Shaw J E, Zimmet P Z, de Courten M, Dowse G K, Chitson P, Gareeboo H, Hemraj F, Fareed D, Tuomilehto J, Alberti K G
International Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Diabetes Care. 1999 Mar;22(3):399-402. doi: 10.2337/diacare.22.3.399.
To determine if impaired fasting glucose (IFG; fasting plasma glucose level 6.1-6.9 mmol/l) can predict future type 2 diabetes as accurately as does impaired glucose tolerance (IGT; 2-h plasma glucose level 7.8-11.0 mmol/l).
A longitudinal population-based study was performed with surveys in 1987 and 1992 on the island of Mauritius, assessing diabetes status by the oral glucose tolerance test. A total of 3,717 subjects took part in both surveys. Of these subjects, 3,229 were not diabetic in 1987 and formed the basis of this study.
At baseline, there were 607 subjects with IGT and 266 subjects with IFG. There were 297 subjects who developed diabetes by 1992. For predicting progression to type 2 diabetes, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive values were 26, 94, and 29% for IFG and 50, 84, and 24% for IGT, respectively. Only 26% of subjects that progressed to type 2 diabetes were predicted by their IFG values, but a further 35% could be identified by also considering IGT. The sensitivities were 24% for IFG and 37% for IGT in men and 26% for IFG and 66% for IGT in women, respectively.
These data demonstrate the higher sensitivity of IGT over IFG for predicting progression to type 2 diabetes. Screening by the criteria for IFG alone would identify fewer people who subsequently progress to type 2 diabetes than would the oral glucose tolerance test.
确定空腹血糖受损(IFG;空腹血糖水平为6.1 - 6.9 mmol/l)预测未来2型糖尿病的准确性是否与糖耐量受损(IGT;2小时血糖水平为7.8 - 11.0 mmol/l)相同。
在毛里求斯岛进行了一项基于人群的纵向研究,于1987年和1992年进行调查,通过口服葡萄糖耐量试验评估糖尿病状态。共有3717名受试者参与了这两项调查。在这些受试者中,1987年有3229人未患糖尿病,构成了本研究的基础。
基线时,有607名受试者患有IGT,266名受试者患有IFG。到1992年有297名受试者患糖尿病。对于预测进展为2型糖尿病,IFG的敏感性、特异性和阳性预测值分别为26%、94%和29%,IGT分别为50%、84%和24%。进展为2型糖尿病的受试者中只有26%可通过其IFG值预测,但通过同时考虑IGT还可识别出另外35%。男性中IFG的敏感性为24%,IGT为37%;女性中IFG的敏感性为26%,IGT为66%。
这些数据表明IGT在预测进展为2型糖尿病方面比IFG具有更高的敏感性。仅依据IFG标准进行筛查,与口服葡萄糖耐量试验相比,将识别出更少随后进展为2型糖尿病的人。