首页> 外文期刊>Diabetes care >A1C between 5.7 and 6.4% as a marker for identifying pre-diabetes, insulin sensitivity and secretion, and cardiovascular risk factors: the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study (IRAS).
【24h】

A1C between 5.7 and 6.4% as a marker for identifying pre-diabetes, insulin sensitivity and secretion, and cardiovascular risk factors: the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study (IRAS).

机译:A1C在5.7%和6.4%之间,作为识别糖尿病前期,胰岛素敏感性和分泌以及心血管危险因素的标志物:胰岛素抵抗性动脉粥样硬化研究(IRAS)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: A1C is an optional method for diagnosing diabetes and also for detecting individuals at increased risk of the disease. However, how A1C compares with fasting (FPG) and 2-h plasma glucose for detecting at-risk individuals is not well known. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 2-h glucose tolerance test, frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test, and A1C were obtained at the follow-up examination in 855 participants in the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study (IRAS). For this report, 385 individuals were at increased risk of diabetes as defined by A1C between 5.7 and 6.4%, impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and/or impaired fasting glucose (IFG). RESULTS: IFG and IGT identified 69.1 and 59.5% of all individuals at increased risk of diabetes, respectively. A1C 5.7-6.4% detected 23.6% of all at-risk individuals, although more African Americans (31.4%) and Hispanics (35.2%) than non-Hispanic whites (9.9%). Relative to A1C, FPG was more strongly related to fasting insulin (r = 0.38 vs. 0.26; P < 0.01), acute insulin response (r = - 0.20 vs. - 0.09; P < 0.01), and waist circumference (r = 0.43 vs. 0.25; P < 0.001) by the Spearman correlation test. Similarly, 2-h plasma glucose was more strongly related to Si (r = - 0.40 vs. - 0.27; P < 0.01) and triglycerides (r = 0.30 vs. 0.08; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A1C 5.7-6.4% is less sensitive for detecting at-risk individuals than IFG and IGT, particularly among non-Hispanic whites. Single determinations of FPG and 2-h plasma glucose seem to be more precise correlates of insulin resistance and secretion than A1C and, in general, better for other metabolic disorders.
机译:目的:A1C是诊断糖尿病的一种可选方法,也可用于检测罹患该疾病的风险较高的个体。但是,如何将A1C与禁食(FPG)和2-h血浆葡萄糖进行比较以检测高危个体尚不清楚。研究设计与方法:在胰岛素抵抗性动脉粥样硬化研究(IRAS)的855名参与者的随访检查中获得了2小时葡萄糖耐量试验,经常采样的静脉葡萄糖耐量试验和A1C。对于本报告,按照A1C的定义,有385位患者患糖尿病的风险增加,介于5.7%和6.4%之间,葡萄糖耐量受损(IGT)和/或空腹血糖(IFG)受损。结果:IFG和IGT分别确定了罹患糖尿病风险增加的所有个体中的69.1%和59.5%。 A1C 5.7-6.4%的人占所有高危人群的23.6%,尽管非洲裔美国人(31.4%)和西班牙裔(35.2%)比非西班牙裔白人(9.9%)多。相对于A1C,FPG与空腹胰岛素(r = 0.38 vs. 0.26; P <0.01),急性胰岛素反应(r =-0.20 vs--0.09; P <0.01)和腰围(r = 0.43)密切相关相对于0.25; P <0.001)。同样,2 h血浆葡萄糖与Si(r =-0.40 vs.-0.27; P <0.01)和甘油三酸酯(r = 0.30 vs. 0.08; P <0.001)更密切相关。结论:A1C 5.7-6.4%对高危人群的检测灵敏度低于IFG和IGT,特别是在非西班牙裔白人中。与A1C相比,单次测定FPG和2小时血浆葡萄糖似乎与胰岛素抵抗和分泌之间的关联更为精确,并且一般而言,对其他代谢性疾病而言更好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号