Investigating the association between fasting insulin, erythrocytosis and HbA1c through Mendelian randomization and observational analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Insulin resistance (IR) with associated compensatory hyperinsulinemia (HI) are early abnormalities in the etiology of prediabetes (preT2D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). IR and HI also associate with increased erythrocytosis. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is commonly used to diagnose and monitor preT2D and T2D, but can be influenced by erythrocytosis independent of glycemia. Methods: We undertook bidirectional Mendelian randomization (MR) in individuals of European ancestry to investigate potential causal associations between increased fasting insulin adjusted for BMI (FI), erythrocytosis and its non-glycemic impact on HbA1c. We investigated the association between the triglyceride-glucose index (TGI), a surrogate measure of IR and HI, and glycation gap (difference between measured HbA1c and predicted HbA1c derived from linear regression of fasting glucose) in people with normoglycemia and preT2D. Results: ). Multivariable MR indicated that increased FI did not impact HbA1c (b=0.23 ± 0.16, p=0.162) but reduced HbA1c after adjustment for T2D (b=0.31 ± 0.13, p=0.016). Increased Hb (b=0.03 ± 0.01, p=0.02), RCC (b=0.02 ± 0.01, p=0.04) and RETIC (b=0.03 ± 0.01, p=0.002) might modestly increase FI. In the observational cohort, increased TGI associated with decreased glycation gap, (i.e., measured HbA1c was lower than expected based on fasting glucose, (b=-0.09 ± 0.009, p<0.0001)) in people with preT2D but not in those with normoglycemia (b=0.02 ± 0.007, p<0.0001). Conclusions: MR suggests increased FI increases erythrocytosis and might potentially decrease HbA1c by non-glycemic effects. Increased TGI, a surrogate measure of increased FI, associates with lower-than-expected HbA1c in people with preT2D. These findings merit confirmatory studies to evaluate their clinical significance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".