Noninvasive Type 2 Diabetes Screening: Superior sensitivity to fasting plasma glucose and A1C

OBJECTIVE:--This study compared the performance of a novel noninvasive technology to fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and A1C tests for detecting undiagnosed diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--The design was a head-to-head evaluation in a naïve population. Consented su...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diabetes care 2007-05, Vol.30 (5), p.1120-1124
Hauptverfasser: Maynard, John D, Rohrscheib, Mark, Way, Jeffrey F, Nguyen, Catriona M, Ediger, Marwood N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:OBJECTIVE:--This study compared the performance of a novel noninvasive technology to fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and A1C tests for detecting undiagnosed diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--The design was a head-to-head evaluation in a naïve population. Consented subjects received FPG and A1C tests and an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Subjects were also measured by a noninvasive device that detects the fluorescence of skin advanced glycation end products. A total of 351 subjects participated. RESULTS:--Subjects with 2-h OGTT values >=140 mg/dl defined the positive screening class. A total of 84 subjects (23.9% prevalence) screened positive. The performances of the noninvasive device, FPG, and A1C were evaluated for sensitivity and specificity against this classification. At the impaired fasting glucose threshold (FPG =100 mg/dl), the FPG testing sensitivity was 58% and the specificity was 77.4%. At that same specificity, the sensitivity for A1C testing was 63.8%, while the noninvasive testing sensitivity was 74.7%. The sensitivity advantage of the noninvasive device over both blood tests for detecting diabetes and precursors was statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:--The noninvasive technology showed clinical performance advantages over both FPG and A1C testing. The sensitivity differential indicated that the noninvasive device is capable of identifying 28.8% more individuals in the OGTT-defined positive screening class than FPG testing and 17.1% more than A1C testing. The combination of higher sensitivity and greater convenience--rapid results with no fasting or blood draws--makes the device well suited for opportunistic screening.
ISSN:0149-5992
1935-5548
DOI:10.2337/dc06-2377