Glycemic Variability and Its Association With Demographics and Lifestyles in a General Adult Population

Abstract

Objective:The objective was to investigate glycemic variability indices in relation to demographic factors and common environmental lifestyles in a general adult population.Methods:The A Estrada Glycation and Inflammation Study is a cross-sectional study covering 1516 participants selected by sampling of the population aged 18 years and over. A subsample of 622 individuals participated in the Glycation project, which included continuous glucose monitoring procedures. Five glycemic variability indices were analyzed, that is, SD, MAGE, MAG, CONGA1, and MODD.Results:Participants had a mean age of 48 years, 62% were females, and 12% had been previously diagnosed with diabetes. In the population without diabetes, index distributions were not normal but skewed to the right. Distributional regression models that adjusted for age, gender, BMI, alcohol intake, smoking status, and physical activity confirmed that all indices were positively and independently associated with fasting glucose levels and negatively with heavy drinking. SD, MAGE, and CONGA1 were positively associated with aging, and MAG was negatively associated with BMI. None of the GVI studied were influenced by physical activity. Age-group-specific reference values are given for the indices.Conclusions:This study yielded age-specific reference values for glucose variability indices in a general adult population. Significant increases were observed with aging. Heavy drinking of more than 140 g/week was associated with significant decreases in variability indices. No differences were found between males and females. These normative ranges provide a guide for clinical care, and may offer an alternative treatment target among persons with diabetes.

Distinct impacts of sleep-disordered breathing on glycemic variability in patients with and without diabetes mellitus

“…In the present study, median MAGE in the non-DM patients seems to be higher than those in earlier reports [ 31 – 33 ]. Zhou et al and Gude et al have reported that median MAGE for non-DM subjects was 31 mg/dl and 26 mg/dl, respectively.…”

“…MAGE may be influenced by concomitant diseases, since MAGE for non-DM patients with coronary artery disease was reported to be high (60.1±32.9 mg/dl) [ 34 ]. Since non-DM patients in the present study were older and had high rates of history of metabolic and cardiac diseases ( Table 1 ), MAGE in this group was relatively higher than that in the healthy control subjects in the previous reports [ 31 – 33 ].…”

Glycemic variability in the development of cardiovascular complications in diabetes

“…In fact, in youth with T1D, higher BMI and adiposity may relate to increased hyperglycemic excursions . Moreover, a cross‐sectional study, which analysed continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data from a general adult population (12% had been previously diagnosed with diabetes), showed that mean absolute glucose was negatively associated with BMI, while GV indexes were positively associated with aging . Interestingly, no gender difference in GV parameters was observed in the latter study.…”

Assessing the relationship between markers of glycemic control through flexible copula regression models

“…AEGIS is a cross‐sectional population‐based study being performed in the municipality of A Estrada (NW, Spain); the data collection and recruiting phase were completed in March 2015. Its aim is to investigate the association between glycation, inflammation, lifestyles, and their association with common diseases and to study discordances between markers for glycaemia . An outline of the AEGIS study is available at www.clinicaltrials.gov, code NCT01796184.…”

“…Its aim is to investigate the association between glycation, inflammation, lifestyles, and their association with common diseases and to study discordances between markers for glycaemia. 18 An outline of the AEGIS study is available at www.clinicaltrials.gov, code NCT01796184. The study was reviewed and approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee from Galicia, Spain (CEIC2012-025).…”