HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose levels are equally related to incident cardiovascular risk in a high CVD risk population without known diabetes
Author:
Been Riemer A.1ORCID, Noordstar Ellen2, Helmink Marga A.G.3, van Sloten Thomas T.4, de Ranitz-Greven Wendela L.4, van Beek André P.1, Houweling Sebastiaan T.5, van Dijk Peter R.1, Westerink Jan2
Affiliation:
1. Department of Endocrinology , University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen , Groningen , The Netherlands 2. Department of Internal Medicine , Isala Hospital , Zwolle , The Netherlands 3. Department of Vascular Medicine , University Medical Center Utrecht , Utrecht , The Netherlands 4. Department of Endocrinology , University Medical Center Utrecht , Utrecht , The Netherlands 5. Langerhans Foundation , Zeist , The Netherlands
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is associated with increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Whether screen-detected T2DM, based on fasting plasma glucose (FPG) or on HbA1c, are associated with different risks of incident CVD in high-risk populations and which one is preferable for diabetes screening in these populations, remains unclear.
Methods
A total of 8,274 high-risk CVD participants were included from the UCC-SMART cohort. Participants were divided into groups based on prior T2DM diagnosis, and combinations of elevated/non-elevated FPG and HbA1c (cut-offs at 7 mmol/L and 48 mmol/mol, respectively): Group 0: known T2DM; group 1: elevated FPG/HbA1c; group 2: elevated FPG, non-elevated HbA1c; group 3: non-elevated FPG, elevated HbA1c; group 1 + 2: elevated FPG, regardless of HbA1c; group 1 + 3: elevated HbA1c, regardless of FPG; and group 4 (reference), non-elevated FPG/HbA1c.
Results
During a median follow-up of 6.3 years (IQR 3.3–9.8), 712 cardiovascular events occurred. Compared to the reference (group 4), group 0 was at increased risk (HR 1.40; 95 % CI 1.16–1.68), but group 1 (HR 1.16; 95 % CI 0.62–2.18), 2 (HR 1.18; 95 % CI 0.84–1.67), 3 (HR 0.61; 95 % CI 0.15–2.44), 1 + 2 (HR 1.17; 95 % CI 0.86–1.59) and 1 + 3 (HR 1.01; 95 % CI 0.57–1.79) were not. However, spline interpolation showed a linearly increasing risk with increasing HbA1c/FPG, but did not allow for identification of other cut-off points.
Conclusions
Based on current cut-offs, FPG and HbA1c at screening were equally related to incident CVD in high-risk populations without known T2DM. Hence, neither FPG, nor HbA1c, is preferential for diabetes screening in this population with respect to risk of incident CVD.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Reference38 articles.
1. Damaskos, C, Garmpis, N, Kollia, P, Mitsiopoulos, G, Barlampa, D, Drosos, A, et al.. Assessing cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetes: an update. Curr Cardiol Rev 2020;16:266. https://doi.org/10.2174/1573403x15666191111123622. 2. Zhang, PY. Cardiovascular disease in diabetes – PubMed. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2014;18:2205–14. 3. Davidson, KW, Barry, MJ, Mangione, CM, Cabana, M, Caughey, AB, Davis, EM, et al.. Screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA 2021;326:736–43. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.12531. 4. Nathan, DM, Balkau, B, Bonora, E, Borch-Johnsen, K, Buse, JB, Colagiuri, S, et al.. International expert committee report on the role of the A1C assay in the diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1327. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc09-9033. 5. Kahn, R. Report of the expert committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 1997;20:1183–97. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.20.7.1183.
|
|