Cited by 128Diabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Historical HbA1c values may explain the type 2 diabetes legacy effect: UKPDS 88

Open access
Lind, Marcus, Imberg, Henrik, Coleman, Ruth L., Nerman, Olle, Holman, Rury R.·2021·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Type 2 diabetes all-cause mortality (ACM) and myocardial infarction (MI) glycemic legacy effects have not been explained. We examined their relationships with prior individual HbA1c values and explored the potential impact of instituting earlier, compared with delayed, glucose-lowering therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Twenty-year ACM and MI hazard functions were estimated from diagnosis of type 2 diabetes in 3,802 UK Prospective Diabetes Study participants. Impact of HbA1c values over time was analyzed by weighting them according to their influence on downstream ACM and MI risks. RESULTS: Hazard ratios for a one percentage unit higher HbA1c for ACM were 1.08 (95% CI 1.07–1.09), 1.18 (1.15–1.21), and 1.36 (1.30–1.42) at 5, 10, and 20 years, respectively, and for MI was 1.13 (1.11–1.15) at 5 years, increasing to 1.31 (1.25–1.36) at 20 years. Imposing a one percentage unit lower HbA1c from diagnosis generated an 18.8% (95% CI 21.1–16.0) ACM risk reduction 10–15 years later, whereas delaying this reduction until 10 years after diagnosis showed a sevenfold lower 2.7% (3.1–2.3) risk reduction. Corresponding MI risk reductions were 19.7% (22.4–16.5) when lowering HbA1c at diagnosis, and threefold lower 6.5% (7.4–5.3%) when imposed 10 years later. CONCLUSIONS: The glycemic legacy effects seen in type 2 diabetes are explained largely by historical HbA1c values having a greater impact than recent values on clinical outcomes. Early detection of diabetes and intensive glucose control from the time of diagnosis is essential to maximize reduction of the long-term risk of glycemic complications.

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/dc20-2439

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • Early intervention is essential for reducing microvascular complications.

    “and early intervention is essential (13).”

    From Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) (2022) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Introduction reports that intensive glycemic control lowered microvascular complications in people with type 2 diabetes, and Conclusions > Other Studies says minimizing hyperglycemia is particularly important for these complications (page numbers unavailable). The paper advocates early glucose optimization, but its analysis of the advantage of early over delayed control concerns mortality and myocardial infarction, not microvascular complications. It therefore does not establish that early intervention specifically is essential for reducing microvascular complications. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    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
Lind, M., Imberg, H., Coleman, R. L., Nerman, O., & Holman, R. R.
Affiliations
  • NU Hospital Group (SE)
  • Chalmers University of Technology (SE)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Lind, Marcus
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2021-07-08
Volume
44
Issue
10
Pages
2231-2237
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W3180546758
Cited by
128
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 6
FWCI
16.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Eli Lilly and Company
  • AstraZeneca
  • Intarcia Therapeutics
  • Dexcom
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Chalmers Tekniska Högskola
  • Novo Nordisk
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, HbA1c, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, glucose-lowering therapy, tight glycemic control, early detection of diabetes, long-term risk, UK Prospective Diabetes Study

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