M Bergman1, A Chetrit2, J Roth3, R Dankner2,3,4. 1. NYU Diabetes Prevention Program, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA. 2. Unit for Cardiovascular Epidemiology, The Gertner Institute for Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, Tel Hashomer, Israel. 3. The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, USA. 4. Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Abstract
AIMS: The relationship between 1- and 2-h glucose levels following an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and long-term mortality was evaluated. METHODS: Over a 33-year period, 2138 individuals were followed for all-cause mortality. Fasting and post-OGTT glucose parameters categorized the cohort according to baseline glycaemic status. Four categories were established according to 1- and 2-h glucose levels (in mmol/l): group A = 1 h ≤ 8.8 and 2 h < 7.8; group B = 1 h > 8.6 and 2 h < 7.8; group C = 1 h ≤ 8.6 and 2 h = 7.8-11.1 (impaired glucose tolerance); group D = 1 h > 8.6 and 2 h = 7.8-11.1 (impaired glucose tolerance). Individuals with diabetes at baseline were excluded from the cohort. RESULTS: By August 2013, 51% of the study cohort had died. The worst prognosis occurred in group D (73.8% mortality), followed by groups C (67.5%), B and A (57.9% and 41.6%, respectively). When the 2-h glucose value is 'normal' (< 7.8 mmol/l), the 1-h glucose value > 8.6 mmol/l is an important predictor of mortality (28% increased risk) compared with group A, controlling for sex, age, smoking, BMI, systolic and diastolic blood pressures. A gradual increased hazard for mortality was seen by study group (hazard ratio = 1.28, 1.60 and 1.76, for groups B, C and D, respectively; group A = reference). CONCLUSIONS: A 1-h glucose value > 8.6 mmol/l predicts mortality even when the 2-h level is < 7.8 mmol/l. However, when the 2-h level is in the impaired glucose tolerance range, the hazard for mortality rises significantly independent of the 1-h value. Individuals at risk for developing diabetes could be identified earlier using the 1-h threshold value of 8.6 mmol/l, which could avert progression to diabetes and increased mortality..
AIMS: The relationship between 1- and 2-h glucose levels following an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and long-term mortality was evaluated. METHODS: Over a 33-year period, 2138 individuals were followed for all-cause mortality. Fasting and post-OGTT glucose parameters categorized the cohort according to baseline glycaemic status. Four categories were established according to 1- and 2-h glucose levels (in mmol/l): group A = 1 h ≤ 8.8 and 2 h < 7.8; group B = 1 h > 8.6 and 2 h < 7.8; group C = 1 h ≤ 8.6 and 2 h = 7.8-11.1 (impaired glucose tolerance); group D = 1 h > 8.6 and 2 h = 7.8-11.1 (impaired glucose tolerance). Individuals with diabetes at baseline were excluded from the cohort. RESULTS: By August 2013, 51% of the study cohort had died. The worst prognosis occurred in group D (73.8% mortality), followed by groups C (67.5%), B and A (57.9% and 41.6%, respectively). When the 2-h glucose value is 'normal' (< 7.8 mmol/l), the 1-h glucose value > 8.6 mmol/l is an important predictor of mortality (28% increased risk) compared with group A, controlling for sex, age, smoking, BMI, systolic and diastolic blood pressures. A gradual increased hazard for mortality was seen by study group (hazard ratio = 1.28, 1.60 and 1.76, for groups B, C and D, respectively; group A = reference). CONCLUSIONS: A 1-h glucose value > 8.6 mmol/l predicts mortality even when the 2-h level is < 7.8 mmol/l. However, when the 2-h level is in the impaired glucose tolerance range, the hazard for mortality rises significantly independent of the 1-h value. Individuals at risk for developing diabetes could be identified earlier using the 1-h threshold value of 8.6 mmol/l, which could avert progression to diabetes and increased mortality..
Authors: Michael Bergman; Ram Jagannathan; Martin Buysschaert; Jose Luis Medina; Mary Ann Sevick; Karin Katz; Brenda Dorcely; Jesse Roth; Angela Chetrit; Rachel Dankner Journal: Endocrine Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Ethan Paddock; Maximilian G Hohenadel; Paolo Piaggi; Pavithra Vijayakumar; Robert L Hanson; William C Knowler; Jonathan Krakoff; Douglas C Chang Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2017-06-29 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Angela Sciacqua; Maria Perticone; Sofia Miceli; Angelina Pinto; Velia Cassano; Elena Succurro; Francesco Andreozzi; Marta Letizia Hribal; Giorgio Sesti; Francesco Perticone Journal: Endocrine Date: 2019-02-21 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: M L Marcovecchio; M Bagordo; E Marisi; T de Giorgis; V Chiavaroli; F Chiarelli; A Mohn Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Adam Hulman; Dorte Vistisen; Charlotte Glümer; Michael Bergman; Daniel R Witte; Kristine Færch Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2017-10-06 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Vasudha Ahuja; Pasi Aronen; T A Pramodkumar; Helen Looker; Angela Chetrit; Aini H Bloigu; Auni Juutilainen; Cristina Bianchi; Lucia La Sala; Ranjit Mohan Anjana; Rajendra Pradeepa; Ulagamadesan Venkatesan; Sarvanan Jebarani; Viswanathan Baskar; Teresa Vanessa Fiorentino; Patrick Timpel; Ralph A DeFronzo; Antonio Ceriello; Stefano Del Prato; Muhammad Abdul-Ghani; Sirkka Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi; Rachel Dankner; Peter H Bennett; William C Knowler; Peter Schwarz; Giorgio Sesti; Rie Oka; Viswanathan Mohan; Leif Groop; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Samuli Ripatti; Michael Bergman; Tiinamaija Tuomi Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2021-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Yvette Amshoff; Gertraud Maskarinec; Yurii B Shvetsov; Phyllis H Raquinio; Andrew Grandinetti; Veronica W Setiawan; Christopher A Haiman; Loïc Le Marchand Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-02-25 Impact factor: 7.316