Glycation gap size, stability over time and correlates in people with Type 1 diabetes
Authors' conclusion
We found frequent differences between laboratory and CGM-estimated HbA1c measures, with 64% of 316 adults having a glycation gap ≥0.3%.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with T1D using Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM), Australian tertiary-referral diabetes clinic231 in longitudinal study
- Participants
- 316 adults
- Outcome
- Glycation gap: difference between laboratory and CGM-estimated HbA1c
Methodological detailssingle-centre, tertiary-referral diabetes clinic
- Single-centre
- Tertiary-referral diabetes clinic
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Glycation gap ≥0.3%
Adults with glycation gap ≥0.3%
64%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Glycation gap change over time (longitudinal)
- Glycation gap changed by ≥0.3%
- 118/231 adults (51%)
- Glycation gap stable over time in groups
Correlates of the glycation gap
- Inverse correlation with age, HbA1c and haematocrit
- Positive correlation with eGFR and mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration
- Differed between CGM brands, but not by insulin delivery modality
Original publication
Glycation gap size, stability over time and correlates in people with Type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. Published 15 June 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →