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
. 2023 Sep 18;108(10):e1125-e1133.
doi: 10.1210/clinem/dgad135.

Reproducibility of Glycemic Measures Among Dysglycemic Youth and Adults in the RISE Study

Affiliations

Reproducibility of Glycemic Measures Among Dysglycemic Youth and Adults in the RISE Study

Ashley H Tjaden et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. .

Abstract

Aims: Previous work found poor reproducibility for measures of glycemia in individuals at risk for dysglycemia. Differences between youth and adults have not been assessed. Using youth and adults in the Restoring Insulin Secretion Study, we tested variability and classification concordance for hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), fasting and 2-hour glucose from oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs).

Methods: HbA1c and glucose on repeated samples obtained ∼6 weeks apart were compared in 66 youth (mean age 14.2 years) and 354 adults (52.7 years). Changes, coefficient of variation (CV), and concordance of diagnostic categories between the 2 visits were compared.

Results: Mean difference between the 2 visits in HbA1c was higher in youth than adults (P < .001), while fasting glucose was similar and 2-hour glucose was lower in youth (P = .051). CV was smallest for HbA1c compared to fasting and 2-hour glucose. For HbA1c, youth had higher CV (P < .001); whereas CV for 2-hour glucose was lower for youth (P = .041). Classification concordance by HbA1c was lower in youth (P = .004). Using OGTT or HbA1c for classification, intervisit variability produced discordant classification in 20% of youth and 28% of adults. Using both fasting glucose and HbA1c, intervisit variability reduced discordant classification to 16% of adults while not improving classification in youth.

Conclusions: Poor reproducibility and lack of classification concordance highlight the limitations of one-time testing, with important implications for assessing eligibility in clinical trials. Consideration should be given to using more than a single parameter for screening and diagnosis, especially when classification category is important.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01779362 NCT01779375 NCT01763346.

Keywords: HbA1c; classification criteria; coefficient of variation; diagnosis and classification; oral glucose tolerance test; reproducibility.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Correlation for HbA1c (A), fasting glucose (B), and 2-hour glucose (C) for youth (blue) and adults (green). On the correlation plots, the line of utility (slope of 1) represents identical values with both tests (dashed line). The Bland-Altman plots show the difference against the mean value for the 2 visits for HbA1c (D), fasting glucose (E), and 2-hour glucose (F) for youth (blue) and adults (green). The solid reference line at 0 represents no difference between the measurements at screening and baseline. The corresponding dashed lines represents the mean differences and the solid lines represent the 95% CI (±1.96*SD) of the mean of the differences. Correlation is stronger in youth than adults for fasting and 2-hour glucose (P = .031 and P = .004, respectively) but not significantly different for HbA1c. Abbreviations: HbA1c, hemoglobin A1C.

References

    1. American Diabetes Association . Standards of medical care in diabetes–2014. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(Suppl 1):14. 10.2337/dc14-S014 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Siu AL, U S Preventive Services Task Force . Screening for abnormal blood glucose and type 2 diabetes mellitus: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(11):861‐868. 10.7326/M15-2345 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ko GT, Chan JC, Woo J, et al. . The reproducibility and usefulness of the oral glucose tolerance test in screening for diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors. Ann Clin Biochem. 1998;35(Pt 1):62‐67. 10.1177/000456329803500107 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Selvin E, Crainiceanu CM, Brancati FL, Coresh J. Short-term variability in measures of glycemia and implications for the classification of diabetes. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(14):1545‐1551. 10.1001/archinte.167.14.1545 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Simon D, Senan C, Balkau B, Saint-Paul M, Thibult N, Eschwege E. Reproducibility of HbA1c in a healthy adult population: the telecom study. Diabetes Care. 1999;22(8):1361‐1363. 10.2337/diacare.22.8.1361 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data