Liu Hongxia, Yang Daizhi, Deng Hongrong, Xu Wen, Lv Jing, Zhou Yongwen, Luo Sihui, Zheng Xueying, Liang Hua, Yao Bin, Qiu Liling, Wang Funeng, Liu Fang, Yan Jinhua, Weng Jianping
Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Diabetology, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, the First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Division of Life Sciences and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China.
Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2020 Jun 8;11:2042018820931664. doi: 10.1177/2042018820931664. eCollection 2020.
Our aim was to investigate the impact of glycemic variability (GV) on the relationship between glucose management indicator (GMI) and laboratory glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c).
Adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) were enrolled from five hospitals in China. All subjects wore the iPro2 system for 14 days before HbA1c was measured at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. Data derived from iPro2 sensor was used to calculate GMI and GV parameters [standard deviation (SD), glucose coefficient of variation (CV), and mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE)]. Differences between GMI and laboratory HbA1c were assessed by the absolute value of the hemoglobin glycation index (HGI).
A total of 91 sensor data and corresponding laboratory HbA1c, as well as demographic and clinical characteristics were analyzed. GMI and HbA1c were 7.20 ± 0.67% and 7.52 ± 0.73%, respectively. The percentage of subjects with absolute HGI 0 to lower than 0.1% was 21%. GMI was significantly associated with laboratory HbA1c after basic adjustment (standardized β = 0.83, < 0.001). Further adjustment for SD or MAGE reduced the standardized β for laboratory HbA1c from 0.83 to 0.71 and 0.73, respectively (both < 0.001). In contrast, the β remained relatively constant when further adjusting for CV. Spearman correlation analysis showed that GMI and laboratory HbA1c were correlated for each quartile of SD and MAGE (all < 0.05), with the corresponding correlation coefficients decreased across ascending quartiles.
This study validated the GMI formula using the iPro2 sensor in adult patients with T1D. GV influenced the relationship between GMI and laboratory HbA1c.
我们的目的是研究血糖变异性(GV)对血糖管理指标(GMI)与实验室糖化血红蛋白A1c(HbA1c)之间关系的影响。
从中国五家医院招募成年1型糖尿病(T1D)患者。所有受试者在基线、3个月和6个月测量HbA1c之前佩戴iPro2系统14天。来自iPro2传感器的数据用于计算GMI和GV参数[标准差(SD)、血糖变异系数(CV)和血糖波动幅度平均值(MAGE)]。通过糖化血红蛋白指数(HGI)的绝对值评估GMI与实验室HbA1c之间的差异。
共分析了91份传感器数据及相应的实验室HbA1c,以及人口统计学和临床特征。GMI和HbA1c分别为7.20±0.67%和7.52±0.73%。绝对HGI为0至低于0.1%的受试者比例为21%。基本调整后,GMI与实验室HbA1c显著相关(标准化β=0.83,<0.001)。进一步调整SD或MAGE后,实验室HbA1c的标准化β分别从0.83降至0.71和0.73(均<0.001)。相比之下,进一步调整CV时,β保持相对稳定。Spearman相关性分析表明,对于SD和MAGE的每个四分位数,GMI与实验室HbA1c均相关(均<0.05),且相应的相关系数随四分位数升高而降低。
本研究使用iPro2传感器验证了成年T1D患者的GMI公式。GV影响GMI与实验室HbA1c之间的关系。