» Articles » PMID: 38715286

Correlation Between the Glycemia Risk Index and Longitudinal Hemoglobin A1c in Children and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

Overview
Specialty Endocrinology
Date 2024 May 8
PMID 38715286
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The glycemia risk index (GRI) is a composite metric developed and used to estimate quality of glycemia in adults with diabetes who use continuous glucose monitor (CGM) devices. In a cohort of youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D), we examined the utility of the GRI for evaluating quality of glycemia between clinic visits by analyzing correlations between the GRI and longitudinal glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measures.

Method: Using electronic health records and CGM data, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to analyze the relationship between the GRI and longitudinal HbA1c measures in youth (T1D duration ≥1 year; ≥50% CGM wear time) receiving care from a Midwest pediatric diabetes clinic network (March 2016 to May 2022). Furthermore, we analyzed correlations between HbA1c and the GRI high and low components, which reflect time spent with high/very high and low/very low glucose, respectively.

Results: In this cohort of 719 youth (aged = 2.5-18.0 years [median = 13.4; interquartile range [IQR] = 5.2]; 50.5% male; 83.7% non-Hispanic White; 68.0% commercial insurance), baseline GRI scores positively correlated with HbA1c measures at baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months later (r = 0.68, 0.65, 0.60, 0.57, and 0.52, respectively). At all time points, strong positive correlations existed between HbA1c and time spent in hyperglycemia. Substantially weaker, negative correlations existed between HbA1c and time spent in hypoglycemia.

Conclusions: In youth with T1D, the GRI may be useful for evaluating quality of glycemia between scheduled clinic visits. Additional CGM-derived metrics are needed to quantify risk for hypoglycemia in this population.

Citing Articles

Exploring the Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Pediatric Diabetes: Current Practices, Innovative Metrics, and Future Implications.

Chobot A, Piona C, Bombaci B, Kaminska-Jackowiak O, Mancioppi V, Passanisi S Children (Basel). 2024; 11(8).

PMID: 39201842 PMC: 11352692. DOI: 10.3390/children11080907.

References
1.
Shah V, Sakamoto C, Pyle L . Optimal Sampling Duration for Continuous Glucose Monitoring for the Estimation of Glycemia Risk Index. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2022; 25(2):140-142. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2022.0401. View

2.
Pulkkinen M, Varimo T, Hakonen E, Harsunen M, Hyvonen M, Janer J . MiniMed 780G™ in 2- to 6-Year-Old Children: Safety and Clinical Outcomes After the First 12 Weeks. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2022; 25(2):100-107. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2022.0313. View

3.
Bergenstal R, Ahmann A, Bailey T, Beck R, Bissen J, Buckingham B . Recommendations for standardizing glucose reporting and analysis to optimize clinical decision making in diabetes: the ambulatory glucose profile. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013; 7(2):562-78. PMC: 3737658. DOI: 10.1177/193229681300700234. View

4.
Hoogendoorn C, Hernandez R, Schneider S, Harmel M, Pham L, Crespo-Ramos G . Glycemic Risk Index Profiles and Predictors Among Diverse Adults With Type 1 Diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2023; 18(5):1070-1078. PMC: 11418469. DOI: 10.1177/19322968231164151. View

5.
Miller K, Foster N, Beck R, Bergenstal R, DuBose S, DiMeglio L . Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the U.S.: updated data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015; 38(6):971-8. DOI: 10.2337/dc15-0078. View