discovery to test validation. Partnering of academe and industry should occur throughout the process of biomarker development. The National Cancer Institute is in a unique position to bring together academe, industry, and the Food and Drug Administration to (a) define clinical needs for biomarkers by tumor type, (b) establish analytic and clinical paradigms for biomarker development, (c) discuss ways in which markers from different companies might be evaluated in combination, (d) establish computational methods to combine data from multiple biomarkers, (e) share information regarding promising markers developed in National Cancer Institute–supported programs, and (f) exchange data regarding new platforms and techniques that can accelerate marker development.