Is the Current Cut Point for Glycated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Correct for Diagnosing Diabetes Mellitus in Premenopausal Women? Evidence to Inform Discussion.

INTRODUCTION: Women are on average diagnosed with diabetes mellitus at later age than men but have higher mortality. As the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus is primarily based on HbA1c, the use of a non-specific reference range and cut point for diabetes mellitus that does not account for gender differences in diabetes could potentially lead to underdiagnosis of diabetes mellitus in women and missed opportunities for intervention. We investigated whether a contributing factor to the later diagnosis in women may be a difference in distribution of HbA1c in premenopausal women versus men of the same age by comparing HbA1c values in men and women across multiple sites in the UK. METHODS: We analysed the HbA1c levels of 146,907 individuals who underwent single testing only and had HbA1c ≤ 50 mmol/mol between 2012 and 2019 in one laboratory (cohort 1). This was replicated in six laboratories with 938,678 individuals tested between 2019 and 2021 (cohort 2). RESULTS: In cohort 1, women < 50 years old had an HbA1c distribution markedly lower than that in men by a mean of 1.6 mmol/mol (p < 0.0001), while the difference in the distribution of HbA1c for individuals aged ≥ 50 years was less pronounced (mean difference 0.9 mmol/mol, p < 0.0001). For individuals under the age of 50, HbA1c in women lagged by up to 10 years compared to men. Similar findings were found in cohort 2. We estimated an additional 17% (n = 34,953) of undiagnosed women aged < 50 years in England and Wales could be reclassified to have diabetes mellitus, which may contribute to up to 64% of the difference in mortality rates between men/women with diabetes mellitus aged 16-50 years. CONCLUSION: The HbA1c cut point for diagnosis of diabetes mellitus may need to be re-evaluated in women under the age of 50 years. Early identification of diabetes mellitus in women has the potential to improve women's health outcomes in the longer term.

Serum cortisol assay performance following the 1 mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test.

BACKGROUND: The 1 mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test (ONDST) is recommended for the differential diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome and the investigation of adrenal incidentalomas. Despite documented variation in serum cortisol immunoassay performance, little has been published regarding its effect on the ONDST. AIMS: Assess the performance of three immunoassay platforms (Roche Elecsys II, Abbott Alinity & Siemens Centaur) when compared to a liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method. METHODS: Samples (n = 77) sent to the laboratory as part of an ONDST were retrieved prior to disposal, anonymized, and analysed on all platforms. Samples with factors impacting immunoassay analysis quality were excluded. Results were statistically compared to an LC-MS/MS method that previously demonstrated excellent comparability to a candidate reference method. RESULTS: The Roche gen II showed a mean bias of -2.4 nmol/L and a Passing-Bablok fit of y = -0.9 + 0.97x. This was not affected by sex. The Abbott showed a mean bias -18.8 nmol/L, and a fit of y = -11.3 + 0.88x. This bias was -20.7 nmol/L in females versus -17.2 nmol/L in males. The Siemens had a mean bias of 2.3 nmol/L and a fit of y = 1.4 + 1.07x. This bias was 5.7 nmol/L in males versus -1.0 nmol/L in females. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware of the method-dependent variation that exists within serum cortisol analysis during the ONDSTs. Roche and Siemens aligned more closely with LC-MS/MS while the Abbot may cause a reduction in ONDST sensitivity. This data supports assay-specific cut-offs for the ONDST.

The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on HbA1c Testing: Prioritization of High-Risk Cases and Impact of Social Deprivation.

INTRODUCTION: Studies show that the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected people with diabetes and those from disadvantaged backgrounds. During the first 6 months of the UK lockdown, > 6.6 M glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) tests were missed. We now report variability in the recovery of HbA1c testing, and its association with diabetes control and demographic characteristics. METHODS: In a service evaluation, we examined HbA1c testing across ten UK sites (representing 9.9% of England's population) from January 2019 to December 2021. We compared monthly requests from April 2020 to those in the equivalent 2019 months. We examined effects of (i) HbA1c level, (ii) between-practice variability, and (iii) practice demographics. RESULTS: In April 2020, monthly requests dropped to 7.9-18.1% of 2019 volumes. By July 2020, testing had recovered to 61.7-86.9% of 2019 levels. During April-June 2020, we observed a 5.1-fold variation in the reduction of HbA1c testing between general practices (12.4-63.8% of 2019 levels). There was evidence of limited prioritization of testing for patients with HbA1c > 86 mmol/mol during April-June 2020 (4.6% of total tests vs. 2.6% during 2019). Testing in areas with the highest social disadvantage was lower during the first lockdown (April-June 2020; trend test p < 0.001) and two subsequent periods (July-September and October-December 2020; both p < 0.001). By February 2021, testing in the highest deprivation group had a cumulative fall in testing of 34.9% of 2019 levels versus 24.6% in those in the lowest group. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight that the pandemic response had a major impact on diabetes monitoring and screening. Despite limited test prioritization in the > 86 mmol/mol group, this failed to acknowledge that those in the 59-86 mmol/mol group require consistent monitoring to achieve the best outcomes. Our findings provide additional evidence that those from poorer backgrounds were disproportionately disadvantaged. Healthcare services should redress this health inequality.

Variability in Test Interval Is Linked to Glycated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Trajectory over Time.

Aims: We previously showed that the glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) testing frequency links to diabetes control. Here, we examine the effect of variability in test interval, adjusted for the frequency, on change in HbA1c (ΔHbA1c). Materials & Methods. HbA1c results were collected on 83,872 people with HbA1c results at baseline and 5 years (±3 months) later and ≥6 tests during this period. We calculated the standard deviation (SD) of test interval for each individual and examined the link between deciles of SD of the test interval and ΔHbA1c level, stratified by baseline HbA1c. Results: In general, less variability in testing frequency (more consistent monitoring) was associated with better diabetes control. This was most evident with moderately raised baseline HbA1c levels (7.0-9.0% (54-75 mmol/mol)). For example, in those with a starting HbA1c of 7.0-7.5% (54-58 mmol/mol), the lowest SD decile was associated with little change in HbA1c over 5 years, while for those with the highest decile, HbA1c rose by 0.4-0.6% (4-6 mmol/mol; p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed that the association was independent of the age/sex/hospital site. Subanalysis suggested that the effect was most pronounced in those aged <65 years with baseline HbA1c of 7.0-7.5% (54-58 mmol/mol). We observed a 6.7-fold variation in the proportion of people in the top-three SD deciles across general practices. Conclusions: These findings indicate that the consistency of testing interval, not the just number of tests/year, is important in maintaining diabetes control, especially in those with moderately raised HbA1c levels. Systems to improve regularity of HbA1c testing are therefore needed, especially given the impact of COVID-19 on diabetes monitoring.

Can we check serum lithium levels less often without compromising patient safety?

BACKGROUND: Lithium is viewed as the first-line long-term treatment for prevention of relapse in people with bipolar disorder. AIMS: This study examined factors associated with the likelihood of maintaining serum lithium levels within the recommended range and explored whether the monitoring interval could be extended in some cases. METHOD: We included 46 555 lithium rest requests in 3371 individuals over 7 years from three UK centres. Using lithium results in four categories (<0.4 mmol/L; 0.40-0.79 mmol/L; 0.80-0.99 mmol/L; ≥1.0 mmol/L), we determined the proportion of instances where lithium results remained stable or switched category on subsequent testing, considering the effects of age, duration of lithium therapy and testing history. RESULTS: For tests within the recommended range (0.40-0.99 mmol/L categories), 84.5% of subsequent tests remained within this range. Overall, 3 monthly testing was associated with 90% of lithium results remaining within range, compared with 85% at 6 monthly intervals. In cases where the lithium level in the previous 12 months was on target (0.40-0.79 mmol/L; British National Formulary/National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criteria), 90% remained within the target range at 6 months. Neither age nor duration of lithium therapy had any significant effect on lithium level stability. Levels within the 0.80-0.99 mmol/L category were linked to a higher probability of moving to the ≥1.0 mmol/L category (10%) compared with those in the 0.4-0.79 mmol/L group (2%), irrespective of testing frequency. CONCLUSION: We propose that for those who achieve 12 months of lithium tests within the 0.40-0.79 mmol/L range, the interval between tests could increase to 6 months, irrespective of age. Where lithium levels are 0.80-0.99 mmol/L, the test interval should remain at 3 months. This could reduce lithium test numbers by 15% and costs by ~$0.4 m p.a.

Paired sensitivity analysis of four SARS-CoV-2 serological immunoassays in a longitudinal cohort of convalescent hospital staff.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 serological testing has seen extensive academic and clinical use from investigating correlates of immunity to seroprevalence, convalescent plasma and vaccine trials. Interpretation of these studies will depend on robust validation of the longitudinal sensitivities of these assays, especially in the context of mild disease which makes up the majority of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caseload. METHODS: Hospital staff (n = 94) returning to work following polymerase chain reaction confirmed COVID-19 were offered antibody testing to assist with laboratory verification. Initial specimens were collected at median 29 days post-symptom onset and run on the Roche, Abbott, Siemens and DiaSorin platforms. Re-sampling occurred at median 142 days from a subset of the initial cohort (n = 62) that had volunteered to provide further serum samples to assist in longitudinal sensitivity analysis. Samples that were not run across all four platforms were excluded from analysis. RESULTS: Comparative sensitivity analysis was conducted on 89/94 of the initial specimens and 55/62 of the repeat specimens. Sensitivity at initial sampling ranged from 78 to 87% across platforms. At re-sampling, sensitivities were: 100% (Roche), 45% (Abbott), 100% (Siemens), and 80% (DiaSorin). Paired analysis using the longitudinal cohort (n = 55) demonstrated stable or increasing median assay values on three platforms, with a clear reduction seen only on the Abbott platform (4.78 to 1.34) with corresponding sensitivity drop-off (81.8% to 45.4%). CONCLUSION: The Abbott assay demonstrated sensitivity drop-off and decrease in median assay signal below detection threshold at four to five months. This has implications on the interpretation and design of future studies.

Serum lithium test requesting across three UK regions: an evaluation of adherence to monitoring guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder is the fourth most common mental health condition, affecting ~ 1% of UK adults. Lithium is an effective treatment for prevention of relapse and hospital admission, and is widely recommended as a first-line treatment. We previously showed in other areas that laboratory testing patterns are variable with sub-optimal conformity to guidance. We therefore examined lithium results and requesting patterns relative to monitoring recommendations. METHODS: Data on serum lithium levels and intervals between requests were extracted from Clinical Biochemistry laboratory information systems at the University Hospitals of North Midlands, Salford Royal Foundation Trust and Pennine Acute Hospitals from 2012 to 2018 (46,555 requests; 3371 individuals). Data were examined with respect to region/source of request, age and sex. RESULTS: Across all sites, lithium levels on many requests were outside the recommended UK therapeutic range (0.4-0.99 mmol/L); 19.2% below the range and 6.1% above the range (median [Li]: 0.60 mmol/L). A small percentage were found at the extremes (3.2% at < 0.1 mmol/L, 1.0% at ≥1.4 mmol/L). Most requests were from general practice (56.3%) or mental health units (34.4%), though those in the toxic range (≥1.4 mmol/L) were more likely to be from secondary care (63.9%). For requesting intervals, there was a distinct peak at 12 weeks, consistent with guidance for those stabilised on lithium therapy. There was no peak at 6 months, as recommended for those aged < 65 years on unchanging therapy, though re-test intervals in this age group were more likely to be longer. There was a peak at 0-7 days, reflecting those requiring closer monitoring (e.g. treatment initiation, toxicity). However, for those with initial lithium concentrations within the BNF range (0.4-0.99 mmol/L), 69.4% of tests were requested outside expected testing frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed: (a) lithium levels are often maintained at the lower end of the recommended therapeutic range, (b) patterns of lithium results and testing frequency were comparable across three UK sites with differing models of care and, (c) re-test intervals demonstrate a noticeable peak at the recommended 3-monthly, but not at 6-monthly intervals. Many tests were repeated outside expected frequencies, indicating the need for measures to minimise inappropriate testing.

The frequency of testing for glycated haemoglobin, HbA1c, is linked to the probability of achieving target levels in patients with suboptimally controlled diabetes mellitus.

Background We previously showed, in patients with diabetes, that >50% of monitoring tests for glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) are outside recommended intervals and that this is linked to diabetes control. Here, we examined the effect of tests/year on achievement of commonly utilised HbA1c targets and on HbA1c changes over time. Methods Data on 20,690 adults with diabetes with a baseline HbA1c of >53 mmol/mol (7%) were extracted from Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory records at three UK hospitals. We examined the effect of HbA1c tests/year on (i) the probability of achieving targets of ≤53 mmol/mol (7%) and ≤48 mmol/mol (6.5%) in a year using multi-state modelling and (ii) the changes in mean HbA1c using a linear mixed-effects model. Results The probabilities of achieving ≤53 mmol/mol (7%) and ≤48 mmol/mol (6.5%) targets within 1 year were 0.20 (95% confidence interval: 0.19-0.21) and 0.10 (0.09-0.10), respectively. Compared with four tests/year, having one test or more than four tests/year were associated with lower likelihoods of achieving either target; two to three tests/year gave similar likelihoods to four tests/year. Mean HbA1c levels were higher in patients who had one test/year compared to those with four tests/year (mean difference: 2.64 mmol/mol [0.24%], p<0.001). Conclusions We showed that ≥80% of patients with suboptimal control are not achieving commonly recommended HbA1c targets within 1 year, highlighting the major challenge facing healthcare services. We also demonstrated that, although appropriate monitoring frequency is important, testing every 6 months is as effective as quarterly testing, supporting international recommendations. We suggest that the importance HbA1c monitoring frequency is being insufficiently recognised in diabetes management.

Social Disadvantage Is Associated With Lower Vitamin D Levels in Older People and There Is No Surrogate for Its Measurement.

Introduction: There is increasing evidence concerning adverse health consequences of low vitamin D levels. We determined whether there is any surrogate for measuring vitamin D in people older than 70 years and the relation between index of multiple deprivation (IMD) and vitamin D levels. Methods: Blood samples from 241 patients were included in this analysis. Concurrent measurements for 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D), parathyroid hormone (PTH), and bone profile are reported. Results: The prevalence of total vitamin D insufficiency/deficiency (defined as total vitamin D <50 nmol/L) was 57.5% overall. Even for patients with vitamin D deficiency, a significant proportion had PTH, normal calcium, phosphate, and alkaline phosphatase levels. For patients with vitamin D <25 nmol/L, 62.7% had a PTH within reference range, 83.1% had normal serum-adjusted calcium, 80.6% had normal phosphate, and 85.1% had a normal serum alkaline phosphatase. With increasing quintiles of IMD, there was a 22% increased risk of vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency from quintiles 1 to 5, in age- and sex-adjusted logistic regression models (odds ratio [OR] = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [1.01, 1.47]; p = .034). Conclusion: No other parameter is currently adequate for screening for vitamin D deficiency in older people. A higher IMD is associated with lower vitamin D levels in older people.

Monitoring Thyroid Function in Patients on Levothyroxine. Assessment of Conformity to National Guidance and Variability in Practice.

With demand for endocrine tests steadily increasing year-on-year, we examined thyroid function test (TFT) frequencies in patients on levothyroxine replacement therapy to assess the effect of initial TFT results and request source on TFT re-testing interval. All TFTs performed by the Clinical Biochemistry Departments at the Salford Royal Hospital (2009-2012; 288 263 requests from 139 793 patients) and University Hospital of North Midlands (2011-2014; 579 156 requests from 193 035 patients) were extracted from the laboratory computer systems. Of these, 54 894 tests were on 13 297 patients confirmed to be on levothyroxine therapy in the test cohort (Salford) and 67 298 requests on 11 971 patients in the confirmatory cohort (North Midlands). In the test cohort, median TFT re-testing interval in the total group was 19.1 weeks (IQR 9.1-37.7 weeks), with clearly defined peaks in TFT re-testing evident at 6 and 12 months and a prominent broad peak at 1-3 months. Median re-test interval was much lower than recommended (52 weeks) for those with normal TFTs at 31.3 weeks (30.6 weeks for the confirmatory cohort). Where thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) was elevated and free thyroxine (fT4) was below the reference range, re-test interval was much longer than is recommended (8 weeks) at 13.4-17.6 weeks (7.1-23.4 weeks in the confirmatory cohort), as was the interval when TSH was below and fT4 was above the normal range, at 16.7-25.6 weeks (27.5-31.9 weeks in the confirmatory cohort). Our findings show that the majority of TFT requests are requested outside recommended intervals and within-practice variability is high. A new approach to ensuring optimum monitoring frequency is required. Direct requesting from the clinical laboratory may provide one such solution.

Validation of a locally derived serum calcium adjustment equation: relationship with total 25(OH) vitamin D and PTH levels.

AIMS: Many clinical laboratories in the UK use a standard equation to adjust total calcium for albumin concentration. To assess the validity of this practice, we assessed the effect of the use of a traditional and locally derived calcium adjustment equation on parathyroid hormone (PTH) and 25(OH, hydroxy) vitamin D levels. METHODS: Samples requested for calcium and albumin measurement over a 6 month period that met inclusion criteria were used to derive a calcium adjustment equation (n=60 941). The traditional and locally derived calcium adjustment equations were then applied to a second cohort of adult patients that underwent calcium measurement over a 1 year period (n=275 456). Patients were classified as hypocalcaemic, normocalcaemic or hypercalcaemic using a UK Pathology Harmony adjusted calcium reference interval (2.2-2.6 mmol/L). RESULTS: The local calcium adjustment equation provided a 7.1-fold reduction in the prevalence of hypocalcaemia. Patients classified as hypocalcaemic using the locally derived equation had statistically significantly lower 25(OH) vitamin D and higher PTH levels. A 2.4-fold increase in the prevalence of hypercalcaemia was also observed using the new equation, but with no significant difference in 25(OH) vitamin D or PTH levels. CONCLUSIONS: A locally derived calcium adjustment equation reclassified the calcium status of 61 278 (22%) patients. Patients classified as hypocalcaemic by the locally derived equation had significantly lower 25(OH) vitamin D and significantly higher PTH values, providing evidence that use of this adjustment equation generates adjusted calcium results of greater clinical relevance. This study provides further and novel evidence that individual laboratories should determine local equations for adjusted calcium where possible.

Reduced testing frequency for glycated hemoglobin, HbA1c, is associated with deteriorating diabetes control.

OBJECTIVE: We previously showed that in patients with diabetes mellitus, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) monitoring outside international guidance on testing frequency is widespread. Here we examined the relationship between testing frequency and diabetes control to test the hypothesis that retest interval is linked to change in HbA1c level. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined repeat HbA1c tests (400,497 tests in 79,409 patients, 2008-2011) processed by three U.K. clinical laboratories. We examined the relationship between retest interval and 1) percentage change in HbA1c and 2) proportion of cases showing a significant HbA1c rise. The effect of demographics factors on these findings was also explored. RESULTS: Our data showed that the optimal testing frequency required to maximize the downward trajectory in HbA1c was four times per year, particularly in those with an initial HbA1c of ≥7% (≥53 mmol/mol), supporting international guidance. Testing 3-monthly was associated with a 3.8% reduction in HbA1c compared with a 1.5% increase observed with annual testing; testing more frequently provided no additional benefit. Compared with annual monitoring, 3-monthly testing was associated with a halving of the proportion showing a significant rise in HbA1c (7-10 vs. 15-20%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide, in a large, multicenter data set, objective evidence that testing outside guidance on HbA1c monitoring frequency is associated with a significant detrimental effect on diabetes control. To achieve the optimum downward trajectory in HbA1c, monitoring frequency should be quarterly, particularly in cases with suboptimal HbA1c. While this impact appears small, optimizing monitoring frequency across the diabetes population may have major implications for diabetes control and comorbidity risk.