Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 May;30(5):1120-4.
doi: 10.2337/dc06-2377. Epub 2007 Mar 2.

Noninvasive type 2 diabetes screening: superior sensitivity to fasting plasma glucose and A1C

Affiliations

Noninvasive type 2 diabetes screening: superior sensitivity to fasting plasma glucose and A1C

John D Maynard et al. Diabetes Care. 2007 May.

Abstract

Objective: This study compared the performance of a novel noninvasive technology to fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and A1C tests for detecting undiagnosed diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance.

Research design and methods: The design was a head-to-head evaluation in a naïve population. Consented subjects received FPG and A1C tests and an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Subjects were also measured by a noninvasive device that detects the fluorescence of skin advanced glycation end products. A total of 351 subjects participated.

Results: Subjects with 2-h OGTT values > or = 140 mg/dl defined the positive screening class. A total of 84 subjects (23.9% prevalence) screened positive. The performances of the noninvasive device, FPG, and A1C were evaluated for sensitivity and specificity against this classification. At the impaired fasting glucose threshold (FPG = 100 mg/dl), the FPG testing sensitivity was 58% and the specificity was 77.4%. At that same specificity, the sensitivity for A1C testing was 63.8%, while the noninvasive testing sensitivity was 74.7%. The sensitivity advantage of the noninvasive device over both blood tests for detecting diabetes and precursors was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: The noninvasive technology showed clinical performance advantages over both FPG and A1C testing. The sensitivity differential indicated that the noninvasive device is capable of identifying 28.8% more individuals in the OGTT-defined positive screening class than FPG testing and 17.1% more than A1C testing. The combination of higher sensitivity and greater convenience--rapid results with no fasting or blood draws--makes the device well suited for opportunistic screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by