Evidence Hub

The Associations of Mean Glucose and Time in Range from Continuous Glucose Monitoring with HbA1c in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Selvin E, Wang D, Rooney MR, Echouffo-Tcheugui J, Fang M, Zeger S, Sartini J, Tang O et al.

Diabetes technology & therapeutics, 2023

186 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Associations of mean glucose and time in range (70-180 mg/dL) from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with HbA1c in adults with type 2 diabetes are not well characterized. We conducted a secondary analysis of 186 participants from the Hyperglycemic Profiles in Obstructive Sleep Apnea (HYPNOS) trial. Participants simultaneously wore Dexcom G4 and Abbott Libre Pro CGM sensors up to 4 weeks. Mean HbA1c was 7.7% (SD, 1.3). There were strong negative Pearson's correlations of HbA1c with CGM time in range (-0.79, Abbott; -0.81, Dexcom) and strong positive correlations with CGM mean glucose (Dexcom, 0.84; Abbott, 0.82). However, there were large differences in CGM mean glucose (±20 mg/dL) and time in range (±14%) at any given HbA1c value. Mean glucose and HbA1c are strongly correlated in type 2 diabetes patients not taking insulin but discordance is evident at the individual level. Clinicians should expect discordance and use HbA1c and CGM in a complementary manner. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02454153.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 186 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free