Continuous glucose monitoring metrics (Mean Glucose, time above range and time in range) are superior to glycated haemoglobin for assessment of therapeutic efficacy
Authors' conclusion
The CGM metrics %TAR and %TIR show much higher correlations with Mean Glucose than with HbA1c and provide sensitive indicators of efficacy. Mean glucose may be the best metric and shows consistently higher correlations with %TAR than with %TIR.
Study context
- Population
- People with T1D, T2D, and T1D during pregnancy and postpartum, from prior studies
- Participants
- 545 / 5,910 / 98
- Comparison
- T1D vs T2D vs T1D pregnancy/postpartum
- T1Dn = 545
- T2Dn = 5,910
- T1D pregnancy/postpartumn = 98
- Primary endpoint
- Correlations among CGM metrics (Mean Glucose, %TAR, %TIR) and HbA1c
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Mean Glucose vs %TAR, r (T1D; T2D)
0.98; 0.97
Mean Glucose vs %TIR, r (T1D; T2D)
−0.92; −0.83
Mean Glucose vs HbA1c, r (T1D)
0.78
%TAR vs %TIR, r (T1D; T2D)
−0.96; −0.91
Further findings
Correlation of changes in Mean Glucose with changes in other metrics after real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use (T1D) · 6 months
- Δ Mean Glucose vs Δ %TAR, r
- 0.95
- Δ Mean Glucose vs Δ %TIR, r
- −0.85
- Δ Mean Glucose vs Δ HbA1c, r
- 0.52
Original publication
Continuous glucose monitoring metrics (Mean Glucose, time above range and time in range) are superior to glycated haemoglobin for assessment of therapeutic efficacy. Diabetes Obes Metab. Published 1 December 2022. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →