Diabetes Care, Vol 17, Issue 5 436-439, Copyright © 1994 by American Diabetes Association

ARTICLES

Fasting plasma glucose in screening for NIDDM in the U.S. and Israel

M Modan and MI Harris
Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel.

OBJECTIVE--To demonstrate the inadequacy of fasting plasma glucose for screening for NIDDM, even among groups at high risk for diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--Representative samples of adults 40-69 years of age in the U.S. (n = 2,035) and Israel (n = 2,316) were selected. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was measured and a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was administered. Subjects with undiagnosed NIDDM were identified using internationally accepted diagnostic criteria (FPG > or = 7.8 mM or 2-h plasma glucose > or = 11.1 mM). RESULTS--Only 31-38% of subjects with undiagnosed NIDDM had fasting hyperglycemia (> or = 7.8 mM), and 36% in the U.S. and 19% in Israel had normoglycemia (< 6.1 mM). Postchallenge glucose, diagnostic of diabetes, was associated with all fasting values, including values < 5.0 mM. Based on sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value, no FPG level provided a satisfactory cutoff point to use in screening for undiagnosed NIDDM. Sensitivity at each FPG cutoff point varied little among groups classified by age, sex, race, blood pressure status, or body mass index (BMI) levels > 23, but sensitivity was lower among those with BMI levels < 23. CONCLUSIONS--In the clinical setting, FPG is commonly used in screening for NIDDM. However, fasting values < or = 7.8 mM are highly insensitive for detecting NIDDM. Lower FPG cutoff points tha achieve acceptable sensitivity are accompanied by inadequately low specificity, require a high percentage of patients to be retested, and result in a low yield of diabetes among those screened. Clinicians and researchers who seek detection of undiagnosed NIDDM should use the OGTT, because FPG lacks adequate sensitivity and specificity for this purpose.
CiteULike    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Greaves, J. Stead, A. Hattersley, P Ewings, P Brown, and P. Evans A simple pragmatic system for detecting new cases of type 2 diabetes and impaired fasting glycaemia in primary care Fam. Pract., February 1, 2004; 21(1): 57 - 62. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. B. Davidson How Do We Diagnose Diabetes and Measure Blood Glucose Control?: View 1: (Diagnosing) A Clinical Basis for the Diagnosis of Diabetes Diabetes Spectr, April 1, 2001; 14(2): 67 - 71. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. C. Perry, R. R. Shankar, N. Fineberg, J. McGill, and A. D. Baron HbA1c Measurement Improves the Detection of Type 2 Diabetes in High-Risk Individuals With Nondiagnostic Levels of Fasting Plasma Glucose: The Early Diabetes Intervention Program (EDIP) Diabetes Care, March 1, 2001; 24(3): 465 - 471. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				K. Wiener and N.B. Roberts Age does not influence levels of HbA1c in normal subject QJM, March 1, 1999; 92(3): 169 - 173. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Yu, P. Mitchell, G. Berry, W. Li, and J. J. Wang Retinopathy in Older Persons Without Diabetes and Its Relationship to Hypertension Arch Ophthalmol, January 1, 1998; 116(1): 83 - 89. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]