Glycemic Control Biomarkers: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Andrea Rescalli
,
Elena Maria Varoni
,
Francesco Cellesi
,
Pietro Cerveri

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a worldwide-spread chronic metabolic disease that occurs when the pancreas fails to produce enough insulin levels or when the body fails to effectively use the secreted pancreatic insulin, eventually resulting in hyperglycemia. According to the International Diabetes Federation, in 2021, 537 million adults were suffering from DM, resulting in 6.7 million deaths and a 966 billion dollars healthcare cost. Systematic glycemic control is the only procedure at the disposal to prevent diabetes long-term complications such as cardiovascular disorders, kidney diseases, nephropathy, neuropathy, and retinopathy. The gold standard for glycemic control assessment in clinics is the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement,  but glycated albumin (GA) has recently gained more and more attention as a control biomarker thanks to its shorter lifespan and wider reliability compared to HbA1c. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and blood glucose monitoring (BGM) remain useful individual tools for diabetes self-management. 

  • diabetes mellitus
  • glycemic control
  • glycated proteins
  • glycated hemoglobin
  • glycated albumin

1. Introduction

The current management of diabetes mellitus (DM) demands rigorous and systematic monitoring of the glycemic status of the patient, whose results can be exploited to assess therapy effectiveness, as well as to adjust diet and/or medications to improve blood glucose control. In the ’70s, diabetes was predominantly monitored through urine ketone and glucose measurements [1][2][3]. The former currently remains a valid tool to denote imminent or established diabetic ketoacidosis, i.e., a life-threatening complication induced by insulin deficiency, and hence it is recommended to all patients with diabetes, especially type 1 DM [4][5]. Conversely, technical advances in blood glucose monitoring [6][7][8] together with additional clinical experience and extensive research investigations, marked the progressive abandonment of urine glucose testing as the recommended approach to home diabetes monitoring. Indeed, urine glucose level was proven to be an unreliable estimator of plasma glucose concentration due to wide confidence levels and poor correlation [9][10], significant inter-patient variability of glucose renal thresholds [11], and drug interference [12]. At the end of the last century, the results of two important randomized controlled trials were published. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) [13][14] was conducted on 1441 type 1 diabetic patients, randomly assigned to an intervention group administered with intensive insulin therapy (three or more daily injections) guided by frequent BGM, and a control group in which patients followed conventional therapy requiring one or two daily injections; its findings cemented the clinical importance of rigorous monitoring aimed at maintaining the glycemic status of the subject as close as possible to the normal range. The UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) [15] involved 3867 type 2 diabetic patients randomly split into an intervention group receiving different sulfonylureas (i.e., chlorpropamide or glibenclamide) or insulin and a control group treated with conventional diet; the study is to establishing whether intensive glucose control had an impact on lowering the risk of macro/micro-vascular complications, and whether any pharmaceutical therapy was more advantageous than the others. Its results showed that improvement in glycemic control, assessed over a 10-year temporal window with HbA1c systematic monitoring, rather than any specific therapy, was the principal factor involved in the observed risk reductions. As a consequence, nowadays, glycemic control is assessed in clinics by the HbA1c measurement, whereas continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and BGM are useful individual tools for diabetes self-management [16].

2. Glycated Proteins

Blood glucose and urine ketone measurements are single-point measurements that provide essential information on diabetes management on a daily basis; glycated proteins instead, such as HbA1c and glycated albumin (GA), introduce a new, complementary layer in glycemic control monitoring by reflecting the mean glucose level over longer, past periods, and are not affected by daily fluctuations induced by diet or physical activity. Glycation is a non-enzymatic mechanism also called a Maillard reaction, which consists of the covalent addition of a reducing sugar to a free amino group of amine-containing molecules such as proteins to form an unstable, reversible product (i.e., Schiff base) which is then rearranged to a more stable conformation known as Amadori product or ketoamine. This process is shown in Figure 1.
Biosensors 12 00687 g001 550
Figure 1. Reactions involved in the glycation of proteins. In particular, hemoglobin (PDB ID: 1BBB) and albumin (PDB ID: 1AO6) have been reported, and the main glycation sites for each of them have been highlighted in red: N-terminal valine of the β-chains of hemoglobin, and lysine and arginine residues of albumin.
Eventually, this process leads to the formation of irreversible compounds designated as advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) [17]. Advanced glycation is a critical pathway involved in the development of several diabetic complications such as neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy that arise from AGEs-induced oxidative stress and inflammatory processes [18]. Protein glycation is affected by the time of exposure to glucose, and its concentration; extracellular proteins such as albumin have higher glycation rates than intracellular ones, such as hemoglobin, due to their direct exposure to blood glucose [19].

2.1. Glycated Hemoglobin

HbA1c is the Amadori rearrangement of the adduct of glucose with the N-terminal valine of the β-chain of hemoglobin [4][20][21], which is the most reactive site [22][23]. Its rate of formation is proportional to the ambient glucose concentration, and it reflects the mean glycemia over the past two to four months, correlating directly with the lifespan of erythrocytes [4][24][25][26]. Its value is expressed in terms of percentage with respect to the total hemoglobin concentration and can be used as a diagnostic biomarker [27] and as a monitoring tool to assess treatment effectiveness in diabetic patients [16]. Despite being supported by large-scale clinical trials, i.e., the DCCT and the UKPDS, its employment suffers from some intrinsic disadvantages related to the breadth of the temporal window, which does not allow for accurately tracking rapid changes in glycemic control [28][29][30], and to its reliability under certain clinical circumstances such as hematologic disorders (variant hemoglobin, different types of anemia), recent blood transfusions, use of erythropoietin-based drugs, and pregnancy, which alter the lifespan of red blood cells hence affecting HbA1c measurements [16][31][32]. Moreover, there is evidence for inter-individual heterogeneity of glucose gradient across the membrane of red blood cells, which changes the dynamics of hemoglobin glycation hence impacting HbA1c assessment tests [33].

2.2. Glycated Albumin

Human serum albumin (HSA) is the most abundant protein in human blood: with a normal concentration ranging from 3 to 5 g/dL, it accounts for approximately 60% of serum proteins [19][34]. It is composed of a single, 585 amino acids-long polypeptidic chain with a molecular weight of 66.5 kDa [35][36], and its three-dimensional structure is reported in Figure 2. HSA has a half-life of approximately three weeks [37], during which the exposure to blood glucose induces glycation processes primarily at its lysine and arginine residues [38] that modify its spatial arrangement as well as the N-terminal region [31]; glycation of albumin also leads to a slight increase in the polarity of the molecule [21].
Biosensors 12 00687 g002 550
Figure 2. Three-dimensional structure of human serum albumin. The three domains I, II, and III are highlighted in purple, blue and green, respectively, and for each domain the two subdomains A and B are shown—from Belinskaia et al. [36].
Clinically, GA has some clear advantages over HbA1c. Firstly, thanks to a higher rate of formation and shorter lifespan, it can reflect hyperglycemia earlier than HbA1c [31], and it is a more adequate indicator to evaluate glycemic variability [29][39]. Secondly, due to its independence from red blood cells, it offers a more robust parameter whenever the patient suffers from erythrocyte lifespan-affecting events. Table 1 summarizes the principal clinical conditions in which GA may offer a better understanding of the glycemic status of a patient.
Table 1. List of conditions in which GA may be more reliable than HbA1c as a glycemic control biomarker.
Condition Brief Explanation Reference
Intensive insulin therapy HbA1c levels change too slowly, whereas GA tracks accurately the variations induced by the therapy. [40]
Fulminant type 1 diabetes mellitus HbA1c is usually normal or only slightly elevated in this clinical condition, whereas the GA/HbA1c ratio significantly increases due to the reactiveness of GA. In this case, the GA/HbA1c is even a better indicator than GA alone. [41][42]
Anemia Hemolytic anemia shortens the lifespan of erythrocytes hence HbA1c levels are lower, whereas iron deficiency anemia produces higher levels of HbA1c due to enhanced glycation processes and longer red blood cell survivability. Albumin instead is not affected by these pathologies. [43][44]
Variant hemoglobin The genetic structural variants affect the ability of hemoglobin to be glycated, hence HbA1c does not reflect properly the glycemic status. Albumin instead is not affected by this condition. [45]
Pregnancy Towards the end of pregnancy, iron deficiency affects HbA1c levels, whereas GA levels remain stable both in diabetic and non diabetic women. [46][47]
Chronic kidney disease Erythropoietin injections, blood transfusions and hemodialysis are frequent in patients with this condition. They all affect red blood cells’ lifespan and iron values, altering HbA1c levels. Special attention has to be put on proteinuria conditions that may develop in these patients because GA values can be altered. [48][49][50]
GA, however, is not exempt from limitations, and medical operators should be aware of the conditions in which glycated albumin does not accurately reflect the glycemic status of a patient because of the involvement of other factors. GA measurements, being corrected for total albumin, should not be influenced by albumin concentration [19][51]; nevertheless, the association between low plasma albumin levels and increased protein glycation rates, probably caused by different exposure to glucose, has been demonstrated [52]. Indeed, disorders that impact HSA metabolism may alter GA levels; in particular, higher GA levels have been observed in patients with chronic liver disease [53] and hypothyroidism [54], whereas lower values have been reported for nephrotic syndrome [55][56] and hyperthyroidism [54] cases. Body mass index (BMI) has an impact on glycated albumin too [57], with absolute GA values decreasing by 0.13% every 1 kg/m2 increment in BMI [58]. Finally, patient age should be considered when analyzing GA levels, since newborns show much lower values of GA with respect to adults [59], and the values significantly increase as the patient’s age increases [60][61]. According to the Japanese Diabetes Society, values of GA in non-diabetic patients should range within 11–16%, normalized to the total albumin, whereas diabetic patients generally exhibit values greater than 20% [62]. Nevertheless, the lack of standardization in the reference method used to assess diabetes (some studies used FPG, others oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) or HbA1c) is responsible for slight variations in the definition of the reference thresholds. Another critical aspect is related to the choice of the analytical technique used to obtain the GA measurement. Kohzuma et al. [20] meticulously summarized the main clinical studies and their relative findings related to GA reference range and cutoff values for diabetes diagnosis and screening, whereas Roohk et al. [63] reported the reference values employed in six US clinical laboratories, showing the discrepancies related to the different GA testing methods used.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/bios12090687

References

  1. Albisser, A.M.; Leibel, B.S.; Ewart, T.G.; Davidovac, Z.; Botz, C.K.; Zingg, W.; Schipper, H.; Gander, R. Clinical Control of Diabetes by the Artificial Pancreas. Diabetes 1974, 23, 397–404.
  2. Nelson, C.J. A Guide to Glucose Urine Testing Systems: For the Pharmacist Teaching the Diabetic Patient. Drug Intell. Clin. Pharm. 1974, 8, 422–429.
  3. McArthur, R.G.; Tomm, K.M.; Leahey, M.D. Management of diabetes mellitus in children. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 1976, 114, 783–787.
  4. Goldstein, D.E.; Little, R.R.; Lorenz, R.A.; Malone, J.I.; Nathan, D.; Peterson, C.M.; Sacks, D.B. Tests of Glycemia in Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2004, 27, 1761–1773.
  5. Laffel, L. Ketone bodies: A review of physiology, pathophysiology and application of monitoring to diabetes. Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev. 1999, 15, 412–426.
  6. Clarke, W.L.; Cox, D.; Gonder-Frederick, L.A.; Carter, W.; Pohl, S.L. Evaluating Clinical Accuracy of Systems for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose. Diabetes Care 1987, 10, 622–628.
  7. American Diabetes Association. Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose. Diabetes Care 1994, 17, 81–86.
  8. Walford, S.; Gale, E.; Allison, S.; Tattersall, R. SELF-MONITORING OF BLOOD-GLUCOSE: Improvement of Diabetic Control. Lancet 1978, 311, 732–735.
  9. Hayford, J.T.; Weydert, J.A.; Thompson, R.G. Validity of Urine Glucose Measurements for Estimating Plasma Glucose Concentration. Diabetes Care 1983, 6, 40–44.
  10. Morris, L.R.; McGee, J.A.; Kitabchi, A.E. Correlation Between Plasma and Urine Glucose in Diabetes. Ann. Intern. Med. 1981, 94, 469–471.
  11. Walford, S.; McB Page, M.; Allison, S.P. The Influence of Renal Threshold on the Interpretation of Urine Tests for Glucose in Diabetic Patients. Diabetes Care 1980, 3, 672–674.
  12. American Diabetes Association. Urine Glucose and Ketone Determinations. Diabetes Care 1992, 15, 38.
  13. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The Effect of Intensive Treatment of Diabetes on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus. N. Engl. J. Med. 1993, 329, 977–986.
  14. American Diabetes Association. Implications of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care 2002, 25, s25–s27.
  15. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998, 352, 837–853.
  16. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 6. Glycemic Targets: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022. Diabetes Care 2021, 45, S83–S96.
  17. Thorpe, S.R.; Baynes, J.W. Maillard reaction products in tissue proteins: New products and new perspectives. Amino Acids 2003, 25, 275–281.
  18. Singh, V.P.; Bali, A.; Singh, N.; Jaggi, A.S. Advanced Glycation End Products and Diabetic Complications. Korean J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 2014, 18, 1–14.
  19. Freitas, P.A.C.; Ehlert, L.R.; Camargo, J.L. Glycated albumin: A potential biomarker in diabetes. Arch. Endocrinol. Metab. 2017, 61, 296–304.
  20. Kohzuma, T.; Tao, X.; Koga, M. Glycated albumin as biomarker: Evidence and its outcomes. J. Diabetes Its Complicat. 2021, 35, 108040.
  21. Pohanka, M. Glycated Hemoglobin and Methods for Its Point of Care Testing. Biosensors 2021, 11, 70.
  22. Shapiro, R.; McManus, M.J.; Zalut, C.; Bunn, H.F. Sites of nonenzymatic glycosylation of human hemoglobin A. J. Biol. Chem. 1980, 255, 3120–3127.
  23. Wang, S.H.; Wang, T.F.; Wu, C.H.; Chen, S.H. In-Depth Comparative Characterization of Hemoglobin Glycation in Normal and Diabetic Bloods by LC-MSMS. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 2014, 25, 758–766.
  24. Shemin, D.; Rittenberg, D. The life span of the human red blood cell. J. Biol. Chem. 1946, 166, 627–636.
  25. Cohen, R.M.; Franco, R.S.; Khera, P.K.; Smith, E.P.; Lindsell, C.J.; Ciraolo, P.J.; Palascak, M.B.; Joiner, C.H. Red cell life span heterogeneity in hematologically normal people is sufficient to alter HbA1c. Blood 2008, 112, 4284–4291.
  26. Franco, R.S. Measurement of Red Cell Lifespan and Aging. Transfus. Med. Hemotherapy 2012, 39, 302–307.
  27. International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas—10th edition. 2021. Available online: https://diabetesatlas.org/ (accessed on 12 April 2022).
  28. Koga, M.; Kasayama, S. Clinical impact of glycated albumin as another glycemic control marker. Endocr. J. 2010, 57, 751–762.
  29. Yoshiuchi, K.; Matsuhisa, M.; Katakami, N.; Nakatani, Y.; Sakamoto, K.; Matsuoka, T.; Umayahara, Y.; Kosugi, K.; Kaneto, H.; Yamasaki, Y.; et al. Glycated Albumin is a Better Indicator for Glucose Excursion than Glycated Hemoglobin in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes. Endocr. J. 2008, advpub, 0804280122.
  30. Murai, J.; Soga, S.; Saito, H.; Koga, M. Usefulness of glycated albumin for early detection of deterioration of glycemic control state after discharge from educational admission. Endocr. J. 2013, 60, 409–413.
  31. Giglio, R.V.; Lo Sasso, B.; Agnello, L.; Bivona, G.; Maniscalco, R.; Ligi, D.; Mannello, F.; Ciaccio, M. Recent Updates and Advances in the Use of Glycated Albumin for the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Diabetes and Renal, Cerebro- and Cardio-Metabolic Diseases. J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9, 3634.
  32. Xiong, J.Y.; Wang, J.M.; Zhao, X.L.; Yang, C.; Jiang, X.S.; Chen, Y.M.; Chen, C.Q.; Li, Z.Y. Glycated albumin as a biomarker for diagnosis of diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J. Clin. Cases 2021, 9, 9520–9534.
  33. Khera, P.K.; Joiner, C.H.; Carruthers, A.; Lindsell, C.J.; Smith, E.P.; Franco, R.S.; Holmes, Y.R.; Cohen, R.M. Evidence for Interindividual Heterogeneity in the Glucose Gradient Across the Human Red Blood Cell Membrane and Its Relationship to Hemoglobin Glycation. Diabetes 2008, 57, 2445–2452.
  34. Anguizola, J.; Matsuda, R.; Barnaby, O.S.; Hoy, K.; Wa, C.; DeBolt, E.; Koke, M.; Hage, D.S. Review: Glycation of human serum albumin. Clin. Chim. Acta 2013, 425, 64–76.
  35. Rabbani, G.; Ahn, S.N. Structure, enzymatic activities, glycation and therapeutic potential of human serum albumin: A natural cargo. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 123, 979–990.
  36. Belinskaia, D.A.; Voronina, P.A.; Batalova, A.A.; Goncharov, N.V. Serum Albumin. Encyclopedia 2021, 1, 65–75.
  37. Soboleva, A.; Mavropulo-Stolyarenko, G.; Karonova, T.; Thieme, D.; Hoehenwarter, W.; Ihling, C.; Stefanov, V.; Grishina, T.; Frolov, A. Multiple Glycation Sites in Blood Plasma Proteins as an Integrated Biomarker of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 2329.
  38. Zendjabil, M. Glycated albumin. Clin. Chim. Acta 2020, 502, 240–244.
  39. Suwa, T.; Ohta, A.; Matsui, T.; Koganei, R.; Kato, H.; Kawata, T.; Sada, Y.; Ishii, S.; Kondo, A.; Murakami, K.; et al. Relationship between Clinical Markers of Glycemia and Glucose Excursion Evaluated by Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM). Endocr. J. 2010, 57, 135–140.
  40. Kohzuma, T.; Koga, M. Lucica® GA-L Glycated Albumin Assay Kit. Mol. Diagn. Ther. 2010, 14, 49–51.
  41. Koga, M.; Murai, J.; Saito, H.; Kasayama, S.; Imagawa, A.; Hanafusa, T.; Kobayashi, T.; The Members of the Japan Diabetes Society’s Committee on Research on Type 1 Diabetes. Serum glycated albumin to haemoglobin A1C ratio can distinguish fulminant type 1 diabetes mellitus from type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ann. Clin. Biochem. 2010, 47, 313–317.
  42. Koga, M.; Inada, S.; Nakao, T.; Kawamori, R.; Kasayama, S. The Glycated Albumin (GA) to HbA1c Ratio Reflects Shorter-Term Glycemic Control than GA: Analysis of Patients with Fulminant Type 1 Diabetes. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2017, 31, e22023.
  43. Hellman, R. When are HBA1C Values Misleading? AACE Clin. Case Rep. 2016, 2, e377–e379.
  44. Silva, J.F.; Pimentel, A.L.; Camargo, J.L. Effect of iron deficiency anaemia on HbA1c levels is dependent on the degree of anaemia. Clin. Biochem. 2016, 49, 117–120.
  45. Bry, L.; Chen, P.C.; Sacks, D.B. Effects of Hemoglobin Variants and Chemically Modified Derivatives on Assays for Glycohemoglobin. Clin. Chem. 2001, 47, 153–163.
  46. Hashimoto, K.; Noguchi, S.; Morimoto, Y.; Hamada, S.; Wasada, K.; Imai, S.; Murata, Y.; Kasayama, S.; Koga, M. A1C but Not Serum Glycated Albumin Is Elevated in Late Pregnancy Owing to Iron Deficiency. Diabetes Care 2008, 31, 1945–1948.
  47. Hashimoto, K.; Osugi, T.; Noguchi, S.; Morimoto, Y.; Wasada, K.; Imai, S.; Waguri, M.; Toyoda, R.; Fujita, T.; Kasayama, S.; et al. A1C but Not Serum Glycated Albumin Is Elevated Because of Iron Deficiency in Late Pregnancy in Diabetic Women. Diabetes Care 2009, 33, 509–511.
  48. Inaba, M.; Okuno, S.; Kumeda, Y.; Yamada, S.; Imanishi, Y.; Tabata, T.; Okamura, M.; Okada, S.; Yamakawa, T.; Ishimura, E.; et al. Glycated Albumin Is a Better Glycemic Indicator than Glycated Hemoglobin Values in Hemodialysis Patients with Diabetes: Effect of Anemia and Erythropoietin Injection. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2007, 18, 896–903.
  49. Peacock, T.; Shihabi, Z.; Bleyer, A.; Dolbare, E.; Byers, J.; Knovich, M.; Calles-Escandon, J.; Russell, G.; Freedman, B. Comparison of glycated albumin and hemoglobin A1c levels in diabetic subjects on hemodialysis. Kidney Int. 2008, 73, 1062–1068.
  50. Zheng, C.M.; Ma, W.Y.; Wu, C.C.; Lu, K.C. Glycated albumin in diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease. Clin. Chim. Acta 2012, 413, 1555–1561.
  51. Furusyo, N.; Hayashi, J. Glycated albumin and diabetes mellitus. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Gen. Subj. 2013, 1830, 5509–5514.
  52. Bhonsle, H.S.; Korwar, A.M.; Kote, S.S.; Golegaonkar, S.B.; Chougale, A.D.; Shaik, M.L.; Dhande, N.L.; Giri, A.P.; Shelgikar, K.M.; Boppana, R.; et al. Low Plasma Albumin Levels Are Associated with Increased Plasma Protein Glycation and HbA1c in Diabetes. J. Proteome Res. 2012, 11, 1391–1396.
  53. Koga, M.; Kasayama, S.; Kanehara, H.; Bando, Y. CLD (chronic liver diseases)-HbA1C as a suitable indicator for estimation of mean plasma glucose in patients with chronic liver diseases. Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. 2008, 81, 258–262.
  54. Koga, M.; Murai, J.; Saito, H.; Matsumoto, S.; Kasayama, S. Effects of thyroid hormone on serum glycated albumin levels: Study on non-diabetic subjects. Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. 2009, 84, 163–167.
  55. Okada, T.; Nakao, T.; Matsumoto, H.; Nagaoka, Y.; Tomaru, R.; Iwasawa, H.; Wada, T. Influence of Proteinuria on Glycated Albumin Values in Diabetic Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Intern. Med. 2011, 50, 23–29.
  56. Wang, Z.; Xing, G.; Zhang, L. Chapter Eighteen—Glycated albumin level is significantly decreased in patients suffering nephrotic syndrome. In Glycans and Glycosaminoglycans as Clinical Biomarkers and Therapeutics—Part A; Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science; Zhang, L., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; Volume 162, pp. 307–319.
  57. Koga, M.; Matsumoto, S.; Saito, H.; Kasayama, S. Body Mass Index Negatively Influences Glycated Albumin, but not Glycated Hemoglobin, in Diabetic Patients. Endocr. J. 2006, advpub, 0605220014.
  58. He, X.; Mo, Y.; Ma, X.; Ying, L.; Zhu, W.; Wang, Y.; Bao, Y.; Zhou, J. Associations of body mass index with glycated albumin and glycated albumin/glycated hemoglobin A1c ratio in Chinese diabetic and non-diabetic populations. Clin. Chim. Acta 2018, 484, 117–121.
  59. Suzuki, S.; Koga, M.; Niizeki, N.; Furuya, A.; Takahashi, H.; Matsuo, K.; Tanahashi, Y.; Kawata, Y.; Asai, H.; Tsuchida, E.; et al. Glycated albumin is lower in infants than in adults and correlated with both age and serum albumin. Pediatr. Diabetes 2013, 14, 25–30.
  60. Zhou, Q.; Shi, D.B.; Lv, L.Y. The establishment of biological reference intervals of nontraditional glycemic markers in a Chinese population. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2017, 31, e22097.
  61. Bellia, C.; Zaninotto, M.; Cosma, C.; Agnello, L.; Sasso, B.L.; Bivona, G.; Plebani, M.; Ciaccio, M. Definition of the upper reference limit of glycated albumin in blood donors from Italy. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. CCLM 2018, 56, 120–125.
  62. Japanese Diabetes Society. Treatment Guide for Diabetes 2016–2017. 2016. Available online: http://www.fa.kyorin.co.jp/jds/uploads/Treatment_Guide_for_Diabetes_2016-2017.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2022).
  63. Roohk, H.V.; Zaidi, A.R. A Review of Glycated Albumin as an Intermediate Glycation Index for Controlling Diabetes. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 2008, 2, 1114–1121.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback