Julia C Prentice1,2, David C Mohr3,4, Libin Zhang3, Donglin Li3, Aaron Legler3, Richard E Nelson5,6, Paul R Conlin3,7. 1. VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA jprentic@bu.edu. 2. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA. 3. VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA. 4. Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA. 5. VA Salt Lake City Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, UT. 6. University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 7. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Short- and long-term glycemic variability are risk factors for diabetes complications. However, there are no validated A1C target ranges or measures of A1C stability in older adults. We evaluated the association of a patient-specific A1C variability measure, A1C time in range (A1C TIR), on major adverse outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study using administrative data from the Department of Veterans Affairs and Medicare from 2004 to 2016. Patients were ≥65 years old, had diabetes, and had at least four A1C tests during a 3-year baseline period. A1C TIR was the percentage of days during the baseline in which A1C was in an individualized target range (6.0-7.0% up to 8.0-9.0%) on the basis of clinical characteristics and predicted life expectancy. Increasing A1C TIR was divided into categories of 20% increments and linked to mortality and cardiovascular disease (CVD) (i.e., myocardial infarction, stroke). RESULTS: The study included 402,043 veterans (mean [SD] age 76.9 [5.7] years, 98.8% male). During an average of 5.5 years of follow-up, A1C TIR had a graded relationship with mortality and CVD. Cox proportional hazards models showed that lower A1C TIR was associated with increased mortality (A1C TIR 0 to <20%: hazard ratio [HR] 1.22 [95% CI 1.20-1.25]) and CVD (A1C TIR 0 to <20%: HR 1.14 [95% CI 1.11-1.19]) compared with A1C TIR 80-100%. Competing risk models and shorter follow-up (e.g., 24 months) showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In older adults with diabetes, maintaining A1C levels within individualized target ranges is associated with lower risk of mortality and CVD.
OBJECTIVE: Short- and long-term glycemic variability are risk factors for diabetes complications. However, there are no validated A1C target ranges or measures of A1C stability in older adults. We evaluated the association of a patient-specific A1C variability measure, A1C time in range (A1C TIR), on major adverse outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study using administrative data from the Department of Veterans Affairs and Medicare from 2004 to 2016. Patients were ≥65 years old, had diabetes, and had at least four A1C tests during a 3-year baseline period. A1C TIR was the percentage of days during the baseline in which A1C was in an individualized target range (6.0-7.0% up to 8.0-9.0%) on the basis of clinical characteristics and predicted life expectancy. Increasing A1C TIR was divided into categories of 20% increments and linked to mortality and cardiovascular disease (CVD) (i.e., myocardial infarction, stroke). RESULTS: The study included 402,043 veterans (mean [SD] age 76.9 [5.7] years, 98.8% male). During an average of 5.5 years of follow-up, A1C TIR had a graded relationship with mortality and CVD. Cox proportional hazards models showed that lower A1C TIR was associated with increased mortality (A1C TIR 0 to <20%: hazard ratio [HR] 1.22 [95% CI 1.20-1.25]) and CVD (A1C TIR 0 to <20%: HR 1.14 [95% CI 1.11-1.19]) compared with A1C TIR 80-100%. Competing risk models and shorter follow-up (e.g., 24 months) showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In older adults with diabetes, maintaining A1C levels within individualized target ranges is associated with lower risk of mortality and CVD.
Authors: Laura A Young; John B Buse; Mark A Weaver; Maihan B Vu; C Madeline Mitchell; Tamara Blakeney; Kimberlea Grimm; Jennifer Rees; Franklin Niblock; Katrina E Donahue Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Derek LeRoith; Geert Jan Biessels; Susan S Braithwaite; Felipe F Casanueva; Boris Draznin; Jeffrey B Halter; Irl B Hirsch; Marie E McDonnell; Mark E Molitch; M Hassan Murad; Alan J Sinclair Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Alka B Patel; Hude Quan; Robert C Welsh; Jessica Deckert-Sookram; Wayne Tymchak; Sunil Sookram; Ian Surdhar; Padma Kaul Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2015-10-02
Authors: Chang-Sheng Sheng; Jingyan Tian; Ya Miao; Yi Cheng; Yulin Yang; Peter D Reaven; Zachary T Bloomgarden; Guang Ning Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2020-03-30 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Robert A Vigersky; Stephanie J Fonda; Mary Chellappa; M Susan Walker; Nicole M Ehrhardt Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-11-18 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: David C Mohr; Libin Zhang; Julia C Prentice; Richard E Nelson; Donglin Li; Erin Pleasants; Paul R Conlin Journal: BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care Date: 2022-07