What is Hemoglobin A1c?

Hemoglobin A1c (also called HbA1c, A1C, or simply "A1c") is a blood test that measures your average blood sugar levels over the past two to three months. Unlike a regular blood sugar test that shows your glucose level at a single moment in time, A1c provides a "big picture" view of your blood sugar control—like a report card that summarizes your glucose levels over an extended period.[1][2]

The test works by measuring how much glucose has attached to your hemoglobin—the protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen throughout your body. When glucose circulates in your bloodstream, some of it naturally sticks to hemoglobin through a process called glycation. The higher your blood sugar levels have been, the more glucose attaches to your hemoglobin. Since red blood cells live for approximately 120 days, the A1c test reflects your average glucose exposure over roughly the past 60 to 90 days, with more recent weeks weighted more heavily.[2][3]

Think of it like this: if your blood sugar were a river, a regular glucose test would be like dipping a cup in the water to see how fast it's flowing right now. The A1c test, by contrast, would be like measuring the waterline on the riverbank—it tells you how high the water has been, on average, over the past several months.

The Discovery That Transformed Diabetes Care

The discovery that hemoglobin becomes glycated in proportion to blood glucose levels was one of the most important advances in diabetes care. In the 1970s, researchers recognized that measuring glycated hemoglobin could provide an objective measure of long-term glucose control—something that had previously been impossible to assess accurately.[4]

This discovery set the stage for two landmark clinical trials that would definitively establish the importance of glucose control in preventing diabetes complications:

The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT), (1983–1993) showed that intensive glucose control in type 1 diabetes (A1c ~7% vs ~9%) reduced retinopathy by 76%, nephropathy by 50%, and neuropathy by 60%. The UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) in type 2 diabetes similarly found that tighter control lowered microvascular complications by 25%, with a 35% risk reduction for every 1% drop in A1c.[1][5][6][7]

The Metabolic Memory Effect: Why Early Control Matters

One of the most remarkable discoveries from these landmark trials emerged during long-term follow-up studies. After the DCCT ended, researchers continued to follow the participants in a study called EDIC (Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications). Something unexpected happened: even though the A1c levels in the two groups converged within a year after the trial ended (as the conventional therapy group adopted more intensive treatment), the benefits of the earlier intensive therapy persisted for decades.[8]

This phenomenon is called "metabolic memory" (or the "legacy effect" in type 2 diabetes). It means that the glucose levels you maintain early in your diabetes journey have lasting effects on your risk of complications—effects that persist even if your control later becomes similar to someone who had poorer control initially.[8][9]

The UKPDS found the same pattern in type 2 diabetes. In 2024, researchers published 24-year follow-up data showing that the legacy effects of early intensive glucose control remained undiminished for up to 24 years after the original trial ended. Participants who had received intensive therapy from the time of diagnosis continued to have lower rates of death, heart attacks, and microvascular complications—even though their A1c levels had been similar to the conventional therapy group for over two decades.[10]

Perhaps most striking is this finding: each 1 percentage point higher A1c value seen 20 years before death conferred a 36% increased relative risk for death, compared with just 8% for such values seen only 5 years before death.[10] In other words, your blood sugar control decades ago matters more for your long-term outcomes than your control in recent years.

The implications are profound: achieving good glucose control as early as possible—ideally from the time of diagnosis—provides benefits that last a lifetime. Delaying intensive treatment means missing a window of opportunity that cannot be fully recovered later.

Understanding Your A1c Numbers

A1c is reported as a percentage. Here's what the numbers mean:[2][11][12][13]

Optimal: 5% and below

Non diabetic: Less than 5.7%

Prediabetes (high risk for diabetes): 5.7% to 6.4%

Diabetes: 6.5% or higher

For people already diagnosed with diabetes, A1c is used to monitor how well blood sugar is being controlled. The following figure shows how glucose tolerance categories relate to A1c levels, demonstrating that even within the "normal" A1c range, abnormal glucose tolerance becomes progressively more common as A1c rises:

A1c and Cardiovascular Risk

While A1c was originally developed to monitor diabetes and predict microvascular complications (affecting the eyes, kidneys, and nerves), research has shown that it also predicts cardiovascular disease risk—even in people without diabetes.[15][16][17]

A large European study of over 36,000 participants found that for every 10 mmol/mol (approximately 0.9 percentage point) increase in A1c, there was a 16% higher risk of cardiovascular death, 13% higher risk of cardiovascular disease, and 9% higher risk of death from any cause. Importantly, these associations were present even in people without diabetes.[16]

In the UK Biobank study of nearly 500,000 participants, the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease increased progressively across the entire A1c spectrum—even in the prediabetic range and below. Compared to people with A1c less than 5.0%, those with A1c of 7.0% or higher had approximately 3-fold higher risk of cardiovascular disease and heart failure, and 4-fold higher risk of chronic kidney disease.[18]

The following figure from a landmark study in nondiabetic adults shows how A1c relates to the risk of developing diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke, and death:

Figure 2 Adjusted Hazard Ratios for Self-Reported Diagnosed Diabetes and Coronary Heart Disease, Ischemic Stroke, and Death from Any Cause, According to the Baseline Glycated Hemoglobin Value. undefined

This figure reveals several important patterns. For diabetes risk, the relationship is exponential—risk increases continuously even within the normal A1c range. For coronary heart disease and stroke, there appears to be a threshold effect, with risk increasing more steeply above approximately 5.5%. For death from any cause, the relationship is J-shaped, with slightly elevated risk at both very low and high A1c levels.

A meta-analysis of 46 studies found that the optimal A1c range for the lowest all-cause and cardiovascular mortality was 6.0% to 8.0% in people with diabetes and 5.0% to 6.0% in those without diabetes. Both very high and very low A1c levels were associated with increased mortality risk.[20]

How is A1c Measured?

A1c is measured through a simple blood test that can be done at any time of day—no fasting is required. This is one of its major advantages over fasting glucose tests.[4][13]

For accurate results, the test should be performed using a method certified by the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP), which ensures consistency across different laboratories.[2][11] Most clinical laboratories use NGSP-certified assays with excellent performance.

Point-of-care A1c testing (done in the doctor's office with immediate results) can be convenient for treatment adjustments, but may be less accurate than laboratory testing. Point-of-care devices are generally not recommended for initial diagnosis of diabetes.[1][2]

Hemoglobin variants (such as hemoglobin S, C, D, or E) can interfere with some A1c assays, causing either falsely high or falsely low results depending on the specific variant and assay method. Most modern assays in the U.S. are accurate in people who are heterozygous (carriers) for common variants. However, A1c cannot be measured at all in people with homozygous hemoglobin variants (such as sickle cell disease with HbSS), because they lack normal hemoglobin A.[2][1]

For people with conditions that affect A1c accuracy, alternative tests such as fructosamine or glycated albumin can be used. These tests reflect shorter periods of glucose control (2-3 weeks) but can provide useful information when A1c is unreliable.[2][1]

Racial and ethnic differences in A1c have been observed in some studies, with Black individuals having slightly higher A1c levels (approximately 0.3-0.4% higher) than White individuals at the same average glucose level. The reasons for this are not fully understood and may involve genetic factors affecting hemoglobin glycation or red blood cell lifespan. Current guidelines state that race and ethnicity should not be used to adjust A1c interpretation, but clinicians should be aware of potential discordance between A1c and glucose measurements in all patients.[1][11][24]

A1c vs. Continuous Glucose Monitoring

While A1c remains the primary tool for assessing long-term glycemic control, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has emerged as an important complementary technology. CGM provides real-time glucose data and can reveal patterns that A1c cannot capture, including:[1]

• Glycemic variability: How much glucose levels fluctuate throughout the day

• Time in range: The percentage of time glucose is within target range (typically 70-180 mg/dL)

• Hypoglycemia: Episodes of low blood sugar that A1c cannot detect

• Postprandial spikes: High glucose levels after meals

A1c and CGM provide different but complementary information. Two people with the same A1c of 7% might have very different glucose patterns—one with stable glucose levels and the other with wide swings between highs and lows. CGM can reveal these differences and help guide treatment adjustments.[1]

The Relationship Between A1c and Average Glucose

The A1C-Derived Average Glucose (ADAG) study established a strong correlation between A1c and average glucose levels, allowing laboratories to report an "estimated average glucose" (eAG) alongside the A1c result.[1][3]

The approximate relationship is:

• A1c 5.0% ≈ Average glucose 97 mg/dL

• A1c 6.0% ≈ Average glucose 126 mg/dL

• A1c 7.0% ≈ Average glucose 154 mg/dL

• A1c 8.0% ≈ Average glucose 183 mg/dL

• A1c 9.0% ≈ Average glucose 212 mg/dL

• A1c 10.0% ≈ Average glucose 240 mg/dL

However, there is individual variation in this relationship, and some people may have higher or lower A1c than expected based on their measured glucose levels.[1]

References

1. 6. Glycemic Goals, Hypoglycemia, and Hyperglycemic Crises: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee for Diabetes*. Diabetes Care. 2026;49(Supplement_1):S132-S149. doi:10.2337/dc26-S006.

2. Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus. Sacks DB, Arnold M, Bakris GL, et al. Diabetes Care. 2023;46(10):e151-e199. doi:10.2337/dci23-0036.

3. A Test in Context: Hemoglobin a and Cardiovascular Disease. Gore MO, McGuire DK. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2016;68(22):2479-2486. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.08.070.

4. Hemoglobin A1c-Using Epidemiology to Guide Medical Practice: Kelly West Award Lecture 2020. Selvin E. Diabetes Care. 2021;:dci210035. doi:10.2337/dci21-0035.

5. Realising the Long-Term Promise of Insulin Therapy: The DCCT/EDIC Study. Nathan DM. Diabetologia. 2021;64(5):1049-1058. doi:10.1007/s00125-021-05397-4.

6. The NIDDK Takes on the Complications of Type 1 Diabetes: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study. Braffett BH, Bebu I, Lorenzi GM, et al. Diabetes Care. 2025;48(7):1089-1100. doi:10.2337/dc24-2885.

7. Retinopathy in Diabetes. Fong DS, Aiello L, Gardner TW, et al. Diabetes Care. 2004;27 Suppl 1:S84-7. doi:10.2337/diacare.27.2007.s84.

8. Understanding Metabolic Memory: The Prolonged Influence of Glycemia During the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) on Future Risks of Complications During the Study of the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC). Lachin JM, Nathan DM. Diabetes Care. 2021;:dc203097. doi:10.2337/dc20-3097.

9. Glycaemic Management in Diabetes: Old and New Approaches. Ceriello A, Prattichizzo F, Phillip M, et al. The Lancet. Diabetes & Endocrinology. 2022;10(1):75-84. doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(21)00245-X.

10. Post-Trial Monitoring of a Randomised Controlled Trial of Intensive Glycaemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Extended From 10 Years to 24 Years (UKPDS 91). Adler AI, Coleman RL, Leal J, et al. Lancet (London, England). 2024;404(10448):145-155. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00537-3.

11. 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee for Diabetes*. Diabetes Care. 2026;49(Supplement_1):S27-S49. doi:10.2337/dc26-S002.

12. Diagnosis and Management of Prediabetes: A Review. Echouffo-Tcheugui JB, Perreault L, Ji L, Dagogo-Jack S. JAMA. 2023;329(14):1206-1216. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.4063.

13. Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. US Preventive Services Task Force, Davidson KW, Barry MJ, et al. JAMA. 2021;326(8):736-743. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.12531.

14. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Implications of Relationships Between Fasting, 2-Hour Postchallenge Plasma Glucose and Hemoglobin A1c Values. Woerle HJ, Pimenta WP, Meyer C, et al. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2004 Aug 9-23;164(15):1627-32. doi:10.1001/archinte.164.15.1627.

15. 2010 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk in Asymptomatic Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Greenland P, Alpert JS, Beller GA, et al. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2010;56(25):e50-103. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.09.001.

16. Association of Glycated Hemoglobin A1c Levels With Cardiovascular Outcomes in the General Population: Results From the BiomarCaRE (Biomarker for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Europe) Consortium. Sinning C, Makarova N, Völzke H, et al. Cardiovascular Diabetology. 2021;20(1):223. doi:10.1186/s12933-021-01413-4.

17. Association Between Hemoglobin A1c and Development of Cardiovascular Disease in Canadian Men and Women Without Diabetes at Baseline: A Population-Based Study of 608 474 Adults. Butalia S, Chu LM, Dover DC, et al. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2024;13(9):e031095. doi:10.1161/JAHA.123.031095.

18. Cardiovascular and Kidney Outcomes Across the Glycemic Spectrum: Insights From the UK Biobank. Honigberg MC, Zekavat SM, Pirruccello JP, Natarajan P, Vaduganathan M. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2021;78(5):453-464. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.05.004.

19. Glycated Hemoglobin, Diabetes, and Cardiovascular Risk in Nondiabetic Adults. Selvin E, Steffes MW, Zhu H, et al. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2010;362(9):800-11. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0908359.

20. Glycated Haemoglobin A1c as a Risk Factor of Cardiovascular Outcomes and All-Cause Mortality in Diabetic and Non-Diabetic Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cavero-Redondo I, Peleteiro B, Álvarez-Bueno C, Rodriguez-Artalejo F, Martínez-Vizcaíno V. BMJ Open. 2017;7(7):e015949. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015949.

21. Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (2023). Brian Burke MD, Paul R. Conlin MD, Angela Giles DBH LCSW DAPA, et al. Department of Veterans Affairs.

22. Diagnosis and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Adults. Kalyani RR, Neumiller JJ, Maruthur NM, Wexler DJ. JAMA. 2025;334(11):984-1002. doi:10.1001/jama.2025.5956.

23. Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Davies MJ, Aroda VR, Collins BS, et al. Diabetes Care. 2022;45(11):2753-2786. doi:10.2337/dci22-0034.

24. Synopsis of the 2017 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs/U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline: Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Conlin PR, Colburn J, Aron D, et al. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2017;167(9):655-663. doi:10.7326/M17-1362.

25. The Management of Type 1 Diabetes in Adults. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Holt RIG, DeVries JH, Hess-Fischl A, et al. Diabetes Care. 2021;44(11):2589-2625. doi:10.2337/dci21-0043.

• 26. The Effect of Intensive Treatment of Diabetes on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group, Nathan DM, Genuth S, et al. The New England Journal of Medicine. 1993;329(14):977-86. doi:10.1056/NEJM199309303291401.