Claudia Piona1, Marco Marigliano2, Enza Mozzillo3, Francesco Rosanio3, Angela Zanfardino4, Dario Iafusco4, Giulio Maltoni5, Stefano Zucchini5, Elvira Piccinno6, Maurizio Delvecchio6, Claudio Maffeis1. 1. Pediatric Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Unit, Regional Center for Pediatric Diabetes, University City Hospital of Verona, P.le Stefani, 1, Verona, Italy. 2. Pediatric Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Unit, Regional Center for Pediatric Diabetes, University City Hospital of Verona, P.le Stefani, 1, Verona, Italy. Electronic address: marco.marigliano@univr.it. 3. Regional Center of Pediatric Diabetes, Department of Traslational and Medical Sciences, Section of Pediatrics, Federico II University, Naples, Italy. 4. Regional Center of Pediatric Diabetology "G.Stoppoloni" - University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 5. University Hospital of Bologna Sant'Orsola-Malpighi, Paediatric Endocrine Unit, Bologna, Italy. 6. Metabolic Disorder and Diabetes Unit, "Giovanni XXIII" Children Hospital, Bari, Italy.
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the relationships between HbA1c and Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) metrics in children/adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). METHODS: HbA1c and real-life CGM data of the 12 weeks preceding its measurement were retrospectively collected from 654 children/adolescents with T1D. The relationships between HbA1c and CGM metrics were assessed by Spearman correlation coefficient. Participants were categorized into groups based on HbA1c and CGM metrics values. ANOVA was run across HbA1c and CGM metrics groups in the entire study population and in subjects stratified by CGM type, insulin therapy, age and puberty. RESULTS: HbA1c was positively correlated with mean glucose, SD, %TAR > 180 mg/dL, %TAR > 250 mg/dL, HBGI and negatively with %TIR, %TBR and %time < 54 mg/dL. HbA1c-based groups were significantly associated with these metrics, but for each group their value widely ranged with a substantial overlap between them. HbA1c and HbA1c-based groups were not associated with %CV and LBGI, as well as %CV and LBGI-based groups had not significantly different HbA1c. Comparable results were found analysing subjects according to age, type of CGM, insulin therapy and puberty. CONCLUSIONS: The relationships between HbA1c and CGM metrics described in this cohort of paediatric subjects with T1D support the importance of the evaluation of these metrics, in particular %CV and LBGI, independently of HbA1c value.
AIMS: To evaluate the relationships between HbA1c and Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) metrics in children/adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). METHODS: HbA1c and real-life CGM data of the 12 weeks preceding its measurement were retrospectively collected from 654 children/adolescents with T1D. The relationships between HbA1c and CGM metrics were assessed by Spearman correlation coefficient. Participants were categorized into groups based on HbA1c and CGM metrics values. ANOVA was run across HbA1c and CGM metrics groups in the entire study population and in subjects stratified by CGM type, insulin therapy, age and puberty. RESULTS: HbA1c was positively correlated with mean glucose, SD, %TAR > 180 mg/dL, %TAR > 250 mg/dL, HBGI and negatively with %TIR, %TBR and %time < 54 mg/dL. HbA1c-based groups were significantly associated with these metrics, but for each group their value widely ranged with a substantial overlap between them. HbA1c and HbA1c-based groups were not associated with %CV and LBGI, as well as %CV and LBGI-based groups had not significantly different HbA1c. Comparable results were found analysing subjects according to age, type of CGM, insulin therapy and puberty. CONCLUSIONS: The relationships between HbA1c and CGM metrics described in this cohort of paediatric subjects with T1D support the importance of the evaluation of these metrics, in particular %CV and LBGI, independently of HbA1c value.
Authors: Monica N Naguib; Elizabeth Hegedus; Jennifer K Raymond; Michael I Goran; Sarah-Jeanne Salvy; Choo Phei Wee; Ramon Durazo-Arvizu; Lilith Moss; Alaina P Vidmar Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 5.555