Decoding the glycemic paradox: The imperative for frailty-centered inpatient diabetes care

Abstract

The management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in older adults involves the “glycemic paradox”, where lower glycated haemoglobin levels paradoxically link to increased mortality. This editorial for the article which study by Papakitsou et al recently published in World Journal of Clinical Cases, argues that the current “one-size-fits-all” approach in inpatient settings is inadequate. We advocate for the systematic integration of the Clinical Frailty Scale to replace rigid glycemic targets with individualized, safety-focused care. Future clinical protocols must prioritize real-time monitoring and “deprescribing” to prevent iatrogenic hypoglycemia, thereby improving survival and quality of life in this vulnerable cohort. By utilizing the Clinical Frailty Scale - a validated, rapid assessment tool ideal for acute care - clinicians can objectively stratify risk and tailor glycemic targets. Future research should utilize continuous glucose monitoring to determine if these mortality rates are directly tied to iatrogenic hypoglycemia. It is recommended that hospitals incorporate frailty scores as a mandatory component of the diabetes management plan. This would facilitate an automated “alert” for clinicians to consider de-intensifying therapy when a patient crosses a specific frailty threshold.

Key Words: Type 2 diabetes mellitus; Frailty; Glycated haemoglobin; Mortality; Inpatient care; Geriatrics; Clinical Frailty Scale

Core Tip: In frail older adults with type 2 diabetes, lower glycated haemoglobin levels may paradoxically be associated with increased mortality, reflecting overtreatment, hypoglycemia, and underlying physiological decline. Frailty is a key modifier of risk and should guide glycemic targets, particularly in the inpatient setting. Routine frailty assessment, individualized treatment goals, and deprescribing of high-risk therapies are essential. A shift from rigid glycemic control to a safety-focused, patient-centered approach is crucial to improve outcomes in this vulnerable population.

This editorial refers to “Association of glycated hemoglobin levels with 3-year mortality in hospitalized older adults with diabetes: The role of frailty” by Papakitsou et al, 2026; https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v14.i14.120574.

---

INTRODUCTION

Papakitsou et al[1] recently published a study in World Journal of Clinical Cases, which argues that the current “one-size-fits-all” approach in inpatient settings is inadequate. The epidemiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is undergoing a marked transition, driven largely by global population aging. More than 10% of individuals aged ≥ 65 years are currently living with T2DM, and this burden is expected to rise substantially in the coming decades[1-3]. In routine clinical practice, particularly within inpatient settings, clinicians are increasingly confronted with a counterintuitive phenomenon often referred to as the glycemic paradox - where lower glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, traditionally considered desirable, are associated with worse clinical outcomes, including higher mortality[4,5].

This paradox highlights a fundamental limitation in the conventional approach to diabetes management in older adults. Chronological age alone inadequately reflects physiological reserve. Instead, frailty characterized by reduced resilience and increased vulnerability to stressors, provides a more clinically meaningful framework for risk stratification[6,7]. Consequently, diabetes care in this population must move beyond rigid biochemical targets toward a frailty-informed, individualized paradigm that prioritizes safety, functional independence, and quality of life[8,9].

Hospitalization often represents a critical juncture for older adults with T2DM. HbA1c reflects mean glycemia over the preceding 2-3 months and may fail to capture acute metabolic instability or recent clinical deterioration[10]. Emerging observational data suggest that lower HbA1c levels in older adults are paradoxically associated with increased mortality[1,4,5]. In frail individuals, low HbA1c frequently reflects underlying health decline rather than therapeutic success[11-13]. Aggressive glucose-lowering strategies increase risk of hypoglycemia, which is associated with falls, cardiovascular events, and cognitive impairment[1,14,15].

Frailty is a key determinant of outcomes in older adults with diabetes[16-18]. It predicts hospitalization, disability, and mortality[18,19]. Frailty modifies the HbA1c - outcome relationship. In fitter individuals, low HbA1c may reflect overtreatment[20], while in advanced frailty, its predictive value diminishes[21,22]. Thus, frailty should guide therapeutic intensity[23]. Despite guidelines, treatment often remains uniform[24]. Frail patients frequently remain on intensive regimens. This reflects clinical inertia[25,26]. Such treatment increases hypoglycemia without benefit[27]. Guidelines recommend relaxed HbA1c targets (7.5%-8.5%)[28,29], but implementation remains inconsistent[23].

MECHANISMS LINKING LOW HBA1C TO MORTALITY

Frailty acts as a crucial effect modifier in the HbA1c-mortality relationship. In robust patients, low HbA1c may suggest overtreatment, whereas in frail individuals, it often serves as a biomarker of poor health and systemic catabolism. The physiological mechanisms are as follows: (1) Severe hypoglycemia: Intensive glucose lowering does not improve survival and triggers cardiovascular events, such as arrhythmias or myocardial infarction, and accelerates cognitive decline[30-34]; (2) Hypoglycemia unawareness: Blunted counter-regulatory responses in older adults lead to severe neuroglycopenia and falls[35]; and (3) Metabolic signaling: Low HbA1c often signals sarcopenia (loss of muscle mass) and declining metabolic demand rather than successful glycemic control[36,37]. In this context, a low HbA1c reflects the severity of underlying systemic disease rather than a therapeutic achievement[38].

Rethinking glycemic metrics

Although HbA1c is the gold standard for diabetes management, the most important limitation of HbA1c in frail patients is that it fails to give accurate results due to factors like anemia or altered red blood cell turnover[39]. Glycemic variability is often more predictive of adverse outcomes than the average sugar level itself[40]. Hence, continuous glucose monitoring is a better option to provide real-time data that allows clinicians to see the “time in range” and identify silent nocturnal hypoglycemia, offering a much safer picture of a patient’s status than a single laboratory value[41,42].

Implications for clinical practice

Routine frailty assessment should be a standard practice before setting the glucose targets[43] and utilizing the Clinical Frailty Scale for its validity and feasibility in acute settings[44]. Glycemic targets must be individualized based on the biological age of the patient to prevent hypoglycemia[15]. Hospitalization should be viewed as an opportunity to deprescribe high-risk medications that are no longer providing a clear benefit[45]. Treatment simplification improves safety[27,46]. Multidisciplinary care is essential to balance metabolic control with the patient’s overall quality of life[47]. To facilitate clinically actionable decisions, we propose a stratification approach as per Table 1 prioritize hypoglycemia avoidance and deprescribing.

Table 1 Stratification approach.

Frailty status (CFS)	Recommended HbA1c target	Clinical priority
Robust (CFS 1-3)	7.0%-7.5%	Optimize glycemic control
Mild/moderate (CFS 4-6)	7.5%-8.0%	Balance control and safety
Severe (CFS ≥ 7)	8.0%-9.0%	Prioritize hypoglycemia avoidance; deprescribing

CFS: Clinical Frailty Scale; HbA1c: Glycated hemoglobin.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

It is important to acknowledge that current evidence linking low HbA1c to mortality is largely observational, and frailty assessment can be confounded by acute illness. Future research should prioritize prospective trials using continuous glucose monitoring to validate the causal link between “tight” control, hypoglycemia, and mortality in the frail elderly.

CONCLUSION

The glycemic paradox challenges the assumption that lower HbA1c is always beneficial. However, in the frail elderly, an obsessively low HbA1c often signals overtreatment or advanced systemic decline. By shifting our priority from strict numerical targets to safety, function, and the prevention of hypoglycaemia, we can significantly improve the quality of life and longevity for this vulnerable population.