Association between glycaemia risk index (GRI) and diabetic retinopathy in type 2 diabetes: A cohort study

Association between glycemia risk index and arterial stiffness in type 2 diabetes

AIM

This study aims to investigate the association of glycemia risk index (GRI), a novel composite metric derived from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), with arterial stiffness in patients with type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 342 adults with type 2 diabetes were enrolled between April and June 2023 from 11 communities in Shanghai, China. Medical examinations, including measurements of anthropometric parameters, blood pressure, and venous blood samples were conducted. Brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) was examined to evaluate arterial stiffness. All the participants underwent a 14 day CGM recording and GRI was calculated from the CGM data.

RESULTS

The mean age was 70.3 ± 6.8 years, and 162 (47.4%) were male. Participants with a higher baPWV had significantly higher levels of GRI and hyperglycemia component (both P for trend < 0.05). Linear regression revealed the significant positive linear associations of the GRI with baPWV in unadjusted or adjusted models (All P < 0.05). In the multivariable logistic analysis, each increase in the GRI quartile was associated with a 1.30-fold (95% CI 1.01-1.68, P for trend < 0.05) higher prevalence of increased arterial stiffness after adjustment for age, sex, BMI, diabetes duration, current smoking status, blood pressure, and lipid profile. Subgroup analyses showed that the association between the GRI quartiles and increased arterial stiffness was stronger among participants with a diabetes duration ≥15 years (P for interaction = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Glycemia risk index assessed by continuous glucose monitoring is associated with increased arterial stiffness in type 2 diabetes.

Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Manual Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis Using the Glycemia Risk Index

BACKGROUND

Glycemia risk index (GRI) is a novel composite metric assessing overall glycemic risk, accounting for both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia and weighted toward extremes. Data assessing GRI as an outcome measure in closed-loop studies and its relation with conventional key continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics are limited.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis was performed to evaluate the sensitivity of GRI in assessing glycemic quality in adults with type 1 diabetes randomized to 26 weeks hybrid closed-loop (HCL) or manual insulin delivery (control). The primary outcome was GRI comparing HCL with control. Comparisons were made with changes in other CGM metrics including time in range (TIR), time above range (TAR), time below range (TBR), and glycemic variability (standard deviation [SD] and coefficient of variation [CV]).

RESULTS

GRI with HCL (N = 61) compared with control (N = 59) was significantly lower (mean [SD] 33.5 [11.7] vs 56.1 [14.4], respectively; mean difference -22.8 [-27.2, -18.3], P = .001). The mean increase in TIR was +14.8 (11.0, 18.5)%. GRI negatively correlated with TIR for combined arms (r = -.954; P = .001), and positively with TAR >250 mg/dL (r = .901; P = .001), TBR < 54 mg/dL (r = .416; P = .001), and glycemic variability (SD [r = .916] and CV [r = .732]; P = .001 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-six weeks of HCL improved GRI, in addition to other CGM metrics, compared with standard insulin therapy. The improvement in GRI was proportionally greater than the change in TIR, and GRI correlated with all CGM metrics. We suggest that GRI may be an appropriate primary outcome for closed-loop trials.

Impact of glucose variability on the assessment of the glycemia risk index (GRI) and classic glycemic metrics

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of glucose variability on the relationship between the GRI and other glycemic metrics in a cohort of pediatric and adult patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using intermittent scanning continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM).

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of 202 patients with T1D under intensive insulin treatment (25.2% CSII) using isCGM. Clinical, metabolic, and glycemic metrics were collected, and the GRI was calculated with its hypoglycemia (CHypo) and hyperglycemia (CHyper) components. The correlation between the GRI and other classical glycometrics in relation to the coefficient of variation (CV) was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 202 patients were included (53% male; 67.8% adults) with a mean age of 28.6 ± 15.7 years and 12.5 ± 10.9 years of T1D evolution (TIR 59.0 ± 17.0%; CV 39.8 ± 8.0%; GMI 7.3 ± 1.1%). The mean GRI was 54.0 ± 23.3 with a CHypo and CHyper component of 5.7 ± 4.8 and 23.4 ± 14.3, respectively. A strong negative correlation was observed between the GRI and TIR (R = -0.917; R2 = 0.840; p < 0.001), showing differences when dividing patients with low glycemic variability (CV < 36%) (R = -0.974; R2 = 0.948; p < 0.001) compared to those with greater CV instability (≥36%) (R = -0.885; R2 = 0.784; p < 0.001). The relationship of GRI with its two components was strongly positive with CHyper (R = 0.801; R2 = 0.641; p < 0.001) and moderately positive with CHypo (R = 0.398; R2 = 0.158; p < 0.001). When the GRI was evaluated with the rest of the classic glycemic metrics, a strong positive correlation was observed with HbA1c (R = 0.617; R2 = 0.380; p < 0.001), mean glucose (R = 0.677; R2 = 0.458; p < 0.001), glucose standard deviation (R = 0.778; R2 = 0.605; p < 0.001), TAR > 250 (R = 0.801; R2 = 0.641; p < 0.001), and TBR < 54 (R = 0.481; R2 = 0.231; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The GRI correlated significantly with all the glycemic metrics analyzed, especially with the TIR. Glycemic variability (GV) significantly affected the correlation of the GRI with other parameters and should be taken into consideration.

Comparison of Glycemia Risk Index with Time in Range for Assessing Glycemic Quality

Background: The glycemia risk index (GRI) is a novel composite continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metric that gives greater weight to hypoglycemia than to hyperglycemia and to extreme hypo/hyperglycemia over less extreme hypo/hyperglycemia. This study aimed at validating the effectiveness of GRI and at comparing it with time in range (TIR) in assessing glycemic quality in clinical practice. Methods: A total of 524 ninety-day CGM tracings of 194 insulin-treated adults with diabetes were included in the analysis. GRI was assessed according to standard metrics in ambulatory glucose profiles. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses were performed to compare the GRI and TIR. Results: The GRI was strongly correlated not only with TIR (r = -0.974), but also with the coefficient of variation (r = 0.683). To identify whether the GRI differed by hypoglycemia even with a similar TIR, CGM tracings were grouped according to TIR (50% to <60%, 60% to <70%, 70% to <80%, and ≥80%). In each TIR group, the GRI increased as time below range (TBR)<70 mg/dL increased (P < 0.001 for all TIR groups). In longitudinal analysis, as TBR<70 mg/dL improved, the GRI improved significantly (P = 0.003) whereas TIR did not (P = 0.704). Both GRI and TIR improved as time above range (TAR)>180 mg/dL improved (P < 0.001 for both). The longitudinal change was easily identifiable on a GRI grid. Conclusions: The GRI is a useful tool for assessing glycemic quality in clinical practice and reflects hypoglycemia better than does TIR.