↓ Skip to main content

Different Effects of Intraperitoneal and Subcutaneous Insulin Administration on the GH-IGF-1 Axis in Type 1 Diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in JCEM, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Different Effects of Intraperitoneal and Subcutaneous Insulin Administration on the GH-IGF-1 Axis in Type 1 Diabetes
Published in
JCEM, April 2016
DOI 10.1210/jc.2016-1473
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter R van Dijk, Susan J J Logtenberg, Simona I Chisalita, Christina A Hedman, Klaas H Groenier, Reinold O B Gans, Nanne Kleefstra, Hans J Arnqvist, Henk J G Bilo

Abstract

In type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), low levels of insulin-like growth factor -1 (IGF-1) and IGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) and high levels of growth hormone (GH) and IGFBP-1 are present, probably due to portal vein insulinopenia. To test the hypothesis that continuous intraperitoneal insulin infusion (CIPII) has a more pronounced effect than subcutaneous (SC) insulin therapy on regulation of the GH-IGF-1 axis. Prospective, observational case-control study. Measurements were performed twice at a 26-week interval. Two secondary care hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 184 patients, age and gender matched, of which 39 used CIPII and 145 SC insulin therapy for the past 4 years. Primary endpoint included differences in IGF-1. Secondary outcomes were differences in GH, IGFBP-1 and IGFBP-3. IGF-1 was higher with CIPII as compared to SC insulin therapy: 124 μg/l (95% CI 111, 138) versus 108 μg/l (95% CI 102, 115) (p=0.035). Additionally, IGFBP-3 concentrations were higher and IGFBP-1 and GH concentrations were lower with CIPII as compared to SC insulin therapy: 3.78 mg/l (95% CI 3.49, 4.10) versus 3.31 mg/l (95% CI 3.17, 3.47) for IGFBP-3, 50.9 μg/l (95% CI 37.9, 68.2) versus 102.6 μg/l (95% CI 87.8, 119.8) for IGFBP-1 and 0.68 μg/l (95% CI 0.44, 1.06) versus 1.21 μg/l (95% CI 0.95, 1.54) for GH, respectively. In multivariate analysis, IGF-1 had no significant association with HbA1c. The GH-IGF-1 axis may be affected by the route of insulin administration with CIPII counteracting dysregulation of the GH-IGF1 axis present during SC insulin therapy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 15%
Professor 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 10 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 8%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 13 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2024.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from JCEM
#6,504
of 15,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,117
of 312,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JCEM
#53
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,431 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.