Serum Glycated Albumin As Good Biomarker for Predicting Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Cohort Study of China National Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Survey

Yuanyuan Bai,Yujie Fang,Jie Ming,Huigang Wei,Pinghua Zhang,Juan Yan,Yongfeng Du,Qiaoyue Li,Xinwen Yu,Minglan Guo,Shengru Liang,Ruofan Hu,Qiuhe Ji
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.3477
2021-01-01
Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews
Abstract:Aims Glycated albumin (GA) is a biomarker for short-term (2-3 weeks) glycaemic control. However, the predictive utility of GA for diabetes and prediabetes is largely uncharacterised. We aimed to investigate the relationships of baseline serum GA levels with incident diabetes and prediabetes. Methods This was a longitudinal cohort study involving 516 subjects without diabetes or prediabetes at baseline. Blood glucose levels were observed during follow-up. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using COX proportional hazard models. Receiver operating characteristic curves and areas under the curves (AUCs) were used to evaluate the discriminating abilities of glycaemic biomarkers and prediction models. Results During a 9-year follow-up, 51 individuals (9.88%) developed diabetes and 92 (17.83%) prediabetes. Unadjusted HRs (95% CI) for both diabetes and prediabetes increased proportionally with increasing GA levels in a dose-response manner. Multivariable-adjusted HRs (95% CI) for diabetes were significantly elevated from 1.0 (reference) to 5.58 (1.86-16.74). However, the trend was no longer significant for prediabetes after multivariable adjustment. AUCs for GA, fasting blood glucose (FBG) and 2-h postprandial blood glucose (2h-PBG) for predicting diabetes were 0.698, 0.655 and 0.725, respectively. The AUCs for GA had no significant differences compared with those for FBG (p = 0.376) and 2h-PBG (p = 0.552). Replacing FBG or 2h-PBG or both with GA in diabetes prediction models made no significant changes to the AUCs of the models. Conclusions GA is of good prognostic utility in predicting diabetes. However, GA may not be a useful biomarker for predicting prediabetes.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?