Comparison of Percent Total GHb With Percent HbA1c in People With and Without Known Diabetes

Author:

Nuttall Frank Q1

Affiliation:

1. Metabolic Research Laboratory and the Section of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Nutrition, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center; and the Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To directly compare results obtained using an ion-exchange high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) HbA1c method used in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial with two different affinity chromatography methods in which ”total GHb” is determined. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Blood was obtained from a large number of people with and without known diabetes. The specimens were divided and assayed for HbA1c and for total GHb. Total GHb was determined using a semi-automated gravity-elution boronate affinity chromatography method and an automated boronate affinity HPLC method. The results obtained with the two methods were also compared. RESULTS In subjects without known diabetes, the mean percentage HbA1c and the range of values were similar to the total GHb values in the same subjects when assayed using the semi-automated affinity gravity-elution method (mean 5.2 ± 0.4 and 5.1 ± 0.4% [SD], respectively). With the affinity HPLC method, results were 5.3 ± 0.4%. The similarity in results was surprising. However, analysis of the data suggests that a large proportion of the material in the HbA1c fraction measured using this ion-exchange HPLC method is not GHb, as pointed out by others. Although the results were similar in people without known diabetes, in the people with diabetes, the incremental increase was ∼25% greater for the total GHb when compared with the increase in HbA1c. When corrected for the non-GHb being measured by the HbA1c method, it can be calculated that ∼40% more GHb is measured using affinity chromatography over the entire range of GHb values. CONCLUSIONS The similarity in the mean and range of percent HbA1c and in percent total GHb using these different methods can be attributed to two factors: 1) the HbA1c ion-exchange method measures only ∼ 50–60% of the total GHb present, and 2) ∼ 40–50% of the material being measured in the HbA1c fraction is not GHb, i.e., offsetting factors fortuitously resulted in values similar to the more specific affinity methods. The greater incremental increase in percent total GHb compared with percent HbA1c in people with diabetes can be attributed to the greater amount of GHb being measured with the affinity methods.

Publisher

American Diabetes Association

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism,Internal Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3