Key result
HbA1c and fasting glucose classifications discord in ~26% of older adults.
Why the study?
Fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c reflect different aspects of glycemic regulation and may yield discordant classifications, particularly among older adults.
Does HbA1c-based glycemic classification differ from FPG-based classification in community-dwelling older adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=203)
Does HbA1c-based glycemic classification differ from FPG-based classification in community-dwelling older adults?
Effect estimate: weighted κ 0.486 (95% CI 0.355-0.601)
FPG and HbA1c identify overlapping but non-equivalent glycemic classifications in older adults, with discordance occurring in approximately one-quarter of patients.
Background: Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) reflect different aspects of glycemic regulation and may yield discordant laboratory-defined classifications, particularly among older adults. Methods: This cross-sectional analytical study included 203 community-dwelling Thai adults aged ≥60 years. Single FPG and HbA1c measurements were classified as normal-range, prediabetes-range, or diabetes-range values. Agreement was evaluated using exact agreement, Cohen’s kappa (κ), linear-weighted κ, and symmetry tests. Four binary laboratory-defined phenotypes were compared using age- and sex-adjusted HC3 robust regression. The Benjamini–Hochberg procedure was applied separately across 13 omnibus tests and 39 phenotype-specific contrasts. Results: Exact three-category agreement was 70.9% (unweighted κ = 0.376; 95% CI, 0.247–0.498; weighted κ = 0.486; 95% CI, 0.355–0.601). Binary classifications were discordant in 25.6% of participants; HbA1c-only dysglycemia was numerically more frequent than FPG-only dysglycemia (15.8% vs. 9.9%), but directional asymmetry was not significant (p = 0.127). FDR-supported overall phenotype differences involved adiposity, fasting insulin, and lipid measures, whereas hemodynamic measures did not differ. Conclusions: FPG and HbA1c identified overlapping but non-equivalent laboratory-defined groups. Discordant single measurements warrant confirmation and evaluation of biological, analytical, and treatment-related influences; this study does not establish that routine dual testing improves diagnosis or outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Prakobkaew et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Dysglycemia (n=203). Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) testing was evaluated on Exact three-category agreement between FPG and HbA1c classifications (weighted κ 0.486, 95% CI 0.355-0.601). Fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c classifications showed 70.9% exact agreement (weighted κ 0.486; 95% CI 0.355-0.601), with binary classifications discordant in 25.6% of older adults.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: