The Role Of Hba1C Testing In Diagnosing Diabetes: 종 설 (Review)
The Role Of Hba1C Testing In Diagnosing Diabetes: 종 설 (Review)
The Role Of Hba1C Testing In Diagnosing Diabetes: 종 설 (Review)
(Review)
A1C
Diabetes is often not diagnosed until complications appear, and approximately 30% of people with diabetes may be undiagnosed.
Also, complications of diabetes have become a leading cause of impairment of life quality. Therefore efficient approaches to
diagnosing diabetes should be developed.
The most widely used test for diagnosis of diabetes includes fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and the oral glucose tolerance test
(OGTT). The international expert committee has recently recommended the use of HbA1C assay to diagnose diabetes, with a
threshold of 6.5%. In 2010, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) adopted the proposal and it became part of the diagnostic
criteria of diabetes in the 2010 Clinical Practice Recommendations. Previously, HbA1C had been used primarily to monitor
glycemic control among individuals with diabetes. However, over the last decade, the HbA1C measurement has become standardized, facilitating its recognition as an acceptable diagnostic method for diabetes. And several practical considerations favor the
use of HbA1C in diagnosing diabetes. The HbA1C does not require the patient to be fasting, can be done at any time that a visit is
scheduled, is simpler to perform than the 2 hr OGTT, and is less dependent on the patients health status at the moment of the blood
draw. Also HbA1C is less sensitive to several preanalytical variables, and biological variability is lower than that of both 2 hr
post-load glucose and FPG. However, this advantage must be balanced by the low sensitivity of HbA1C, the limited standardization
of HbA1C in certain regions, the incomplete correlation between HbA1C and glucose, and risk of misdiagnosis in patient with
increased red blood cell turnover, end stage renal disease, with certain forms of hemoglobinopathies. (Korean J Med 79:495-499, 2010)
Key Words: HbA1C; Diabetes
,
,
.
.
NDDG)
140 mg/dL 75 g 2
200 mg/dL ,
- 495 -
140 mg/dL 2
, A1C 6.5%
126 mg/dL
, , ,
, A1C
. 110~125
, A1C 6.5%
mg/dL ,
. 2003
5)
A1C<6.5% 1.8% .
110
1)
6.5% , 20
100 mg/dL .
A1C
9.6%, 19.0%
, ,
. A1C
, 1.8%,
A1C
2 (5.0% combined,
, .
A1C 2009
2)
A1C .
A1C
A1C
. A1C ,
A1C 6.5%
A1C ,
A1C ,
. 2010
A1C 6.5%
6).
A1C
4)
.
126 mg/dL
A1C
45% 61% .
A1C
. 1997
Curve
A1C
76~95%, 67~86%,
A1C
7)
13-18)
. A1C 5.9%
A1C .
, ,
A1C, , 2
A1C
A1C
. A1C , 2
. ,
0.46, 0.33 ,
0.71, 0.79
. ROC curve
. , A1C
, ,
24).
. ,
A1C ,
1,3,7,25,26),
, , .
. A1C
A1C
A1C
8)
. Petersen 12~15%
2009 , 75 g
A1C 1.9% ,
9)
10)
A1C . 8
A1C 2% .
1,000
2
11)
, 2, A1C .
A1C Bennett ,
ROC curve ,
A1C
(126 mg/dL)
, A1C
, 6.1%, 6.2%,
12)
100~125 mg/dL
A1C 6.1% ,
59.0%, .
- 497 -
: 79 5 603 2010
A1C 6.5% , 75 g
. ,
68.1%,
A1C . , A1C
27)
, 36.1%, 97.9% .
3 4,600
. A1C
A1C 6.1%.
69.4 2,107
, A1C , 198
28)
, A1C 6.5%
A1C .
,
44%, 79%
4). (63%)
A1C
1/3 .
A1C ,
A1C 6.5% . ,
0.4~0.7% ,
, A1C 6.1%
A1C 1~1.5% ,
29,30). ,
A1C ,
A1C
. 1
. A1C
A1C
. ,
200 mg/dL
. A1C
.
A1C
: A1C;
A1C
. , HbS, HbC, HbF, HbE
A1C .
, affinity
assays .
2009 CAP A1C survey 6.5%
S C CV 10% ,
20% E , 6%
D
. , ,
, , ,
A1C .
A1C , A1C
- 498 -
REFERENCES
1) Jesudason DR, Dunstan K, Leong D, Wittert GA. Macrovascular
risk and diagnostic criteria for type 2 diabetes: implications for
the use of FPG and HbA(1c) for cost-effective screening. Diabetes
Care 26:485-490, 2003
2) International Expert Committee. International Expert Committee
report on the role of the A1C assay in the diagnosis of diabetes.
Diabetes Care 32:1327-1334, 2009
3) American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of
diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 33(Suppl 1):S62-S69, 2010
4) Kramer CK, Araneta MR, Barrett-Connor E. A1C and diabetes diagnosis: the rancho bernardo study. Diabetes Care 33:101-103,
2010
5) Carson AP, Reynolds K, Fonseca VA, Muntner P. Comparison of
. A1C
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
29)
30)
- 499 -