Группа авторов

Clinical Dilemmas in Diabetes


Скачать книгу

       Jacob Kohlenberg1 and Adrian Vella2

      1 Fellow and Instructor in Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism, and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

      2 Professor of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism, and Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

      LEARNING POINTS

       Prediabetes is a heterogeneous condition with variable risk of progression to type 2 diabetes

       In addition to diabetes risk, it is associated with an increased risk of vascular disease.

       To date, lifestyle modification is the single most important tool for altering the natural history of prediabetes and progression to type 2 diabetes.

      Prediabetes is defined as an elevated fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and/or an elevated 2‐hour plasma glucose (2‐h PG) during a 75‐gram (g) oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), and/or an elevated Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), without meeting diagnostic criteria for overt diabetes mellitus (DM) [1]. The 2020 American Diabetes Association (ADA) Guidelines define prediabetes as impaired fasting glucose (IFG) with a FPG of 100–125 mg/dL, and/or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) with a 2‐h PG during a 75‐g OGTT of 140–199 mg/dL, and/or a HbA1c of 5.7–6.4% [1]. In contrast to the ADA, the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) Guidelines define intermediate hyperglycemia as IFG between 110–125 mg/dL and/or IGT with a 2‐h PG during a 75‐g OGTT between 140–199 mg/dL [2]. Unlike the ADA, the WHO does not include HbA1c as a diagnostic criterion for prediabetes.

      The definitions of both prediabetes and DM have evolved in recent decades. The WHO first defined the “borderline state” in 1965 as a 2‐h PG during a 50 or 100 g OGTT between 110–129 mg/dL [3]. The ADA has long recognized IGT, and its definition has undergone little change since its inception. First adopted by the ADA in 1997 and WHO in 1999, the term IFG was originally defined as FPG 110–125 mg/dL [4]. However, in 2003, the ADA revised the criteria for IFG to 100–125 mg/dL based on data from multiple studies showing that the risk of DM increases markedly at a FPG concentration > 100 mg/dL [5]. In 2010, the ADA added HbA1c as a diagnostic criterion for prediabetes because the relationship between HbA1c and the risk of retinopathy was similar to corresponding FPG and 2‐h PG thresholds [6].

Histogram depicts superimposed composite and component curves to describe the distribution of two-hour plasma glucose levels following an oral glucose load.

      The 2020 National Diabetes Statistics Report published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated the prevalence of prediabetes (defined by 2020 ADA criteria) to be 38.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 35.2–40.8) among adults in the United States (U.S.) [1, 16]. Overall, the prevalence of prediabetes has not changed significantly from 2005–2016. However, the number of U.S. adults who are aware that they have prediabetes increased from 6.5% (95% CI 5.3–7.9) in 2005–2008 to 13.3% (95% CI 11.0–16.0) in 2013–2016. Further, the prevalence of prediabetes increases with age: 29.1% (95% CI 25.2–33.3) of adults 18–44 years of age; 46.3% (95% CI 43.5–49.1) of adults 45–64 years of age; and 51.0% (95% CI 46.5–55.5) of adults ≥ 65 years of age. Prediabetes is also more common in men, whose prevalence is 42.3% (95% CI 38.1–46.5), compared to women, whose prevalence is 33.7% (95% CI 30.7–36.8). The prevalence of prediabetes is similar among racial/ethnic groups and among individuals of different education levels [16].

      In epidemiologic studies, isolated IGT consistently has a higher prevalence than isolated IFG [17]. The prevalence of IFG and IGT increases with age [17]. In adults less than 55 years of age, IGT is more common in women and IFG is more common in men [17]. This suggests that these two states have different pathophysiologic mechanisms.

      Genetics and lifestyle influence the pathogenesis of DM [18, 19]. Although more than 400 genetic signals have been identified as influencing risk for DM2, single polymorphisms add only small degrees of risk [20]. Polymorphisms in the Transcription factor 7‐like 2 (TCF7L2) locus have the largest‐known effect on risk for DM [20, 21]. Compared with non‐carriers, heterozygous and homozygous carriers of the at‐risk TCF7L2 variants have relative risks of developing DM of 1.45 and 2.41, respectively [20, 21].

      The relationship between genetics and lifestyle on the pathogenesis of DM was emphasized by a study comparing the prevalence of DM2 in the Pima population in Mexico versus the Pima population in the U.S. [22]. The prevalence of DM2 in the Pima population in Mexico was 6.9%, compared to 38% in the Pima population in the U.S. The prevalence of obesity in the Pima population in Mexico was significantly lower than that in the Pima population in the U.S. By comparison, the latter group also had significantly lower physical activity levels.

      Studies using the minimal model to quantitate insulin secretion and insulin action demonstrated that both indices are lower in subjects with NFG/IGT and IFG/IGT than in subjects with NFG/NGT [25, 26]. However, there was no significant difference in insulin secretion and insulin action between subjects with IFG/NGT and those with NFG/NGT. This implies that insulin secretion declines in concert with insulin action across the spectrum of prediabetes; however, subjects with isolated IFG may have an altered glucose threshold for insulin secretion without