Literature DB >> 32459124

Estimation of Hemoglobin A1c from Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data in Individuals with Type 1 Diabetes: Is Time In Range All We Need?

Chiara Fabris1, Lutz Heinemann2, Roy Beck3, Claudio Cobelli4, Boris Kovatchev1.   

Abstract

Objective: To bridge the gap between laboratory-measured hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-derived time in target range (TIR), introducing TIR-driven estimated A1c (eA1c).
Methods: Data from Protocol 1 (training data set) and Protocol 3 (testing data set) of the International Diabetes Closed-Loop Trial were used. Training data included 3 months of CGM recordings from 125 individuals with type 1 diabetes, and HbA1c at 3 months; testing data included 9 months of CGM recordings from 168 individuals, and HbA1c at 3, 6, and 9 months. Hemoglobin glycation was modeled by a first-order differential equation driven by TIR. Three model parameters were estimated in the training data set and fixed thereafter. A fourth parameter was estimated in the testing data set, to individualize the model by calibration with month 3 HbA1c. The accuracy of eA1c was assessed on months 6 and 9 HbA1c.
Results: eA1c was tracked for each individual in the testing data set for 6 months after calibration. Mean absolute differences between HbA1c and eA1c 3- and 6-month postcalibration were 0.25% and 0.24%; Pearson's correlation coefficients were 0.93 and 0.93; percentages of eA1c within 10% from reference HbA1c were 97.6% and 96.3%, respectively. Conclusions: HbA1c and TIR are reflections of the same underlying process of glycemic fluctuation. Using a model individualized with one HbA1c measurement, TIR provides an accurate approximation of HbA1c for at least 6 months, reflecting blood glucose fluctuations and nonglycemic biological factors. Thus, eA1c is an intermediate metric that mathematically adjusts a CGM-based assessment of glycemic control to individual glycation rates.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Continuous glucose monitoring; Estimated A1c; Hemoglobin A1c; Hemoglobin clearance; Hemoglobin glycation; International Diabetes Closed-Loop Trial; Time in range

Year:  2020        PMID: 32459124      PMCID: PMC7336887          DOI: 10.1089/dia.2020.0236

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther        ISSN: 1520-9156            Impact factor:   6.118


  42 in total

1.  The hemoglobin glycation index is not an independent predictor of the risk of microvascular complications in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial.

Authors:  John M Lachin; Saul Genuth; David M Nathan; Brandy N Rutledge
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2007-03-14       Impact factor: 9.461

2.  Glucose Management Indicator (GMI): Insights and Validation Using Guardian 3 and Navigator 2 Sensor Data.

Authors:  Lalantha Leelarathna; Roy W Beck; Richard M Bergenstal; Hood Thabit; Roman Hovorka
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Mechanistic modeling of hemoglobin glycation and red blood cell kinetics enables personalized diabetes monitoring.

Authors:  Roy Malka; David M Nathan; John M Higgins
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 17.956

Review 4.  Effects of hemoglobin variants and chemically modified derivatives on assays for glycohemoglobin.

Authors:  L Bry; P C Chen; D B Sacks
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 8.327

5.  High and low hemoglobin glycation phenotypes in type 1 diabetes: a challenge for interpretation of glycemic control.

Authors:  James M Hempe; Ricardo Gomez; Robert J McCarter; Stuart A Chalew
Journal:  J Diabetes Complications       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.852

6.  Differences in A1C by race and ethnicity among patients with impaired glucose tolerance in the Diabetes Prevention Program.

Authors:  William H Herman; Yong Ma; Gabriel Uwaifo; Steven Haffner; Steven E Kahn; Edward S Horton; John M Lachin; Maria G Montez; Tina Brenneman; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2007-05-29       Impact factor: 19.112

7.  Relationship of A1C to glucose concentrations in children with type 1 diabetes: assessments by high-frequency glucose determinations by sensors.

Authors:  Darrell M Wilson
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2007-12-04       Impact factor: 19.112

8.  Biological variation in HbA1c predicts risk of retinopathy and nephropathy in type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Robert J McCarter; James M Hempe; Ricardo Gomez; Stuart A Chalew
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 19.112

9.  Translating the A1C assay into estimated average glucose values.

Authors:  David M Nathan; Judith Kuenen; Rikke Borg; Hui Zheng; David Schoenfeld; Robert J Heine
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2008-06-07       Impact factor: 19.112

10.  Glucose Management Indicator (GMI): A New Term for Estimating A1C From Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

Authors:  Richard M Bergenstal; Roy W Beck; Kelly L Close; George Grunberger; David B Sacks; Aaron Kowalski; Adam S Brown; Lutz Heinemann; Grazia Aleppo; Donna B Ryan; Tonya D Riddlesworth; William T Cefalu
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  8 in total

1.  Teamwork, Targets, Technology, and Tight Control in Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes: the Pilot 4T Study.

Authors:  Priya Prahalad; Victoria Y Ding; Dessi P Zaharieva; Ananta Addala; Ramesh Johari; David Scheinker; Manisha Desai; Korey Hood; David M Maahs
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 5.958

2.  Diabetes Technology Meeting 2021.

Authors:  Nicole Y Xu; Kevin T Nguyen; Ashley Y DuBord; John Pickup; Jennifer L Sherr; Hazhir Teymourian; Eda Cengiz; Barry H Ginsberg; Claudio Cobelli; David Ahn; Riccardo Bellazzi; B Wayne Bequette; Laura Gandrud Pickett; Linda Parks; Elias K Spanakis; Umesh Masharani; Halis K Akturk; John S Melish; Sarah Kim; Gu Eon Kang; David C Klonoff
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2022-05-02

3.  Improvement in Mean CGM Glucose in Young People with Type 1 Diabetes During 1 Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Tara Kaushal; Liane Tinsley; Lisa K Volkening; Louise Ambler-Osborn; Lori Laffel
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2021-10-13       Impact factor: 6.118

4.  Relationship of continuous glucose monitoring-related metrics with HbA1c and residual β-cell function in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Naru Babaya; Shinsuke Noso; Yoshihisa Hiromine; Yasunori Taketomo; Fumimaru Niwano; Sawa Yoshida; Sara Yasutake; Yumiko Kawabata; Hiroshi Ikegami
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-17       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Beyond A1C-Standardization of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Reporting: Why It Is Needed and How It Continues to Evolve.

Authors:  Roy W Beck; Richard M Bergenstal
Journal:  Diabetes Spectr       Date:  2021-05-25

6.  Improvement in Glucose Regulation Using a Digital Tracker and Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Healthy Adults and Those with Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Ashkan Dehghani Zahedani; Solmaz Shariat Torbaghan; Salar Rahili; Kirill Karlin; Darrin Scilley; Riya Thakkar; Maziyar Saberi; Noosheen Hashemi; Dalia Perelman; Nima Aghaeepour; Tracey McLaughlin; Michael P Snyder
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 2.945

7.  Diabetes Technology Meeting 2020.

Authors:  Trisha Shang; Jennifer Y Zhang; B Wayne Bequette; Jennifer K Raymond; Gerard Coté; Jennifer L Sherr; Jessica Castle; John Pickup; Yarmela Pavlovic; Juan Espinoza; Laurel H Messer; Tim Heise; Carlos E Mendez; Sarah Kim; Barry H Ginsberg; Umesh Masharani; Rodolfo J Galindo; David C Klonoff
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2021-07

8.  Improved individual and population-level HbA1c estimation using CGM data and patient characteristics.

Authors:  Joshua Grossman; Andrew Ward; Jamie L Crandell; Priya Prahalad; David M Maahs; David Scheinker
Journal:  J Diabetes Complications       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 3.219

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.