OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of using fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentrations in conjunction with HbA1c or fructosamine for the screening of diabetes in high-risk individuals. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this study 2,877 Hong Kong Chinese (565 [19.6%] men; 2,312 [80.4%] women) with various risk factors for glucose intolerance underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) for screening of diabetes. The risk factors included a family history positive for diabetes, a history of gestational diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance, and obesity. RESULTS: Using World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, 1,593 (55.4%) had normal glucose tolerance, 657 (22.8%) had impaired glucose tolerance, and 627 (21.8%) had diabetes. When the 1997 American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria were applied, 394 (13.7%) had diabetes with an FPG > or = 7.0 mmol/l. Using multiple receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the paired values of an FPG of 5.6 mmol/l and a HbA1c of 5.5% gave an optimal sensitivity of 83.8% and specificity of 83.6% to predict a 2-h plasma glucose (PG) > or = 11.1 mmol/l. Likewise, the paired values of an FPG of 5.4 mmol/l and a fructosamine level of 235 mumol/l (n = 2,408) gave an optimal sensitivity of 81.5% and specificity of 83.2%. An FPG > or = 5.6 mmol/l and an HbA1c > or = 5.5% was 5.4-fold more likely to occur in diabetic subjects (based on the WHO criteria) compared with nondiabetic subjects. For paired parameters less than these values, the likelihood ratio of this occurring in diabetic subjects was only 0.11. Similarly, an FPG > or = 5.4 mmol/l and a fructosamine > or = 235 mumol/l was fivefold more likely to occur in diabetic subjects than in nondiabetic subjects, with both parameters less than these values having a likelihood ratio of 0.04. Using these paired values as initial screening tests, only subjects who had an FPG > or = 5.6 mmol/l and < 7.8 mmol/l and an HbA1c > or = 5.5% (n = 642) required an OGTT to confirm diabetes, thereby saving 77.7% [(2,877-642)/2,877] of the OGTTs performed. Similarly, only subjects who had an FPG > or = 5.4 mmol/l and < 7.8 mmol/l and a fructosamine > or = 235 mumol/l (n = 526) required OGTT to confirm diabetes, meaning that 78.2% [(2,408-526)/2,408] of the OGTTs could have been saved. Based on the 1997 ADA criterion of an FPG cutoff value of 7.0 mmol/l, the corresponding numbers of OGTTs to be saved were 82.6% and 85.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The paired values of FPG and HbA1c or FPG and fructosamine helped to identify potentially diabetic subjects, the diagnosis of which could be further confirmed by the 75-g OGTT. Using this approach approximately 80% of OGTTs could have been saved, depending on the diagnostic cutoff value of FPG.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the validity of using fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentrations in conjunction with HbA1c or fructosamine for the screening of diabetes in high-risk individuals. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this study 2,877 Hong Kong Chinese (565 [19.6%] men; 2,312 [80.4%] women) with various risk factors for glucose intolerance underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) for screening of diabetes. The risk factors included a family history positive for diabetes, a history of gestational diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance, and obesity. RESULTS: Using World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, 1,593 (55.4%) had normal glucose tolerance, 657 (22.8%) had impaired glucose tolerance, and 627 (21.8%) had diabetes. When the 1997 American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria were applied, 394 (13.7%) had diabetes with an FPG > or = 7.0 mmol/l. Using multiple receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the paired values of an FPG of 5.6 mmol/l and a HbA1c of 5.5% gave an optimal sensitivity of 83.8% and specificity of 83.6% to predict a 2-h plasma glucose (PG) > or = 11.1 mmol/l. Likewise, the paired values of an FPG of 5.4 mmol/l and a fructosamine level of 235 mumol/l (n = 2,408) gave an optimal sensitivity of 81.5% and specificity of 83.2%. An FPG > or = 5.6 mmol/l and an HbA1c > or = 5.5% was 5.4-fold more likely to occur in diabetic subjects (based on the WHO criteria) compared with nondiabetic subjects. For paired parameters less than these values, the likelihood ratio of this occurring in diabetic subjects was only 0.11. Similarly, an FPG > or = 5.4 mmol/l and a fructosamine > or = 235 mumol/l was fivefold more likely to occur in diabetic subjects than in nondiabetic subjects, with both parameters less than these values having a likelihood ratio of 0.04. Using these paired values as initial screening tests, only subjects who had an FPG > or = 5.6 mmol/l and < 7.8 mmol/l and an HbA1c > or = 5.5% (n = 642) required an OGTT to confirm diabetes, thereby saving 77.7% [(2,877-642)/2,877] of the OGTTs performed. Similarly, only subjects who had an FPG > or = 5.4 mmol/l and < 7.8 mmol/l and a fructosamine > or = 235 mumol/l (n = 526) required OGTT to confirm diabetes, meaning that 78.2% [(2,408-526)/2,408] of the OGTTs could have been saved. Based on the 1997 ADA criterion of an FPG cutoff value of 7.0 mmol/l, the corresponding numbers of OGTTs to be saved were 82.6% and 85.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The paired values of FPG and HbA1c or FPG and fructosamine helped to identify potentially diabetic subjects, the diagnosis of which could be further confirmed by the 75-g OGTT. Using this approach approximately 80% of OGTTs could have been saved, depending on the diagnostic cutoff value of FPG.
Authors: M Mata Cases; X Cos Claramunt; E Pujol Ribera; I Bobé Molina; R Centelles Fernández; R Ortiz López; A Ramos Fuertes; C Royo Pastor Journal: Aten Primaria Date: 2001-06-15 Impact factor: 1.137
Authors: Stefan Ehehalt; Susanna Wiegand; Antje Körner; Roland Schweizer; Klaus-Peter Liesenkötter; Carl-Joachim Partsch; Gunnar Blumenstock; Ulrike Spielau; Christian Denzer; Michael B Ranke; Andreas Neu; Gerhard Binder; Martin Wabitsch; Wieland Kiess; Thomas Reinehr Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Caroline West; David Ploth; Virginia Fonner; Jessie Mbwambo; Francis Fredrick; Michael Sweat Journal: Am J Med Sci Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 2.378