Methods We compared the prognostic value of glycated hemoglobin and fasting glucose for identifying adults at risk for diabetes or cardiovascular disease. We measured glycated hemoglobin in whole-blood samples from 11,092 black or white adults who did not have a history of diabetes or cardiovascular disease and who attended the second visit (occurring in the 1990–1992 period) of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Results The glycated hemoglobin value at baseline was associated with newly diagnosed diabetes and cardiovascular outcomes. For glycated hemoglobin values of less than 5.0%, 5.0 to less than 5.5%, 5.5 to less than 6.0%, 6.0 to less than 6.5%, and 6.5% or greater, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) for diagnosed diabetes were 0.52 (0.40 to 0.69), 1.00 (reference), 1.86 (1.67 to 2.08), 4.48 (3.92 to 5.13), and 16.47 (14.22 to 19.08), respectively. For coronary heart disease, the hazard ratios were 0.96 (0.74 to 1.24), 1.00 (reference), 1.23 (1.07 to 1.41), 1.78 (1.48 to 2.15), and 1.95 (1.53 to 2.48), respectively. The hazard ratios for stroke were similar. In contrast, glycated hemoglobin and death from any cause were found to have a J-shaped association curve. All these associations remained significant after adjustment for the baseline fasting glucose level. The association between the fasting glucose levels and the risk of cardiovascular disease or death from any cause was not significant in models with adjustment for all covariates as well as glycated hemoglobin. For coronary heart disease, measures of risk discrimination showed significant improvement when glycated hemoglobin was added to models including fasting glucose. Conclusions In this community-based population of nondiabetic adults, glycated hemoglobin was similarly associated with a risk of diabetes and more strongly associated with risks of cardiovascular disease and death from any cause as compared with fasting glucose. These data add to the evidence supporting the use of glycated hemoglobin as a diagnostic test for diabetes.

/pdf/glycated-hemoglobin-diabetes-and-cardiovascular-risk-in-36vfo0skud.pdf

Glycated Hemoglobin, Diabetes, and Cardiovascular Risk in Nondiabetic Adults

Objective To estimate the relative risk forfatal coronary heart disease associated with diabetesin men and women·Design Meta-analysis of prospective cohortstudies·Data sources Studies published between 1966and March 2005, identified through Embase andMedline, using a combined text word and MESHheading search strategy, in addition to studies fromthe Asia Pacific Cohort Studies Collaboration·Review methods Studies were eligible if theyhad reported estimates of the relative risk for fatalcoronary heart disease comparing men and womenwith and without diabetes·Studies were excluded ifthe estimates were not adjusted at least for age·Results 37 studies of type 2 diabetes and fatalcoronary heart disease among a total of 447 064patients were identified·The rate of fatal coronaryheart disease was higher in patients with diabetesthan in those without (5·4v1·6%)·The overallsummary relative risk for fatal coronary heart diseasein patients with diabetes compared with no diabeteswas significantly greater among women than it wasamong men: 3.50, 95% confidence interval 2.70 to4·53v2.06, 1·81 to 2.34·After exclusion of theeight studies that had adjusted only for age, thedifference in risk between the sexes was substantiallyreduced but still highly significant·The pooled ratioof the relative risks ( women: men) from the 29studies with multiple adjusted estimates was 1·46(1·14 to 1·88)·Conclusions The relative risk for fatalcoronary heart disease associated with diabetes is50% higher in women than it is in men·This greaterexcess coronary risk may be explained by more adverse cardiovascular risk profiles among women with diabetes,combined with possible disparities in treatment that favour men·

Excess risk of fatal coronary heart disease associated with diabetes in men and women:meta-analysis of 37 prospective cohort studies

Metformin, one of the oldest oral antidiabetic agents and still recommended by almost all current guidelines as the first-line treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), has become the medication with steadily increasing potential therapeutic indications. A broad spectrum of experimental and clinical studies showed that metformin has a pleiotropic activity and favorable effect in different pathological conditions, including prediabetes, type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Moreover, there are numerous studies, meta-analyses and population studies indicating that metformin is safe and well tolerated and may be associated with cardioprotective and nephroprotective effect. Recently, it has also been reported in some studies, but not all, that metformin, besides improvement of glucose homeostasis, may possibly reduce the risk of cancer development, inhibit the incidence of neurodegenerative disease and prolong the lifespan. This paper presents some arguments supporting the initiation of metformin in patients with newly diagnosed T2DM, especially those without cardiovascular risk factors or without established cardiovascular disease or advanced kidney insufficiency at the time of new guidelines favoring new drugs with pleotropic effects complimentary to glucose control. Moreover, it focuses on the potential beneficial effects of metformin in patients with T2DM and coexisting chronic diseases.

https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8247/14/2/122/pdf

The current and potential therapeutic use of metformin—the good old drug

Diabetes is a risk factor for many cancers; chronic hyperglycemia is hypothesized to be, in part, explanatory. We evaluated the association between glycated hemoglobin, a time-integrated glycemia measure, and cancer incidence and mortality in nondiabetic and diabetic men and women. We conducted a prospective study of 12,792 cancer-free participants attending the second visit (1990-1992) of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. We measured glycated hemoglobin in whole-blood samples using HPLC. Incident cancers were ascertained from registries and hospital records through 2006. We estimated multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of cancer incidence and mortality for nondiabetic participants with values ≥ 5.7% (elevated), nondiabetic participants with <5.0% (low) and diabetic participants all compared with nondiabetic participants with 5.0-5.6% (normal). We ascertained 2,349 incident cancer cases and 887 cancer deaths. Compared with nondiabetic women with normal glycated hemoglobin, nondiabetic women with elevated values had an increased risk of cancer incidence (HR:1.24; 95% CI:1.07,1.44) and mortality (HR:1.58; 95% CI:1.23,2.05) as did diabetic women (incidence, HR:1.30; 95% CI:1.06,1.60, mortality, HR:1.96; 95% CI:1.40,2.76). Nondiabetic women with low values also had increased risk. Diabetic women with good glycemic control (<7.0%) had a lower cancer risk than those with higher values. Glycated hemoglobin in nondiabetic and diabetic men, and diabetes were not statistically significantly associated with total cancer risk. Our findings support the hypothesis that chronic hyperglycemia, even in the nondiabetic range, increases cancer risk in women. Maintaining normal glycated hemoglobin overall, and good glycemic control among diabetic adults, may reduce the burden of cancer, especially in women.

Glycated hemoglobin and cancer incidence and mortality in the Atherosclerosis in Communities (ARIC) Study, 1990-2006.

OBJECTIVE Glycated hemoglobin (HbA 1c ) is a robust biomarker of the preceding 2 to 3 months average blood glucose level. The aim of this study was to examine the association between HbA 1c and mortality in a cohort of Southeast Asians. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Analysis of 7,388 men and women, mean age 62 years, from the Singapore Chinese Health Study who provided a blood sample at the follow-up I visit (1999–2004) and reported no history of diabetes, previous adverse cardiovascular events, or cancer. A total of 888 deaths were identified through 31 December 2011 via registry linkage. Participants represented a random study sample of potential control subjects for a nested case-control Genome Wide Association Study of type 2 diabetes in the population. Hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause and cause-specific mortality by six categories of HbA 1c were estimated with Cox regression models. RESULTS Relative to participants with an HbA 1c of 5.4–5.6% (36–38 mmol/mol), participants with HbA 1c ≥6.5% (≥48 mmol/mol) had an increased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality during an average of 10.1 years of follow-up; HRs (95% CIs) were 1.96 (1.56–2.46), 2.63 (1.77–3.90), and 1.51 (1.04–2.18), respectively. No level of HbA 1c was associated with increased risk of respiratory mortality. Levels 1c were not associated with mortality during follow-up. The results did not materially change after excluding observation of first 3 years post–blood draw. CONCLUSION HbA 1c levels consistent with undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (≥6.5%) are associated with an increased risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality in Chinese men and women.

/pdf/glycated-hemoglobin-and-all-cause-and-cause-specific-5997xdh36p.pdf

Glycated Hemoglobin and All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality in Singaporean Chinese Without Diagnosed Diabetes: The Singapore Chinese Health Study

OBJECTIVE Determine the relationship between hemoglobin A1c value and 5-year, all-cause mortality in nonsmoking life insurance applicants. METHOD By use of the Social Security Master Death Index, mortality was examined in 286,443 non-smoking insurance applicants aged 40 and up for whom blood samples for hemoglobin A1c were submitted to the Clinical Reference Laboratory. Results were stratified by hemoglobin A1c value, gender and age bands 40 to 59, 60 to 69 and 70 and up. RESULTS Increased mortality is apparent at hemoglobin A1c values of 6% and above, is linear, and on a percentage basis decreases with age. Hemoglobin A1c values less than 5% also are associated with increased mortality. Absolute mortality rates for females with elevated hemoglobin A1c are generally lower than rates for males, although mortality relative to the gender-specific reference group with hemoglobin A1c of 5% to 5.9% is generally the same for both. CONCLUSION The importance of even small elevations of hemoglobin A1c above 5.9% is apparent. For screening, it is the degree of blood sugar elevation as measured by hemoglobin A1c rather than any diagnostic label that is critical in risk assessment.

Relationship of hemoglobin A1c to mortality in nonsmoking insurance applicants.

OBJECTIVE Determine the relationship between the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) value and all-cause mortality in life insurance applicants aged 50 years and over. METHOD By use of the Social Security Master Death Index, mortality was examined in 115,590 insurance applicants aged 50 and up for whom blood samples for CEA were submitted to the Clinical Reference Laboratory. Results were stratified by CEA value (<5 ng/mL, 5 to 9.9 ng/mL, 10+ ng/mL), smoking status, and age groups (50-59 years, 60-69 years, and 70 years and up). RESULTS Relative mortality is increased at CEA values between 5 and 9.9 ng/mL and further increased at 10+ ng/mL for all age groups, with the most dramatic increase at the youngest ages. Excess mortality appears to last at least 3 to 4 years after the elevated result. Five-year all-cause mortality in applicants with CEA values of 10+ ng/mL is 25.2% with a mortality ratio relative to those with a CEA <5 ng/mL of 1156%. CONCLUSION This study shows that CEA can detect the risk of early excess mortality in life insurance applicants; CEA levels of 5 ng/mL and over may be of concern. CEA testing beginning at age 50 years for life insurance applicants could capture 4.6% of early mortality if the threshold for further evaluation was set at 10 ng/mL. Only 0.4% of all applicants aged 50 and over have CEA values at or above this threshold.

Increased mortality associated with elevated carcinoembryonic antigen in insurance applicants.

Introduction Numerous studies have demonstrated the accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). Portable, handheld devices have expanded the clinical scope of POCUS at a fraction of the cost of traditional, cart-based models. There is a paucity of data assessing the diagnostic accuracy of portable devices. Our objective in this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of a portable device with a cart-based model. Methods This was an institutional review board-approved, observational, prospective, randomized clinical trial (NCT05196776) of a convenience sample of adult patients who presented to a university-based health system. Patients who required a cardiac, lung, renal, aorta, or biliary POCUS were randomized to a portable device or to a cart-based model. We hypothesized that the cart-based model would have a 90% diagnostic accuracy vs 70% for the handheld device. To detect a 20% difference, the sample size was calculated to be 98, with 49 patients randomized to each arm. We used standard 2x2 tables to calculate test characteristics with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results A total of 110 patients were enrolled, with 56 patients randomized to the cart-based model and 54 to the handheld device. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of the cart-based vs handheld were 77.8% (40–97.2) vs 92.9% (66.1–99.8), 91.5% (79.6–97.6) vs 92.3% (79.1–98.4%), and 89.3% (78.1–96) vs 92.5% (81.8–97.9), respectively. Conclusion The diagnostic accuracy of a portable, handheld device is similar to that of a cart-based model.

Diagnostic Accuracy of a Handheld Ultrasound vs a Cart-based Model: A Randomized Clinical Trial

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10069989

Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia

Enhancing medical students' point-of-care ultrasound confidence and competence

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Mark E Magee

Author Tools

Chat about Author