OBJECTIVE—To quantitate the separate impact of obesity and hyperlycemia on the incretin effect (i.e., the gain in β-cell function after oral glucose versus intravenous glucose). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Isoglycemic oral (75 g) and intravenous glucose administration was performed in 51 subjects (24 with normal glucose tolerance [NGT], 17 with impaired glucose tolerance [IGT], and 10 with type 2 diabetes) with a wide range of BMI (20–61 kg/m²). C-peptide deconvolution was used to reconstruct insulin secretion rates, and β-cell glucose sensitivity (slope of the insulin secretion/glucose concentration dose-response curve) was determined by mathematical modeling. The incretin effect was defined as the oral-to-intravenous ratio of responses. In 8 subjects with NGT and 10 with diabetes, oral glucose appearance was measured by the double-tracer technique. RESULTS—The incretin effect on total insulin secretion and β-cell glucose sensitivity and the GLP-1 response to oral glucose were significantly reduced in diabetes compared with NGT or IGT (P ≤ 0.05). The results were similar when subjects were stratified by BMI tertile (P ≤ 0.05). In the whole dataset, each manifestation of the incretin effect was inversely related to both glucose tolerance (2-h plasma glucose levels) and BMI (partial r = 0.27–0.59, P ≤ 0.05) in an independent, additive manner. Oral glucose appearance did not differ between diabetes and NGT and was positively related to the GLP-1 response (r = 0.53, P < 0.01). Glucagon suppression during the oral glucose tolerance test was blunted in diabetic patients. CONCLUSIONS—Potentiation of insulin secretion, glucose sensing, glucagon-like peptide-1 release, and glucagon suppression are physiological manifestations of the incretin effect. Glucose tolerance and obesity impair the incretin effect independently of one another.

To analyze hospitalization for lower extremity amputations (LEAs) and amputee rates in persons with and without diabetes in Italy. All patients with LEAs in the period 2001–2010 were identified analyzing the National Hospital Discharge Record database. For each year, amputee and hospitalization rates for LEAs were calculated either for persons with diabetes or without. Time trend for major and minor amputations were analysed. From 2001 to 2010 a mean annual number of 11,639 individuals underwent a lower extremity amputation: 58.6% had diabetes accounting for 60.7% of total hospitalizations. In 2010, the crude amputee rate for LEAs was 20.4 per 100,000 inhabitants: 247.2 for 100.000 persons with diabetes, and 8.6 for those without diabetes. Having diabetes was associated to an increased risk of amputation (Poisson estimated RR 10.9, 95%CI 9.4–12.8). Over the whole period, a progressive reduction of amputee rates was observed for major amputations either among persons with diabetes (−30.7%) or without diabetes (−12.5%), while the rates of minor amputations increased progressively (+22.4%) among people without diabetes and were nearly stable in people with diabetes (−4.6%). A greater number of minor amputations were performed among persons with than without diabetes: in 2010, the minor-to-major ratio among persons with diabetes (2.5) was more than twice than in those without diabetes (1.0). The nationwide analyses confirm a progressive reduction of hospitalization and amputee rates for major LEAs, suggesting an earlier and more diffuse approach aimed at limb salvage.

Context: Dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP-4) inhibitors improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. The underlying mechanisms (incretin effect, β-cell function, endogenous glucose production) are not well known. Objective: The aim of the study was to examine mechanisms of the antihyperglycemic effect of DPP-4 inhibitors. Design, Setting, and Patients: We administered a mixed meal with glucose tracers ([6,6-²H₂]-glucose infused, [1-²H]-glucose ingested), and on a separate day, a glucose infusion matched the glucose responses to the meal (isoglycemic test) in 50 type 2 diabetes patients (hemoglobin A_1c = 7.4 ± 0.8%) and seven controls; 47 diabetic completers were restudied after 6 wk. Glucose fluxes were calculated, and β-cell function was assessed by mathematical modeling. The incretin effect was calculated as the ratio of oral to iv insulin secretion. Intervention: We conducted a 6-wk, double-blind, randomized treatment with sitagliptin (100 mg/d; n = 25) or placebo (n = 22). Results: Relative to placebo, meal-induced changes in fasting glucose and glucose area under the curve (AUC) were greater with sitagliptin, in parallel with a lower appearance of oral glucose [difference (post-pre) AUC = −353 ± 915 vs. +146 ± 601 μmol · kg⁻¹ · 5 h] and greater suppression of endogenous glucose production. Insulin sensitivity improved 10%, whereas total insulin secretion was unchanged. During the meal, β-cell glucose sensitivity improved (+19[29] vs. 5[21] pmol · min⁻¹ · m⁻² · mm⁻¹; median [interquartile range]) and glucagon AUC decreased (19.6 ± 7.5 to 17.3 ± 7.1 ng · ml⁻¹ · 5 h), whereas intact glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 AUC increased with sitagliptin vs. placebo. The incretin effect was unchanged because sitagliptin increased β-cell glucose sensitivity also during the isoglycemic test. Conclusions: Chronic sitagliptin treatment improves glycemic control by lowering the appearance of oral glucose, postprandial endogenous glucose release, and glucagon response, and by improving insulin sensitivity and β-cell glucose sensing in response to both oral and iv glucose.