Cited by 363Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Nonfasting Plasma Glucose is a Better Marker of Diabetic Control Than Fasting Plasma Glucose in Type 2 Diabetes

Avignon, A, Radauceanu, A, Monnier, L·1997·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative value of plasma glucose (PG) at different time points in assessing glucose control of type 2 diabetic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Glycemic profiles, i.e., PG at prebreakfast (8:00 A.M.), prelunch (11:00 A.M.), postlunch (2:00 P.M.), and extended postlunch (5:00 P.M.) times over the same day, were obtained in 66 type 2 diabetic patients on an ambulatory basis. The different time points of PG were compared with a measurement of HbA1c made in a reference laboratory. RESULTS: Extended postlunch PG was lower than prebreakfast PG (104 ± 21 vs. 133 ± 35 mg/dl, P < 0.02) in patients demonstrating good diabetic control (HbA1c ≤ 7.0%), was not different from prebreakfast PG (149 ± 47 vs. 166 ± 26 mg/dl, NS) in patients demonstrating fair diabetic control (7.0% < HbA1c ≤ 8.5%), and was higher than prebreakfast PG (221 ± 62 vs. 199 ± 49 mg/dl, P ≤ 0.01) in those demonstrating poor diabetic control (HbA1c ≤ 8.5%). Prebreakfast, prelunch, postlunch, and extended postlunch PG values were all significantly correlated with HbA1c. Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that postlunch PG and extended postlunch PG correlated significantly and independently with HbA1c, but that prebreakfast PG and prelunch PG did not. Moreover, postlunch PG and extended postlunch PG demonstrated better sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value in predicting poor glycemic control than did prebreakfast PG or prelunch PG. CONCLUSIONS: In type 2 diabetes, postlunch PG and extended postlunch PG are better predictors of glycemic control than fasting plasma glucose (FPG). We therefore suggest that they be more widely used to supplement, or substitute for, FPG in evaluating the metabolic control of type 2 diabetic patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/diacare.20.12.1822

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Avignon, A., Radauceanu, A., & Monnier, L.
Affiliations
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier (FR)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
1997-12-01
Volume
20
Issue
12
Pages
1822-1826
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2084772097
Cited by
363
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 4
FWCI
4.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, fasting blood glucose, postprandial blood glucose, HbA1c, glycemic markers, glycemic variability
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Circadian Rhythm, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Fasting, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Sensitivity and Specificity, Biomarkers, Linear Models, Postprandial Period

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