Dataset Information

Prevalence and phenotype of diabetes and prediabetes using fasting glucose vs HbA1c in a Caribbean population.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Both fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA1c are recommended for the diagnosis of diabetes and prediabetes by the American Diabetes Association (ADA), and for diabetes by the World Health Organization. The ADA guidance is influential on clinical practice in many developing countries, including in the Caribbean and Latin America. We aimed to compare the prevalence and characteristics of individuals identified as having diabetes and prediabetes by FPG and HbA1c in a predominantly African ancestry Caribbean population.

Methods

A representative population-based sample of 1234 adults (≥25 years of age) resident in Barbados was recruited. Standard methods with appropriate quality control were used to collect data on height, weight, blood pressure, fasting lipids and history of diagnosed diabetes, and to measure fasting glucose and HbA1c. Those with previously diagnosed diabetes (n = 192) were excluded from the analyses. Diabetes was defined as: FPG ≥7.0 mmol/L or HbA1c ≥6.5%; prediabetes as: FPG ≥5.6 to <7mmol/L or HbA1c ≥5.7 to <6.5%.

Results

Complete data were available on 939 participants without previously diagnosed diabetes. The prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes was higher, but not significantly so, by HbA1c (4.9%, 95% CI 3.5, 6.8) vs FPG (3.5%, 2.4, 5.1). Overall 79 individuals had diabetes by either measure, but only 21 on both. The prevalence of prediabetes was higher by HbA1c compared to FPG: 41.7% (37.9, 45.6) vs 15.0% (12.8, 17.5). Overall 558 individuals had prediabetes by either measure, but only 107 on both. HbA1c, but not FPG, was significantly higher in women than men; and FPG, but not HbA1c, was significantly associated with raised triglycerides and low HDL cholesterol.

Conclusion

The agreement between FPG and HbA1c defined hyperglycaemia is poor. In addition, there are some differences in the phenotype of those identified, and HbA1c gives a much higher prevalence of prediabetes. The routine use of HbA1c for screening and diagnosis in this population would have major implications for clinical and public health policies and resources. Given the lack of robust evidence, particularly for prediabetes, on whether intervention in the individuals identified would improve outcomes, this approach to screening and diagnosis cannot be currently recommended for this population.

SUBMITTER: Unwin N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5604098 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: The incidences of diabetes and diabetic retinopathy (DR) in Thai high-risk individuals with prediabetes have not been identified. This study compared diabetes and DR incidences among people at risk with different glycemic levels, using fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c). Materials and methods: A historical cohort study estimating risk of type 2 diabetes and DR was conducted among outpatients, using FPG and HbA1c measurements at recruitment and monitored for ≥5 years. High-risk participants (defined as having metabolic syndrome or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease) were categorized by glycemic level into 4 groups: 1) impaired fasting glucose (IFG)-/HbA1c- (FPG <110 mg/dl; HbA1c < 6.0%); 2) IFG+/HbA1c- (FPG 110-125 mg/dl; HbA1c < 6.0%); 3) IFG-/HbA1c+ (FPG <110 mg/dl; HbA1c 6.0%-6.4%); and 4) IFG+/HbA1c+ (FPG 110-125 mg/dl; HbA1c 6.0%-6.4%). The incidences of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and DR were obtained and estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Cox regression models explored hazard ratios (HRs). Results: We recruited 8,977 people at risk (metabolic syndrome, 89.9%; atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, 16.9%). The baseline cohort consisted of 1) IFG-/HbA1c- (n = 4,221; 47.0%); 2) IFG+/HbA1c- (n = 1,274; 14.2%); 3) IFG-/HbA1c+ (n = 2,151; 24.0%); and 4) IFG+/HbA1c+ (n = 1,331; 14.8%). Their 5-year T2DM incidences were 16.0%, 26.4%, 30.8%, and 48.5% (p < 0.001). The median DR follow-up was 7.8 years (interquartile range, 7.0-8.4 years). The DR incidences were 0.50, 0.63, 1.44, and 2.68/1,000 person-years (p < 0.001) for IFG-/HbA1c-, IFG+/HbA1c-, IFG-/HbA1c+, and IFG+/HbA1c+, respectively. Compared with IFG-/HbA1c-, the multivariable-adjusted HRs (95% CI) for incident diabetes were 1.94 (1.34-2.80), 2.45 (1.83-3.29), and 4.56 (3.39-6.15) for IFG+/HbA1c-, IFG-/HbA1c+, and IFG+/HbA1c+, respectively. As for incident DR, the corresponding HRs were 0.67 (0.08-5.76), 4.74 (1.69-13.31), and 5.46 (1.82-16.39), respectively. Conclusion: The 5-year incidence of T2DM in Thai high-risk participants with prediabetes was very high. The incidences of diabetes and DR significantly increased with higher degrees of dysglycemia. High-risk people with FPG 110-125 mg/dl and HbA1c 6.0%-6.4% were more likely to develop T2DM and DR. Such individuals should receive priority lifestyle and pharmacological management.

Project description:ObjectivesWe conducted a Pakistan-wide community-based survey on the prevalence of type 2 diabetes using glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) as the screening test. The aim was to estimate diabetes prevalence across different demographic groups as well as all regions of Pakistan.Design, settings and participantsMultistaged stratified cluster sampling was used for the representative selection of people aged ?20 years, residing in 378 sampled clusters of 16 randomly selected districts, in this cross-sectional study. Eligible participants had blood drawn for HbA1c analyses at field clinics near to their homes. The oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was conducted on a subsample of the participants. Overall and stratified prevalence of type 2 diabetes and its association with risk factors were estimated using logistic regression models.Main outcome measuresPrevalence of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.ResultsOf 18?856 eligible participants the prevalence of prediabetes was 10.91% (95% CI 10.46 to 11.36, n=2057) and type 2 diabetes was 16.98% (95% CI 16.44 to 17.51, n=3201). Overall, the mean HbA1c level was 5.62% (SD 1.96), and among newly diagnosed was 8.56% (SD 2.08). The prevalence was highest in age 51-60 years (26.03%, p<0.001), no formal education (17.66%, p<0.001), class III obese (35.09%, p<0.001), family history (31.29%, p<0.001) and female (17.80%, p=0.009). On multivariate analysis, there was a significant association between type 2 diabetes and older age, increase in body mass index and central obesity, positive family history, and having hypertension and an inverse relation with education as a categorical variable. On a subsample (n=1027), summary statistics for diagnosis of diabetes on HbA1c showed a sensitivity of 84.7%, specificity of 87.2% and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.86, compared with OGTT.ConclusionsThe prevalence of type 2 diabetes and prediabetes is much higher than previously thought in Pakistan. Comprehensive strategies need to be developed to incorporate screening, prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes at a community level.