Efficacy of 1‐hour postload plasma glucose as a suitable measurement in predicting type 2 diabetes and diabetes‐related complications: A post hoc analysis of the 30‐year follow‐up of the Da Qing IGT and Diabetes Study
Primary result · DiabetesResult — go to the resultHazard ratio 4.45 95% CI 3.43–5.79Authors' conclusion
Elevated 1hPG level (≥8.6 mmol/L) was associated with increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes and its long-term complications, and could be considered as a suitable measurement for identifying individuals at high risk of type 2 diabetes.
Study context
- Population
- Non-diabetic subjects in the Da Qing IGT and Diabetes Study, followed up at 6, 20 and 30 years
- Participants
- 1,026 subjects
- Comparison
- 1hPG-high vs 1hPG-normal
- Primary endpoint
- Risk of developing T2D (and its complications); predictive value of 1hPG vs 2hPG for diabetes
Methodological detailsproportional hazards analysis, time-dependent ROC curve
- Proportional hazards analysis
- Time-dependent ROC curve
Primary result
Diabetes
Hazard ratio
4.45
95% CI 3.43–5.79
1hPG-highvs 1hPG-normal
HR 4.45 (95% CI 3.43–5.79)
As reported in the abstract
Further findings
| Outcome | HR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| All-cause mortalityAdjusted for confounders | 1.46 (1.07–2.01) | |
| CVD mortalityAdjusted for confounders | 1.84 (1.16–2.95) | |
| CVD eventsAdjusted for confounders | 1.39 (1.03–1.86) | |
| Microvascular diseaseAdjusted for confounders | 1.70 (1.03–2.79) | |
| 0.20.5125Hazard ratio (log scale) |
AUC for predicting diabetes, 1hPG vs 2hPG
- 10 years: AUC 1hPG vs 2hPG
- 0.86 vs. 0.84, p = 0.08
- 20 years: AUC 1hPG vs 2hPG
- 0.88 vs. 0.87, p = 0.04
- 30 years: AUC 1hPG vs 2hPG
- 0.85 vs. 0.82, p = 0.009
Original publication
Efficacy of 1‐hour postload plasma glucose as a suitable measurement in predicting type 2 diabetes and diabetes‐related complications: A post hoc analysis of the 30‐year follow‐up of the Da Qing IGT and Diabetes Study. Diabetes Obes Metab. Published 15 March 2024. doi:10. 1111/ dom. 15547
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →