Continuous glucose monitoring for prediabetes classification in a large real-world cohort: Comparison with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and fasting plasma glucose
Authors' conclusion
CGM metrics achieve classification performance approaching conventional laboratory markers while capturing complementary aspects of glycemic regulation.
Study context
- Population
- Participants from the Human Phenotype Project with concurrent continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) data
- Participants
- 1,883 participants
- Exposure
- CGM metrics vs HbA1c and FPG for prediabetes classification
- Outcome
- Discrimination of prediabetes (AUC) across four ADA-based laboratory reference definitions
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Classification of prediabetes by CGM metrics
Several CGM metrics demonstrated classification performance approaching that of laboratory markers (AUC range)
0.645-0.677
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Discordance of HbA1c- and FPG-based classifications
- Participants meeting both HbA1c and FPG prediabetes criteria
- 9.5%
Original publication
Continuous glucose monitoring for prediabetes classification in a large real-world cohort: Comparison with HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. Published 25 June 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →