» Articles » PMID: 33720761

Profiles of Intraday Glucose in Type 2 Diabetes and Their Association with Complications: An Analysis of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data

Overview
Date 2021 Mar 15
PMID 33720761
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To identify profiles of type 2 diabetes from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data using ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) indicators and examine the association with prevalent complications. Two weeks of CGM data, collected between 2015 and 2019, from 5901 adult type 2 diabetes patients were retrieved from a clinical database in Chennai, India. Non-negative matrix factorization was used to identify profiles as per AGP indicators. The association of profiles with existing complications was examined using multinomial and logistic regressions adjusted for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c; %), sex, age at onset, and duration of diabetes. Three profiles of glycemic variability (GV) were identified based on CGM data-Profile 1 ["TIR Profile"] ( = 2271), Profile 2 ["Hypo"] ( = 1471), and Profile 3 ["Hyper"] ( = 2159). Compared with time in range (TIR) profile, those belonging to Hyper had higher mean fasting plasma glucose (202.9 vs. 167.1, mg/dL), 2-h postprandial plasma glucose (302.1 vs. 255.6, mg/dL), and HbA1c (9.7 vs. 8.6; %). Both "Hypo profile" and "Hyper profile" had higher odds of nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy ("Hypo": 1.44, 1.20-1.73; "Hyper": 1.33, 1.11-1.58), macroalbuminuria ("Hypo": 1.58, 1.25-1.98; "Hyper": 1.37, 1.10-1.71), and diabetic kidney disease (DKD; "Hypo": 1.65, 1.18-2.31; "Hyper": 1.88, 1.37-2.58), compared with "TIR profile." Those in "Hypo profile" (vs. "TIR profile") had higher odds of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR; 2.84, 1.65-2.88). We have identified three profiles of GV from CGM data. While both "Hypo profile" and "Hyper profile" had higher odds of prevalent DKD compared with "TIR profile," "Hypo profile" had higher odds of PDR. Our study emphasizes the clinical importance of recognizing and treating hypoglycemia (which is often unrecognized without CGM) in patients with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

Citing Articles

TACCO: Task-guided Co-clustering of Clinical Concepts and Patient Visits for Disease Subtyping based on EHR Data.

Zhang Z, Cui H, Xu R, Xie Y, Ho J, Yang C KDD. 2025; 2024:6324-6334.

PMID: 40027494 PMC: 11868038. DOI: 10.1145/3637528.3671594.


Glycemia Risk Index is Associated With Risk of Albuminuria Among Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes.

Kim J, Yoo J, Kim N, Kim J J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2025; 19322968241310850.

PMID: 39773006 PMC: 11707761. DOI: 10.1177/19322968241310850.


Sensing Biomechanical Alterations in Red Blood Cells of Type 1 Diabetes Patients: Potential Markers for Microvascular Complications.

Di Santo R, Niccolini B, Rizzi A, Bertini L, Pires Marafon D, Vaccaro M Biosensors (Basel). 2024; 14(12).

PMID: 39727851 PMC: 11674557. DOI: 10.3390/bios14120587.


Effectiveness of Predicted Low-Glucose Suspend Pump Technology in the Prevention of Hypoglycemia in People with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Real-World Data Using DIA:CONN G8.

Yoo J, Kim J, Kim J Diabetes Metab J. 2024; 49(1):144-149.

PMID: 39197835 PMC: 11788546. DOI: 10.4093/dmj.2024.0039.


DDLA: a double deep latent autoencoder for diabetic retinopathy diagnose based on continuous glucose sensors.

Tao R, Li H, Lu J, Huang Y, Wang Y, Lu W Med Biol Eng Comput. 2024; 62(10):3089-3106.

PMID: 38775870 DOI: 10.1007/s11517-024-03120-0.


References
1.
Rodbard D . Evaluating quality of glycemic control: graphical displays of hypo- and hyperglycemia, time in target range, and mean glucose. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014; 9(1):56-62. PMC: 4495532. DOI: 10.1177/1932296814551046. View

2.
Scott E, Feig D, Murphy H, Law G . Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Pregnancy: Importance of Analyzing Temporal Profiles to Understand Clinical Outcomes. Diabetes Care. 2020; 43(6):1178-1184. PMC: 7245356. DOI: 10.2337/dc19-2527. View

3.
Zaharia O, Strassburger K, Strom A, Bonhof G, Karusheva Y, Antoniou S . Risk of diabetes-associated diseases in subgroups of patients with recent-onset diabetes: a 5-year follow-up study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019; 7(9):684-694. DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30187-1. View

4.
Hill N, Hindmarsh P, Stevens R, Stratton I, Levy J, Matthews D . A method for assessing quality of control from glucose profiles. Diabet Med. 2007; 24(7):753-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2007.02119.x. View

5.
Beck R, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, Ahmann A, Bergenstal R, Haller S . Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Injections: The DIAMOND Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017; 317(4):371-378. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.19975. View