Continuous glucose monitoring metrics (Mean Glucose, time above range and time in range) are superior to glycated haemoglobin for assessment of therapeutic efficacy.

AIM: To evaluate continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics for use as alternatives to glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) to evaluate therapeutic efficacy. METHODS: We re-analysed correlations among CGM metrics from studies involving 545 people with type 1 diabetes (T1D), 5910 people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and 98 people with T1D during pregnancy and the postpartum period. RESULTS: Three CGM metrics, interstitial fluid Mean Glucose level, proportion of time above range (%TAR) and proportion of time in range (%TIR), were correlated with HbA1c and provided metrics that can be used to evaluate therapeutic efficacy. Mean Glucose showed the highest correlation with %TAR (r = 0.98 in T1D, 0.97 in T2D) but weaker correlations with %TIR (r = -0.92 in T1D, -0.83 in T2D) or with HbA1c (r = 0.78 in T1D). %TAR and %TIR were highly correlated (r = -0.96 in T1D, -0.91 in T2D). After 6 months of use of real-time CGM by people with T1D, changes in Mean Glucose level were more highly correlated with changes in %TAR (r = 0.95) than with changes in %TIR (r = -0.85) or with changes in HbA1c level (r = 0.52). These metrics can be combined with metrics of hypoglycaemia and/or glycaemic variability to provide a more comprehensive assessment of overall quality of glycaemic control. CONCLUSION: The CGM metrics %TAR and %TIR show much higher correlations with Mean Glucose than with HbA1c and provide sensitive indicators of efficacy. Mean glucose may be the best metric and shows consistently higher correlations with %TAR than with %TIR.