Department of Medicine, University College London, London, U.K.
Diabetes Care. 2016 Aug;39(8):1468-71. doi: 10.2337/dc15-2113.
The category of "prediabetes" defined by the American Diabetes Association comprises a range of intermediate hyperglycemia based on fasting or 2-h postload glucose or on HbA1c Over the recent past, the "cut points" identifying this stage have changed, i.e., a lower fasting glucose level is used. On one hand, it can be argued that the change to a lower cut point identifies a group of individuals still at higher risk and provides heightened awareness for a condition associated with higher risk for cardiovascular disease. In addition, identification of individuals at this stage may represent a chance of earlier intervention in the disease. However, the argument against this definition of "prediabetes" is that it disguises the differences in the three subcategories and creates problems in interpreting observations on interventions and outcomes. In addition, it can be argued that the enormous numbers of people identified with the criteria far exceeds the capacity of health care systems to respond through individual care, particularly without evidence that interventions benefit any category other than impaired glucose tolerance. Thus, there does not appear to be consensus on the definition using the cut points identified. Controversy also remains as to whether there are glycemic metrics beyond HbA1c that can be used in addition to HbA1c to help assess risk of an individual developing diabetes complications. Given the current controversy, a Point-Counterpoint debate on this issue is provided herein. In the point narrative below, Dr. Yudkin provides his argument that there are significant problems with this label. In the counterpoint narrative that follows Dr. Yudkin's contribution, Dr. Cefalu argues that the cut points are appropriate and do provide useful and important information in trying to reduce the future burden of diabetes.-William T. CefaluEditor in Chief, Diabetes Care.
美国糖尿病协会定义的“糖尿病前期”类别包括基于空腹或餐后 2 小时血糖或糖化血红蛋白的一系列中间高血糖。在最近一段时间,确定这一阶段的“切点”发生了变化,即使用更低的空腹血糖水平。一方面,可以认为将切点改为更低的水平可以确定一组处于更高风险的个体,并提高对与心血管疾病风险更高相关的疾病的认识。此外,识别处于这一阶段的个体可能代表着在疾病早期进行干预的机会。然而,反对这种“糖尿病前期”定义的观点是,它掩盖了三个亚类之间的差异,并在解释干预措施和结果的观察结果时造成问题。此外,可以认为,根据这些标准确定的患有该疾病的人数之多,远远超出了医疗保健系统通过个体护理来应对的能力,尤其是没有证据表明干预措施对任何除糖耐量受损以外的类别都有益。因此,对于使用确定的切点的定义似乎没有达成共识。此外,是否有除糖化血红蛋白之外的血糖指标可以与糖化血红蛋白一起用于帮助评估个体发生糖尿病并发症的风险,这仍然存在争议。鉴于目前的争议,本文就这一问题提供了一个观点交锋辩论。在下面的观点叙述中,Yudkin 博士提出了他的观点,认为这个标签存在重大问题。在紧随 Yudkin 博士观点之后的反方观点中,Cefalu 博士认为这些切点是合适的,并且在试图减轻未来糖尿病负担方面提供了有用和重要的信息。-William T. Cefalu,糖尿病护理主编。