Cited by 48Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementAdvanced Glycation End Products researchPregnancy and preeclampsia studies

Plasma glycated CD59, a novel biomarker for detection of pregnancy-induced glucose intolerance

Open access
Ghosh, Pamela, Luque-Fernandez, Miguel A., Vaidya, Anand, Ma, Dongdong, Sahoo, Rupam, Chorev, Michael, Zera, Chloe, McElrath, Thomas F. +3 more·2017·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Plasma glycated CD59 (pGCD59) is an emerging biomarker in diabetes. We assessed whether pGCD59 could predict the following: the results of the glucose challenge test (GCT) for screening of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) (primary analysis); and the diagnosis of GDM and prevalence of large for gestational age (LGA) newborns (secondary analyses). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Case-control study of 1,000 plasma samples from women receiving standard prenatal care, 500 women having a normal GCT (control subjects) and 500 women with a failed GCT and a subsequent oral glucose tolerance test (case patients). RESULTS: Compared with control subjects, the median (interquartile range) pGCD59 value was 8.5-fold higher in case patients and 10-fold higher in GDM patients, as follows: control subjects 0.33 (0.19); case patients 2.79 (1.4); GDM patients 3.23 (1.43) (P < 0.001); area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.92. LGA prevalence was 4.3% in the lowest quartile and 13.5% in the highest quartile of pGCD59. CONCLUSIONS: One pGCD59 measurement during weeks 24–28 identifies pregnancy-induced glucose intolerance with high sensitivity and specificity and can potentially identify the risk for LGA.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc16-2598

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other studies suggest that biomarkers such as CD59 or serum secreted frizzle-related protein-5 may be useful in early identification of women in whom GDM will be identified later in pregnancy.

    “Other studies suggest that biomarkers such as CD59 (287) or serum secreted frizzlerelated protein-5 (288) may be useful in early identification of women in whom GDM will be identified later in pregnancy.”

    From Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus (2023) · cites this paper as [287]

    The Results and Conclusions report that plasma glycated CD59 distinguished women with GDM and could be useful for screening. But the Research Design and Methods say samples were collected during routine screening at about 26 weeks, and the Conclusions identify detection earlier in pregnancy as a question for future studies. This paper therefore does not establish early identification of women whose GDM would be identified later in pregnancy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ghosh, P., Luque-Fernandez, M. A., Vaidya, A., Ma, D., Sahoo, R., Chorev, M., Zera, C., McElrath, T. F., Williams, M. A., Seely, E. W., & Halperin, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, U.K.
  • Division of Hematology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2017-04-27
Volume
40
Issue
7
Pages
981-984
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2609113147
Cited by
48
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7
FWCI
6.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (DK-095424, DK-62294, DK-089206, DK-101442, DK-107407, HL-111771)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Advanced Glycation End Products research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Keywords
gestational diabetes mellitus, biomarkers, glucose challenge test, large for gestational age, prenatal screening, oral glucose tolerance test, hyperglycemia in pregnancy
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Female, Gestational Age, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Infant, Pregnancy, Prenatal Care, Sensitivity and Specificity, Biomarkers, Case-Control Studies, Diabetes, Gestational, Glucose Intolerance, CD59 Antigens

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review