Time to replace the oral glucose tolerance test for cystic fibrosis related diabetes first-step screening? Establishing glycemic tools relevant to cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction As the life expectancy of people with cystic fibrosis (CF) increases, complications related to CF, such as CF-related diabetes (CFRD), are of great concern. Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) is the current gold standard test to screen for CFRD, which is associated with reduced lung function and body mass index (BMI). However, this is a cumbersome test with poor adherence, and emerging evidence suggests that HbA1c or serum fructosamine might be viable alternative screening tools.Research Design and Methods A multi-center study across four Canadian adult CF centers was conducted to determine the ability of HbA1c and serum fructosamine levels to predict screening OGTT results. Cross-sectional outcome data, including ppFEV1 and BMI within two months of testing, were collected.Results A total of 183 CFRD screening encounters over five years were included. HbA1c and the fructosamine-to-albumin ratio had similar predictive performances for CFRD as determined by OGTT-defined cutoffs (AUC both 0.68) and for impaired glucose tolerance (AUC 0.69 and 0.64, respectively). However, the specificity of FAR is lower, meaning fewer OGTTs can be avoided if FAR is used as a first-step screening test when screening for either CFRD and/or IGT compared to HbA1. The optimal HbA1c cut-off for CFRD screening was ≥5.5% (sensitivity, 95%; specificity, 32%). Regression analyses demonstrated a strong inverse correlation between HbA1c and ppFEV1 (p < 0.0001), while the OGTT was inversely correlated with ppFEV1 (p < 0.05), and the fructosamine-to-albumin ratio was inversely correlated with BMI (–0.9; 95% CI −1.5, −0.4; p = 0.002), but not with ppFEV1 within 2 months of testing.Conclusion HbA1c is validated as a first step in screening for CFRD, allowing one-third of the patients to avoid the OGTT. As HbA1c demonstrated a stronger correlation with ppFEV1 than the OGTT, consideration could be made to redefine CFRD based on HbA1c.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.067 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".