ArticleThe journal of applied laboratory medicine2022
Glycated Albumin in Pristine and Non-Pristine Stored Samples in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2004.
Article in The journal of applied laboratory medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inverse Associations between Measures of Adiposity and Glycated Albumin in US Adults, NHANES 1999-2004.The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2023Article
- Performance of glycated albumin as a biomarker of hyperglycemia in pregnancy: Results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2004.Clinical biochemistry · 2023Article
- Associations of Glycated Albumin and HbA1c with Chronic Kidney Disease in US Adults.The journal of applied laboratory medicine · 2022Article
- Glycated albumin and HbA1c as markers of lower extremity disease inUS adults with and without diabetes.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGlycated albumin is cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for clinical use in diabetes care. To understand its performance in the general US population, we conducted measurements in >19 000 samples from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Of these samples, 5.7% had previously undergone at least 2 freeze-thaw cycles and were considered "non-pristine."
methodsWe measured glycated albumin and albumin using the Lucica GA-L (Asahi Kasei) assay in stored serum samples from NHANES 1999-2004. Serum albumin (Roche/Beckman) was previously measured. We examined the correlations of percent glycated albumin with hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c)and fasting glucose in the pristine and non-pristine samples. We also measured cystatin C (Siemens) and compared these to cystatin C (Dade Behring) previously obtained in a subsample.
resultsGlycated albumin (%) was significantly lower in pristine vs non-pristine samples (13.8% vs 23.4%, P < 0.0001). The results from the Asahi Kasei albumin assay (g/dL) were highly correlated with albumin originally measured in NHANES (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r = 0.76) but values were systematically higher (+0.25 g/dL, P < 0.0001). Cystatin C (Siemens) was similar to previous cystatin C measurements (r = 0.98) and did not differ by pristine status (P = 0.119). Glycated albumin (%) was highly correlated with HbA1c and fasting glucose in pristine samples (r = 0.78 and r = 0.71, respectively) but not in non-pristine samples (r = 0.11 and r = 0.12, respectively).
conclusionsThe performance of the glycated albumin assay in the pristine samples was excellent. Performance in non-pristine samples was highly problematic. Analyses of glycated albumin in NHANES 1999-2004 should be limited to pristine samples only. These results have major implications for the use of these public data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.