Accuracy, Variability, and Bias of Glycemic Biomarkers in Patients Treated With Maintenance Dialysis

IF 22.6 1区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Diabetes Care Pub Date : 2026-03-10 DOI:10.2337/dc25-2952
Leila R. Zelnick, Subbulaxmi Trikudanathan, Yoshio N. Hall, Ernest Ayers, Lisa Anderson, Nathaniel Ashford, Evelin Jones, Andrea C. Rivas-Nieto, Simon Hsu, Kuanysh Kabytaev, Zhuo Wang, Andrew N. Hoofnagle, Irl B. Hirsch, Ian H. de Boer
{"title":"Accuracy, Variability, and Bias of Glycemic Biomarkers in Patients Treated With Maintenance Dialysis","authors":"Leila R. Zelnick, Subbulaxmi Trikudanathan, Yoshio N. Hall, Ernest Ayers, Lisa Anderson, Nathaniel Ashford, Evelin Jones, Andrea C. Rivas-Nieto, Simon Hsu, Kuanysh Kabytaev, Zhuo Wang, Andrew N. Hoofnagle, Irl B. Hirsch, Ian H. de Boer","doi":"10.2337/dc25-2952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE Accurate assessment of glycemia in patients treated with maintenance dialysis is imperative and hampered by known biases of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in kidney failure (KF). This study evaluated the accuracy, variability, and covariate bias of three glycemic biomarkers compared with glycemia measured by continuous glucose monitor (CGM) among people with and without diabetes treated with maintenance dialysis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In a prospective community-based cohort study, 251 participants treated with maintenance dialysis wore a Dexcom G6 Pro CGM for 10 days. We compared correlations of HbA1c, glycated albumin (GA), and fructosamine with CGM-derived mean glycemia and examined sources of bias. RESULTS Participants (43% women; 63% with diabetes) had a median of 9.3 (interquartile range 8.5–9.4) valid days of CGM data. Mean (SD) HbA1c, GA, fructosamine, and mean CGM glucose were 6.2% (1.4%), 19.6% (6.3%), 351 (99) µmol/L, and 170 (63) mg/dL, respectively. HbA1c, GA, and fructosamine all strongly correlated with mean CGM blood glucose, with HbA1c and GA more correlated than fructosamine (overall, r = 0.85, r = 0.87, and r = 0.70, respectively; in diabetes, r = 0.84, r = 0.84, and r = 0.64, respectively). Compared with mean CGM glucose, HbA1c was significantly biased by erythropoiesis-stimulating agent dose, BMI, hemoglobin, and serum albumin; GA and fructosamine were biased by dialysis modality and vintage, residual kidney function, and BMI. CONCLUSIONS HbA1c and GA were strongly correlated with mean CGM blood glucose, but all biomarkers had substantial bias by relevant clinical characteristics. HbA1c and GA may be useful assessments of average glycemia in patients treated with maintenance dialysis, if bias can be adequately addressed.","PeriodicalId":11140,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes Care","volume":"80 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/dc25-2952","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Accurate assessment of glycemia in patients treated with maintenance dialysis is imperative and hampered by known biases of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in kidney failure (KF). This study evaluated the accuracy, variability, and covariate bias of three glycemic biomarkers compared with glycemia measured by continuous glucose monitor (CGM) among people with and without diabetes treated with maintenance dialysis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In a prospective community-based cohort study, 251 participants treated with maintenance dialysis wore a Dexcom G6 Pro CGM for 10 days. We compared correlations of HbA1c, glycated albumin (GA), and fructosamine with CGM-derived mean glycemia and examined sources of bias. RESULTS Participants (43% women; 63% with diabetes) had a median of 9.3 (interquartile range 8.5–9.4) valid days of CGM data. Mean (SD) HbA1c, GA, fructosamine, and mean CGM glucose were 6.2% (1.4%), 19.6% (6.3%), 351 (99) µmol/L, and 170 (63) mg/dL, respectively. HbA1c, GA, and fructosamine all strongly correlated with mean CGM blood glucose, with HbA1c and GA more correlated than fructosamine (overall, r = 0.85, r = 0.87, and r = 0.70, respectively; in diabetes, r = 0.84, r = 0.84, and r = 0.64, respectively). Compared with mean CGM glucose, HbA1c was significantly biased by erythropoiesis-stimulating agent dose, BMI, hemoglobin, and serum albumin; GA and fructosamine were biased by dialysis modality and vintage, residual kidney function, and BMI. CONCLUSIONS HbA1c and GA were strongly correlated with mean CGM blood glucose, but all biomarkers had substantial bias by relevant clinical characteristics. HbA1c and GA may be useful assessments of average glycemia in patients treated with maintenance dialysis, if bias can be adequately addressed.
维持性透析患者血糖生物标志物的准确性、可变性和偏倚
目的:准确评估维持性透析患者的血糖是必要的,但由于肾衰竭(KF)患者糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)的已知偏差而受到阻碍。本研究在接受维持性透析治疗的糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者中,评估了三种血糖生物标志物与连续血糖监测仪(CGM)测量的血糖的准确性、可变性和共变量偏倚。研究设计和方法在一项前瞻性社区队列研究中,251名接受维持性透析治疗的参与者佩戴Dexcom G6 Pro CGM 10天。我们比较了HbA1c、糖化白蛋白(GA)和果糖胺与ggm平均血糖的相关性,并检查了偏差来源。结果:参与者(43%为女性,63%为糖尿病患者)的有效CGM数据中位数为9.3天(四分位数间距为8.5-9.4)。平均(SD) HbA1c、GA、果糖胺和平均CGM葡萄糖分别为6.2%(1.4%)、19.6%(6.3%)、351(99)µmol/L和170 (63)mg/dL。HbA1c、GA和果糖胺均与平均CGM血糖呈强相关,其中HbA1c和GA的相关性高于果糖胺(总体r = 0.85、r = 0.87、r = 0.70;糖尿病r = 0.84、r = 0.84、r = 0.64)。与平均CGM葡萄糖相比,HbA1c受促红细胞生成剂剂量、BMI、血红蛋白和血清白蛋白的显著偏倚;GA和果糖胺受透析方式和年份、残余肾功能和BMI的影响。结论:HbA1c和GA与平均CGM血糖密切相关,但所有生物标志物在相关临床特征方面存在显著偏倚。如果偏差能够得到充分解决,HbA1c和GA可能是维持性透析患者平均血糖的有用评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Diabetes Care
Diabetes Care 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
27.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
449
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The journal's overarching mission can be captured by the simple word "Care," reflecting its commitment to enhancing patient well-being. Diabetes Care aims to support better patient care by addressing the comprehensive needs of healthcare professionals dedicated to managing diabetes. Diabetes Care serves as a valuable resource for healthcare practitioners, aiming to advance knowledge, foster research, and improve diabetes management. The journal publishes original research across various categories, including Clinical Care, Education, Nutrition, Psychosocial Research, Epidemiology, Health Services Research, Emerging Treatments and Technologies, Pathophysiology, Complications, and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk. Additionally, Diabetes Care features ADA statements, consensus reports, review articles, letters to the editor, and health/medical news, appealing to a diverse audience of physicians, researchers, psychologists, educators, and other healthcare professionals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书