4.7 Article

High hemoglobin glycation index is associated with increased risk of diabetes: A population-based cohort study in China

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1081520

关键词

biological variation; diabetes mellitus; glycated hemoglobin A1c; hemoglobin glycation index; risk factor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the association between HGI and the risk of incident diabetes and finds that a higher HGI is associated with an increased risk of diabetes in the future, suggesting its potential use as a marker for predicting diabetes risk.
PurposeThe hemoglobin glycation index (HGI) quantifies the mismatch between glycated hemoglobin A1c and average glycemia among individuals. Currently, it is unknown the potential role of HGI in exhaustively evaluating the progression of glucose metabolism/the risk of developing diabetes mellitus. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the association between HGI and the risk of incident diabetes. MethodsA total of 7,345 participants aged at least 40 years and without diabetes were divided into three groups according to the tertile of their baseline HGI level and followed for a median of 3.24 years to track new-onset diabetes. Using multivariate Cox regression analyses, we explored the association between the HGI, both categorized and continuous, and incident diabetes. ResultsDuring follow-up, 742 subjects (263 males and 479 females) developed diabetes mellitus. Higher HGI was associated with an increased risk of diabetes, even when adjusted for confounding factors, and every standard deviation increase in HGI was associated with a significant risk increase of 30.6% for diabetes (hazard ratio 1.306, 95% confidence interval 1.232-1.384). ConclusionsParticipants with a higher HGI were at a higher risk of future diabetes, irrespective of their glycemic conditions. Consequently, HGI may be employed to identify individuals at high risk for diabetes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据