OBJECTIVE: To compare test performance of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) for detecting diabetes mellitus/pre-diabetes for adolescents versus adults in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Individuals were defined as having diabetes mellitus (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] ≥ 126 mg/dL; 2-hour plasma glucose (2-hr PG) ≥ 200 mg/dL) or pre-diabetes (100 ≤ FPG < 126 mg/dL; 140 ≤ 2-hr PG < 200 mg/dL. HbA1c test performance was evaluated with receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analyses. RESULTS: Few adolescents had undiagnosed diabetes mellitus (n = 4). When assessing FPG to detect diabetes, an HbA1c of 6.5% had sensitivity rates of 75.0% (30.1% to 95.4%) and 53.8% (47.4% to 60.0%) and specificity rates of 99.9% (99.5% to 100.0%) and 99.5% (99.3% to 99.6%) for adolescents and adults, respectively. Additionally, when assessing FPG to detect diabetes mellitus, an HbA1c of 5.7% had sensitivity rates of 5.0% (2.6% to 9.2%) and 23.1% (21.3% to 25.0%) and specificity rates of 98.3% (97.2% to 98.9%) and 91.1% (90.3% to 91.9%) for adolescents and adults, respectively. ROC analyses suggested that HbA1c is a poorer predictor of diabetes mellitus (area under the curve, 0.88 versus 0.93) and pre-diabetes (FPG area under the curve 0.61 versus 0.74) for adolescents compared with adults. Performance was poor regardless of whether FPG or 2-hr PG measurements were used. CONCLUSIONS: Use of HbA1c for diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and pre-diabetes in adolescents may be premature, until information from more definitive studies is available.
OBJECTIVE: To compare test performance of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) for detecting diabetes mellitus/pre-diabetes for adolescents versus adults in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Individuals were defined as having diabetes mellitus (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] ≥ 126 mg/dL; 2-hour plasma glucose (2-hr PG) ≥ 200 mg/dL) or pre-diabetes (100 ≤ FPG < 126 mg/dL; 140 ≤ 2-hr PG < 200 mg/dL. HbA1c test performance was evaluated with receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analyses. RESULTS: Few adolescents had undiagnosed diabetes mellitus (n = 4). When assessing FPG to detect diabetes, an HbA1c of 6.5% had sensitivity rates of 75.0% (30.1% to 95.4%) and 53.8% (47.4% to 60.0%) and specificity rates of 99.9% (99.5% to 100.0%) and 99.5% (99.3% to 99.6%) for adolescents and adults, respectively. Additionally, when assessing FPG to detect diabetes mellitus, an HbA1c of 5.7% had sensitivity rates of 5.0% (2.6% to 9.2%) and 23.1% (21.3% to 25.0%) and specificity rates of 98.3% (97.2% to 98.9%) and 91.1% (90.3% to 91.9%) for adolescents and adults, respectively. ROC analyses suggested that HbA1c is a poorer predictor of diabetes mellitus (area under the curve, 0.88 versus 0.93) and pre-diabetes (FPG area under the curve 0.61 versus 0.74) for adolescents compared with adults. Performance was poor regardless of whether FPG or 2-hr PG measurements were used. CONCLUSIONS: Use of HbA1c for diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and pre-diabetes in adolescents may be premature, until information from more definitive studies is available.
Authors: M M Engelgau; T J Thompson; W H Herman; J P Boyle; R E Aubert; S J Kenny; A Badran; E S Sous; M A Ali Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: J M Mooy; P A Grootenhuis; H de Vries; P J Kostense; C Popp-Snijders; L M Bouter; R J Heine Journal: Diabetologia Date: 1996-03 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Tamara S Hannon; Tamara M Dugan; Chandan K Saha; Steven J McKee; Stephen M Downs; Aaron E Carroll Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Christine L Chan; Kim McFann; Lindsey Newnes; Kristen J Nadeau; Philip S Zeitler; Megan Kelsey Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: Arthur M Lee; Cyrelle R Fermin; Stephanie L Filipp; Matthew J Gurka; Mark D DeBoer Journal: Acta Diabetol Date: 2017-01-09 Impact factor: 4.280
Authors: Christine L Chan; Emma Hope; Jessica Thurston; Timothy Vigers; Laura Pyle; Philip S Zeitler; Kristen J Nadeau Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-04-19 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Joyce M Lee; Ashley Eason; Courtney Nelson; Nayla G Kazzi; Anne E Cowan; Beth A Tarini Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2013-08-20 Impact factor: 5.012