Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • Fig displays the comparison of the percentage of subjects

    2018-11-12

    Fig. 4 displays the comparison of the percentage of subjects in these three groups between male and female. Male group had higher prevalence in borderline group and diabetic group, which was opposite in normal group (45.3% of male group vs 75.9% of female group). Also, the percentage of patients diagnosed as diabetes in male group was over 3 times more than that of female patients. Among a total of 200 patients with the age ranged from 20 to 90, 49 were 20–44years, 124 were 45–64years, 17 were 65–74years and 10 were ≥75years. The number of patients in these four age groups was further classified into normal group, borderline group and diabetic group (Fig. 5.). The percentage of patients belonging to normal group decreased (77.6–30%) with an increase in age, while the percentage of patients diagnosed as diabetes increased (10.2–60%) with an increase in age. The percentage of subjects detected as diabetes in age groups 45–64 (26.6%), 65–74 (29.4%) and ≥75 (60%) years old were 2.5, 3 and 6 times respectively higher than that of the diabetic individuals under 45years old (10.2%).
    Discussions The FPG and HbA1c are the two parameters for the detection of plasma erbb2 inhibitor level. In this study, the data were analyzed to compare these two parameters to find out which method is superior as a biomarker for the detection of diabetes. Many literatures supported that early diagnosis of diabetes is of great importance in order to reduce the diabetes complications. The current standard for the diagnosis of diabetes was developed over the world such as a fasting plasma glucose test, which is a commonly used test to evaluate people at high risk of Type 2 diabetes. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommended an acknowledged diabetic criteria for fasting plasma glucose test: FPG<6.1mmol/L indicates normal group, 6.1–6.9mmol/L indicates borderline group, FPG≥7mmol/L suggests diabetic group. This clear diabetic criterion was also used in this study. In the mid 1980s, HbA1c was recommended as a biomarker for the diagnosis of diabetes. The ADA, the European Association for Study of Diabetes, and the International Expert Committee,suggested that HbA1c should be the main test for early detection of Type 2 diabetes and pre-diabetes in asymptomatic people because HbA1c can detect abnormal status in plasma glucose earlier than FPG. In recent years, the main aim carried out was to recognize the range of HbA1c in the tracing back of complication of diabetes and diabetes control. Based on WHO proposals, the criteria of HbA1c were used in this study as: HbA1c<6.0% indicates normal group, 6.0–6.4% indicates borderline group, HbA1c≥6.5% suggests diabetic group. The correlation between HbA1c and FPG is one of the main aims to carry out in recent studies. In this study, a highly significant correlation between HbA1c and FPG (r2=0.713, P<0.05) was noted by linear regression test, which is a method to measure how well two sets of data are related. Linear regression test shows the linear relationship between two sets of data, even though it cannot provide any information regarding the slope. In this study, the data analyses showed a positive correlation of 0.713, it indicated a fairly strong relationship which was well supported by Bennett et al. 2007 and Sacks 2011 whom they demonstrated a highly significant correlation between HbA1c and FPG. A significant difference in the means between HbA1c and FPG (P<0.05) was noted by t-Test. In addition, an inconsistency between HbA1c and FPG was noted from the data when a total number of 200 subjects were classified into normal group, borderline group and diabetic group based on HbA1c criteria and FPG criteria respectively. A part of the subjects in FPG-based criteria subgroups were included into higher level group when they were classified according to HbA1c-based criteria. It was demonstrated that HbA1c was more sensitive than FPG as a biomarker for diagnosis of diabetes. The results of this study were in consistent with Lam et al. study in 2014. The results showed obviously that FPG-based group had a higher prevalence in normal group when compared with HbA1c-based group (151 cases versus 117 cases) (Fig. 2. and Fig. 3.). Most subjects in HbA1c criteria based normal group were allocated in FPG criteria based normal group (Fig. 2). However, 35 out of 151 cases in FPG based criteria based normal group were allocated into borderline and diabetic group by HbA1c based criteria (Fig. 3). This may be caused by short-term lifestyle change such as over activity, stress and drugs. It is acknowledged that HbA1c represents the plasma glucose within 2–3months while FPG represents the moment of fasting plasma glucose. These short-term lifestyle changes decrease the plasma glucose level in a short period so that the reflection of FPG is faster than that of HbA1c test.