Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20573754›Full record

ArticleDiabetes care2010

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).

Carlos Lorenzo, Lynne E Wagenknecht, Anthony J G Hanley, Marian J Rewers, Andrew J Karter, Steven M Haffner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes care, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed, 174 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Carlos LorenzoDepartment of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas, USA. lorenzo@uthscsa.edu
Lynne E Wagenknecht
Anthony J G Hanley
Marian J Rewers
Andrew J Karter
Steven M Haffner
Baylor College of Medicine · USKaiser Permanente · USMount Sinai Hospital · CAThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USUniversity of Colorado Health · USWake Forest University · US

Funding

ZOLEDRONATE VS AREDIA IN MULTIPLE MYELOMA/BREAST CANCER W /BONE DISORDERSM01RR001346 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FERRER, ROBERT L · 1985 to 2008
$23.1M
Diabetes and Aging in a Multi-Ethnic PopulationR01DK081796 · NIDDK · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI HUANG, ELBERT S., KARTER, ANDREW JOHN · 2009 to 2013
$2.9M
INSULIN RESISTANCE AND ATHEROSCLEROSIS STUDY (IRAS)U01HL047887 · NHLBI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY · PI WAGENKNECHT, LYNNE E · 1991 to 1999
–
INSULIN RESISTANCE, HYPERGLYCEMIA AND ATHEROSCLEROSISU01HL047889 · NHLBI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI SELBY, JOE V · 1991 to 1999
–
INSULIN RESISTANCE AND ATHEROSCLEROSIS STUDY (IRAS)U01HL047890 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI BERGMAN, RICHARD N. · 1991 to 1999
–
INSULIN RESISTANCE AND CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASEU01HL047892 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI REWERS, MARIAN J. · 1991 to 1999
–
INSULIN RESISTANCE AND ATHEROSCLEROSIS STUDY (IRAS)U01HL047902 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI SAAD, MOHAMMED F · 1991 to 1999
–
NCRR NIH HHS M01 RR001346NCRR NIH HHS M01-RR-01346NCRR NIH HHS M01-RR431NHLBI NIH HHS HL-47887NHLBI NIH HHS HL-47889NHLBI NIH HHS HL-47890NHLBI NIH HHS HL-47892NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL047892NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL047902NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK081796
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA1C 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

methodsA 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).

resultsIFG 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).

conclusionsA1C 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.

Indexed as

AgedCardiovascular DiseasesFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansInsulin ResistanceMaleMiddle AgedPrediabetic StateRisk FactorsGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID20573754
PMCPMC2928372
OpenAlexW2116705629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.