Interesting read and likely IR could apply to me. That is one of the things I'll have checked out before treating again.
its worth checking even for skinny people ,
Right now it's like the one darn thing that doesn't apply to me but I am going to keep my eye on it in the future because everything else seems to be going kerplonk now that I"m uh over 20.
My A1C's for the past year have ALWAYS been normal. So, with that in mind, even though I've had a few blood sugars that were just barely over the cuttoff..., like 106, 102, 105,101..., my doctor is not calling me a diabetic, or even a pre-diabetic since he says the gold standard is the A1C and mine is always excellent on that front. He's run this A1C over and over and over again, (I think he thinks if he runs it often enough that he's going to be able to call me diabetic, LOL). NOT! I asked him specifically, do I need to have a fasting GTT and he said no because he wouldn't change anything treatment-wise on what he'd do with me. He said if I had an abnormal fasting GTT that the next normal step is always an A1C and since mine is always normal, that there's no reason to run a fasting GTT..., he says that would be a waste of my time and a waste of money. This guy is an internal medicine doctor, so I am pretty sure that he knows his stuff. Also, I might add that he's in the same group as my hepatologist and they have access to each other's records on the computer and actually talk to each other. So, I'm fairly confident that I don't have IR. I do thank you though, for publishing this fact. It is something to keep in mind.
Take care, Susan400
I agree, you should get this checked out.
As far as I know, fasting insulin and fasting blood sugar can be done with the same test and ordered by any Doctor.
It is recommeded to change your lifestyle by exercising and eating right first.
I am skinny an have IR.
A1c is normal
You need to find a Homa caculator.
Have your fasting glucose and fasting insulin
tested and then calculate your Homa.
I am sure someone here can post the
formula , if not I will post later.
I your glucose is nearly always over 100
there is a chance you are IR
I finally got my glucose under 100 but insulin
is 16. So homa score is 3.34
If anything is going to increase your odds of SVR it is worth looking into...
Looks like you're about to share the HOMA equation...
Get it out in the open... I'd like to give my teacher and scholar Co, props for sharing this equation with me.
Get your fasting blood sugar and fasting insulin tested first.
Take your results (fasting blood sugar & fasting insulin) and multiply,,, and then divide by 22.5.
The higher the HOMA, the more insulin resistant you are and the more SVR drops.
If you're results are less than 2... SVR 60.5%
If between 2 & 4... SVR 40%
If higher than 4... SVR 20%
Thanks for the info, but I'm going to just stick with what my doctor's are telling me. I've been having to go to the doctor's too much already with upteen tests and procedures and quite frankly, I'm just sick and tired of being in the doctor's office and being stuck and scanned and poked and prodded! Recently, I went through this whole thing with the rheumatologist running all these blood tests, having me get an MRI of my knee which has swelling and after all that expense and testing and procedures, nothing was ever able to be diagnosed in a definitive fashion. Every 3 mon., these doctor's are having me get bloodwork and if ANYTHING even slightly abnormal comes up on them, they send me back in for even more bloodwork. The other day, they called me up wanting me to get another bone densitometry and I told them to wait until the fall. I don't want to go through a whole huge workup trying to have them make me diagnosed with IR, just to end up having something else for them to call me in for constantly. No thanks. I'll take my chances. I already get ultrasounded or MRI's every 6 mon., if any Liver abnormality i.e. Liver CA shows up, it will be caught early. I am not cirrhotic yet, so I'm not going to get into all this worrying. Thanks for letting me get on my soapbox! Susan400
Diffuse Cirrhosis-like Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Clinically and Radiographically Undetected Variant Mimicking Cirrhosis.
Jakate S, Yabes A, Giusto D, Naini B, Lassman C, Yeh MM, Ferrell LD.
*Department of Pathology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL daggerDepartment of Pathology, University of California San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco section signDepartment of Pathology, University of California Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA double daggerDepartment of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA parallelDepartment of Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
A rare variant of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is encountered that produces small cirrhosis-like nodules diffusely throughout the liver (CL-HCC), instead of a larger evident mass. This pattern remains undetected as carcinoma clinically and radiographically and is unexpectedly discovered after liver transplantation in the explanted native liver. We studied 10 such cases (9 males and 1 female, age 35 to 80 y) from 4 medical centers. The pretransplant clinical, laboratory, and radiographical studies were reviewed to determine the cause and stage of liver disease, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels, and detectability of a mass on imaging. All 10 cases had underlying cirrhosis of varying etiology [3 hepatitis C virus (HCV), 3 alcoholic hepatitis, 1 hepatitis B virus, 1 autoimmune, and 2 mixed HCV/alcoholic hepatitis and hemochromatosis/HCV] and underwent orthotopic liver transplantation with no preoperative clinical suspicion of HCC. Ultrasound and/or dynamic imaging showed cirrhosis and no definite HCC. AFP levels were only mildly elevated in only 3 of 10 cases (144, 150, and 252 ng/mL). Grossly, there were innumerable (from about 20 to >1000) small CL-HCC nodules (0.2 to 0.6 cm) scattered among cirrhotic nodules. Histologically, these were well or moderately differentiated HCC, often with pseudoglandular pattern, perinodular sclerotic rims, cholestasis, frequent Mallory bodies, and small vessel invasion. In addition to the usual HCC immunophenotype, CL-HCC showed frequent ubiquitin and cytoplasmic and membranous CD10 positivity, relatively low Ki-67 proliferative index and absence of AFP immunohistochemically. CL-HCC warrants recognition as a unique HCC variant that evades pretransplant detection despite massive tumor burden, mimics cirrhotic nodules, and shows some uncommon pathologic and immunophenotypical characteristics.
"My A1C's for the past year have ALWAYS been normal."
From "Abnormalities of Glucose Metabolism, Including Insulin Resistance" by
Michael Dube, MD, University of Indiana and ACTG researcher
"Importance of insulin resistance: Insulin resistance is the term used when the body needs more insulin than normal to control the blood sugar. Only when the pancreas can no longer produce sufficient insulin to overcome the resistance does diabetes occur, so TESTING THE BLOOD SUGAR ALONE WILL NOT BE ENOUGH TO ESTIMATE INSULIN RESISTANCE."
"it is clear that INSULIN RESISTANCE IS UNDESIRABLE EVEN IF THE BLOOD SUGAR REMAINS RELATIVELY NORMAL (i.e. in the non-diabetic range). It causes an increase in cardiovascular disease risk and abnormalities in blood vessel function and lipid levels. Interventions that address insulin resistance all tend to improve cardiovascular risk factors.
(editorial comment: you can perform an insulin resistance test to evaluate whether or not you are developing insulin resistance, which can preceed seeing sugar elevations in the blood and diabetes. Performing the insulin resistance test is a way to perhaps identify a potential problem BEFORE sugar in your blood is elevated)."
P.S. Insulin resistance is associated with having a high viral load, lower SVR, faster fibrosis progression....and no benefit.
Well, I do find it rather interesting to note that whenever I have non-fasting liver labs and the glucose is in the panel ..just because.., my blood sugar is perfectly in the normal range and this is after a substantial, rather large breakfast, I might add. ( i.e., eggs, toast, cereal, fruit...), now I'm not trying to be argumentative but, IF I was IR, one would reason that I would have an elevated blood sugar after a high carb meal? I'm telling you that my blood sugar was like 70 after eating, toast, whole wheat cereal, egg-whites, fruit, juice, coffee.... The toast was not that cardboard tasting low-carb type, it was just normal variety whole wheat toast. The cereal was not some type of Kashi or Oatmeal, it was Wheaties complete w/all it's added (god-forbid...little bit of sugar). And, oh, by the way, I also eat chocolate. However, my weight is normal for my height. All the other markers for IR are not there. I have normal cholesterol, normal triglycerides. My waist size is within normal limits. This is based on my doctor's assessment, mind you. My thyroid is normal. My blood pressure is normal (in fact on the low side). So, why is it that so many on here are questioning my statement that I am not IR??? What do you expect me to do, go and stand in front of my doctor w/my hands on my hips and DEMAND that he do a fasting GTT? There are many reasons why someone can be not clearing the virus and it doesn't always have to fall into the category of IR. Yes, I do have some elevated blood sugar's, but they are not THAT bad and my doctor said that under to old guidelines, that we would not even be having this conversation. It's just since they lowered the limits on the blood sugar that this has become an issue. That's my opinion on this. Susan400
There's something I haven't been able to sort out about the HOMA index calculation - I'd be curious to hear any thoughts/corrections on this.
The simple formula for HOMA1 as Cory writes above is FI*FG/22.5 where FI is fasting insulin in uU/ml and FG is fasting glucose in mMol/L. If FG is reported in mg/dL, common in the US, you first have to change units by dividing by 18. So for bandman's readings, HOMA1 is
which would be outside the normal HOMA range and indicate possible IR.
However, HOMA1 has been criticized for high variability and an updated formula, HOMA2, was introduced by the authors
Unfortunately the HOMA2 calculation is not a simple multiplication and involves a non-linear fit. Inputs are the same and it is available from the authors' site
either as an executable or as an excel spreadsheet. For FG=100 mg/dL and FI=16 uU/mL the HOMA2 value is 2.1 which is close to normal.
Reference ranges for FG are normal lt 100 and FI normal lt 17 - or at least those were the ranges from my last FI/FG tests, the FI reference range may vary depending on test). So it seems consistent that in-range FI/FG would yield in-range HOMA2.
CS created a HOMA calculator. I'll send it to you.
Is 25 cents a fair price? LOL Want me to add it to your bill?
sure - put it on my tab. I'll add it to my collection of dubious bioinformatic software...
But seriously, doesn't the discrepancy seem a bit weird? This isn't just rounding error. By one measure bandman's numbers indicate serious IR, by the other (newer) index he's very close to in-range. Which is telling the truth?
Here are my test results. My Glucose is 88 mg/dL. My Insulin result is 9.4 uIU/mL. According to my calculations my HOMA-IR score is 2.04. I think I'm okay.
From what I've heard, a score less than 2 is good, and a score greater than 2 indicates Insulin Resistance. Looks like that's where I'm headed if I don't do something about it. Good thing I got this checked out.
the HOMA2 score for 88 mg/dL and 9.4 uU/ml is 1.2. (you can get the calculator for Matthew's revised index at the Oxford university link above to check). Ranges for HOMA1, HOMA2, scores generally seem to consider lt 2 OK. Here's a Stanford paper that reports insulin/glucose/HOMA values for 490, healthy, non-diabetics. (free-access)
From Table 1, avg fasting insulin was 12 and average HOMA-IR 2.7 .
Overall, doesn't look like IR is an issue for you.
Great information. I was concerned about this during TX as my blood glucose was often a little elevated. Post TP I had to take insulin but glucose returned to normal whan I got off the steroids.
After TX, and subsequent relapse, I got an insulin test and computed HOMA score as 2.8. The problem is that I could not find any references to what this meant. What is too high, what is too low, etc.
I hope the info here will shed a little more light for me. I really think I am IR and suspect it could have been a factor in my relapse.
Very interesting how my HOMA1 score is 2.04 and my HOMA2's 1.2.
That sounds a lot better with the HOMA2 score. Thanks.
I think this is the most I ever understood IR.
the discrepancy between Homa1 and Homa2 is an interesting aspect of the IR world. I'll post what some reading on the subject dug up when I have a bit more time but here's what seems to be the gist of it:
- Wallace and coworkers introduced HOMA1 in '85 as a measure of IR that was easier to obtain than the gold-standard assay (euglycemic clamp)
- in '96 they modified the index to apply a non-linear (and more accurate) fit to the underlying data - HOMA2.
- you can get a rough idea of the difference between the two indices from Fig. 2 of a (free access) summary of HOMA usage published in '04
- as the authors note, there's a much less accurate fit to the data with HOMA1 and the index tends to underestimate your insulin sensitivity (%S) "the equations were based on the 1985 HOMA1 model, which was calibrated to an insulin assay used in the 1970s, and systematically underestimate %S and consequently overestimate %B when compared with newer assays" (that is, HOMA1 makes you look more IR than you are)
- nevertheless, essentially *all* the studies that have found correlation between high HOMA and bad things (failure to SVR, increased fibrosis, increased HCC risk) have used the HOMA1 index. The reason, as best I can make out, is that Matthews et al never got around to publishing the non-linear fit equations which remain buried in the calculator they implemented and make available for download. This doesn't mean the correlation is invalid, just inaccurate.
Overall, the high HOMA/bad-things correlation seems valid (lots of support) but based on studies that used a HOMA measure *known* to be inaccurate. Bottom line is that if you suspect IR is an issue calculate your %S with the updated HOMA2 index and/or check with your Dr. about a euglycemic pump test before deciding it's a problem -it may not be.
You stated--, "Ranges for HOMA1, HOMA2, scores generally seem to consider lt 2 OK."
HOMA1 & HOMA2 are two completely different calculations. Any score GREATER than 2 means your IR (with HOMA1). My HOMA1 score is 2.04. I'm IR!
As of right now it is unknown when IR starts with the HOMA2, (2 definitely wouldn't be OK), IR probably starts somewhere in the range of 1 maybe 1.1.
the free-access paper linked above
measured median HOMA1 of 2.7 among "490 healthy nondiabetic volunteers".
Also HOMA1 and HOMA2 were developed by the same research group at Oxford with HOMA2 being an improvement/refinement over HOMA1. As noted in the quote above (that paper is also free access) the group that developed the test is well-aware that HOMA1 systematically underestimates insulin sensitivity, a problem they believe is fixed in HOMA2. Your HOMA2 score is very close to 1. Insulin resistance may be a problem for you, but it doesn't look that way from the numbers. Confirming with a Dr. that it's a problem before assuming there's something to fix may be a good idea.
Most studies systematically use HOMA1 for data.
Mean being the average, median being the middle number in a set, & mode being the # that occurs most often.
It was confirmed that I'm IR. I'm just slightly into that range. Should be able to sort it out a lot easier that way.