NONFASTING PLASMA-GLUCOSE IS A BETTER MARKER OF DIABETIC CONTROL THANFASTING PLASMA-GLUCOSE IN TYPE-2 DIABETES

OBJECTIVE - To evaluate the relative value of plasma glucose (PG) at d ifferent time points in assessing glucose control of type 2 diabetic p atients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - Glycemic profiles, i.e., PG al 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 obta ined in 66 ripe 2 diabetic patients on an ambulatory basis. The differ ent time points of PG were compared with a measurement of HbA(1c) made in a reference laboratory, RESULTS - Extended postlunch PG was lower than prebreakfast PG (104 +/- 21 vs. 133 +/- 35 mg/dl, P < 0.01) in pa tients demonstrating good diabetic control (HbA(1c), less than or equa l to 7.0%), was not different from prebreakfast PG (149 +/- 47 vs. 166 +/- 26 mg/dl, NS) in patients demonstrating fair diabetic control (7. 0% < HbA(1c) less than or equal to 8.5%), and was higher than prebreak fast PG (221 +/- 62 vs, 199 +/- 49 mg/dl, P less than or equal to 0.01 ) in those demonstrating poor diabetic control (HbA(1c) less than or e qual to 8.5%). Prebreakfast, prelunch, postlunch, and extended postlun ch PG values were all significantly correlated with HbA(1c). Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that postlunch PG and extended postlunch PG correlated significantly and independently with HbA(1c), but that prebreakfast PG and prelunch PG did not. Moreover, postlunch PG and extended postlunch PG demonstrated better sensitivity, specifi city and positive predictive value in predicting poor glycemic control than did prebreakfast PG or prelunch PG. CONCLUSIONS - In type 2 diab etes, postlunch PG and extended postlunch PG are better predictors of glycemic control than fasting plasma glucose (FPG). We therefore sugge st that they be more widely used to supplement, or substitute for, FPG in evaluating the metabolic control of type 2 diabetic patients.