Parameters of glycemic variability in continuous glucose monitoring as predictors of diabetes: A prospective evaluation in a non-diabetic general population

2Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: To prospectively examine the ability of some glycemic variability metrics from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to predict the development of diabetes in a non-diabetic population. Methods: A total of 497 non-diabetic patients from the AEGIS study were included. Participants used a CGM system (iPro2®) over a six-day period. The following parameters were analyzed: standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation (CV) and mean amplitude of glucose excursion (MAGE). Six-years follow-up was performed. ROC curves were constructed to determine the predictive value of glycemic variability metrics. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Results: Of the 497 participants, 16 women (4.9%) and 9 men (5.2%) developed diabetes. Initial HbA1c and fasting glucose levels were significantly higher in the participants who ultimately developed diabetes. Glycemic variability metrics were also significantly higher in these subjects (SD: 18 vs. 13mg/dL; CV: 17 vs. 14%; MAGE: 36 vs. 27mg/dL; p<0.001 in all cases). SD showed the highest AUC (0.81), with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 72% for a cut-off of 14.9mg/dL. AUCs were higher in men for all metrics. Conclusions: The metrics obtained by MCG, especially SD, are effective predictors of progression to type 2 diabetes in a non-diabetic population. These findings suggest that glycemic variability is useful for the early identification of subjects at a higher risk of developing diabetes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rodríguez García, J., Camiña Darriba, F., Ortolá Devesa, J. B., Rodríguez-Segade Villamarín, S., & Valle Rodríguez, A. (2025). Parameters of glycemic variability in continuous glucose monitoring as predictors of diabetes: A prospective evaluation in a non-diabetic general population. Advances in Laboratory Medicine, 6(1), 46–51. https://doi.org/10.1515/almed-2025-0011

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free