The Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) study has enrolled a racially and ethnically diverse population with type 2 diabetes, performed extensive phenotyping, and randomly assigned the participants to one of four second-line diabetes medications. The continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) substudy has been added to determine whether there are racial/ethnic differences in the relationship between average glucose (AG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). CGM will also be used to compare time in target range, glucose variability, and the frequency and duration of hypoglycemia across study groups.
Methods:
The observational CGM substudy will enroll up to 1800 of the 5047 GRADE study participants from the four treatment groups, including as many as 450 participants from each of 4 racial/ethnic minority groups to be compared: Hispanic White, non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic African American, and non-Hispanic Other. CGM will be performed for 2 weeks in proximity to a GRADE annual visit, during which an oral glucose tolerance test will be performed and HbA1c and glycated albumin measured. Indicators of interindividual variation in red blood cell turnover, based on specialized erythrocyte measurements, will also be measured to explore the potential causes of interindividual HbA1c variations.
Conclusions:
The GRADE CGM substudy will provide new insights into whether differences exist in the relationship between HbA1c and AG among different racial/ethnic groups and whether glycemic profiles differ among frequently used diabetes medications and their potential clinical implications. Understanding such differences is important for clinical care and adjustment of diabetes medications in patients of different races or ethnicities.
GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01794143
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
YudkinJS, ForrestRD, JacksonCA, et al.: Unexplained variability of glycated haemoglobin in non-diabetic subjects not related to glycaemia. Diabetologia, 1990; 33:208–215.
2.
GouldBJ, DavieSJ, YudkinJS: Investigation of the mechanism underlying the variability of glycated haemoglobin in non-diabetic subjects not related to glycaemia. Clin Chim Acta, 1997; 260:49–64.
3.
CohenRM, HolmesYR, ChenierTC, et al.: Discordance between hemoglobin A1c and fructosamine: evidence for a glycosylation gap and its relation to nephropathy in longstanding type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2003; 26:163–167.
4.
HermanWH, MaY, UwaifoG, et al; Diabetes Prevention Program ResearchGroup: Differences in A1C by race and ethnicity among patients with impaired glucose tolerance in the Diabetes Prevention Program. Diabetes Care, 2007; 30:2453–2457.
5.
ChalewSA, McCarterRJ, ThomasJ, et al.: A comparison of the glycosylation gap and hemoglobin glycation index in patients with diabetes. J Diabetes Complications, 2005; 19:218–222.
6.
KilpatrickES, RigbyAS, AtkinSL: Variability in the relationship between mean plasma glucose and HbA1c: implications for the assessment of glycemic control. Clin Chem, 2007; 53:897–901.
7.
LachinJM, GenuthS, NathanDM, et al.: The hemoglobin glycation index is not an independent predictor of the risk of microvascular complications in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes, 2007; 56:1913–1921.
8.
SacksDB, NathanDM, LachinJM: Gaps in the glycation gap hypothesis. Clin Chem, 2011; 57:150–152.
9.
ParirnelloCM, SharrettAR, MarutherNM, et al.: Racial differences in and prognostic value of biomarkers of hyperglycemia. Diabetes Care, 2016; 39:589–595.
10.
SelvinE: Are there clinical implications of racial differences in HbA1c? A difference, to be a difference, must make a difference. Diabetes Care, 2016; 39:1462–1467.
11.
NathanDM, KuenenJ, BorgR, et al.: A1C-derived average glucose study group translating the A1C assay into estimated average glucose values. Diabetes Care, 2008; 31:1473–1478.
12.
BergenstalRM, GalRL, ConnorCG, et al.; T1D Exchange Racial Differences Study Group. Racial differences in the relationship of glucose concentrations and hemoglobin A1c levels. Ann Intern Med, 2017; 167:95–102.
13.
LindsellCJ, FrancoRS, SmithEP, et al.: A method for the continuous calculation of the age of labeled red blood cells. Am J Hematol, 2008; 83:454–457.
14.
CohenRM, CiraoloP, PalascakMB, et al.Red cell lifespan heterogeneity in hematologically normal people sufficient to alter the apparent HbA1c. Blood, 2008; 112:4284–4291.
15.
KheraPK, SmithEP, LindsellCJ, et al.Use of an oral stable isotope label to confirm variation in red blood cell mean age that influences HbA1c interpretation. Am J Hematol, 2015; 90:50–55.
16.
FrancoRS: The measurement and importance of red cell survival. Am J Hematol, 2008; 84:109–114.
17.
SoranzoN, SannaS, WheelerE, et al.: Common variants at 10 genomic loci influence hemoglobin A1(C) levels via glycemic and nonglycemic pathways. Diabetes, 2010; 59:3229–3239.
18.
GRADE Study Research Group. Rationale and design of the glycemia reduction approaches in diabetes: a comparative effectiveness study. Diabetes Care, 2013; 36:2254–2261.
19.
HirschIB: Glycemic variability and diabetes complications: does it matter?. Of course it does! Diabetes Care, 2015; 38:1610–1614.
20.
DanneT, NimriR, BattelinoT, et al.: International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care, 2017; 40:1631–1640.
21.
KouzumaT, UemastuY, UsamiT, ImamuraS: Study of glycated amino acid elimination reaction for an improved enzymatic glycated albumin measurement method. Clin Chim Acta, 2004; 346:135–143.
22.
MalkaR, NathanDM, HigginsJM: Mechanistic modeling of hemoglobin glycation and red blood cell kinetics enables personalized diabetes monitoring. Sci Transl Med, 2016; 8:359.
23.
HigginsJM, MahadevanL: Physiological and pathological population dynamics of circulating human red blood cells. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA, 2010; 107:20587–20592.
24.
PatelHH, PatelHR, HigginsJM: Modulation of red blood cell population dynamics is a fundamental homeostatic response to disease. Am J Hematol, 2015; 90:422–428.
25.
HolmS: A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 1979;75, 383–386.
26.
KirkJK, D'AgostinoRBJr, BellRA, et al.: Disparities in HbA1c levels between African-American and non-Hispanic white adults with diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Care, 2006; 29:2130–2136.
27.
HeislerM, FaulJD, HaywardRA, et al.: Mechanisms for racial and ethnic disparities in glycemic control in middle-aged and older Americans in the health and retirement study. Arch Intern Med 2007, 24; 167:1853–1860.
28.
AdamsAS, TrinactyCM, ZhangF, et al.: Medication adherence and racial differences in A1C control. Diabetes Care, 2008; 31:916–921.
29.
VibertiG, LachinJ, HolmanR, et al.: ADOPT Study Group. A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial (ADOPT): baseline characteristics of Type 2 diabetic patients in North America and Europe. Diabet Med, 2006; 23:1289–1294.
30.
WolffenbuttelBH, HermanWH, GrossJL, et al.: Ethnic differences in glycemic markers in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2013; 36:2931–2936.
31.
ZiemerDC, KolmP, WeintraubWS, et al.: Glucose-independent, black-white differences in hemoglobin A1c levels: a cross-sectional analysis of 2 studies. Ann Int Med, 2010; 152:770–777.
32.
GrimsbyJL, PornealaBC, VassyJL, et al; MAGICInvestigators. Race-ethnic differences in the association of genetic loci with HbA1c levels and mortality in U.S. adults: the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III). BMC Med Genet, 2012; 13:30.
33.
MortensenHB, ChristophersenC: Glucosylation of human haemoglobin a in red blood cells studied in vitro. Kinetics of the formation and dissociation of haemoglobin A1c. Clin Chim Acta, 1983; 134:317–326.
34.
RiddlesworthTD, BeckRW, GalRL, et al.: Optimal sampling duration for continuous glucose monitoring to determine long-term glycemic control. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2018; 20:314–316.
35.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group: Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2008; 359:1464–1476.
36.
CarlsonAL, MullenDM, BergenstalRM: Clinical use of continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2017; 19:S4–S11.
37.
FrierBM: Hypoglycaemia in diabetes mellitus: epidemiology and clinical implications. Nat Rev Endocrinol, 2014:10:711–722.
38.
LipskaKJ, RossJS, WangY, et al.: National trends in US hospital admissions for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia among Medicare beneficiaries, 1999 to 2011. JAMA Intern Med, 2014; 174:1116–1124.
39.
QuY, JacoberSJ, ZhangQ, et al.: Rate of hypoglycemia in insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes can be predicted from glycemic variability data. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2012; 14:1008–1012.
40.
SiegelaarSE, KerrL, JacoberSJ, et al.: A decrease in glucose variability does not reduce cardiovascular event rates in type 2 diabetic patients after acute myocardial infarction: a reanalysis of the HEART2D study. Diabetes Care, 2011; 34:855–857.
41.
MonnierL, ColetteC: Glycemic variability: can we bridge the divide between controversies?. Diabetes Care, 2011; 34:1058–1059.
