| Literature DB >> 19138424 |
Shinji Tabata1, Shinichiro Yoshimitsu, Tadamichi Hamachi, Hiroshi Abe, Keizo Ohnaka, Suminori Kono.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visceral obesity is positively related to insulin resistance. The nature of the relationship between waist circumference and insulin resistance has not been known in Japanese populations. This study examined the relationship between waist circumference and insulin resistance and evaluated the optimal cutoff point for waist circumference in relation to insulin resistance in middle-aged Japanese men.Entities:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19138424 PMCID: PMC2635363 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6823-9-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Endocr Disord ISSN: 1472-6823 Impact factor: 2.763
Characteristics of the study subjects
| Variable | Value |
| Age (year), mean (SD) | 50.5 (3.7) |
| Body mass index (kg/m2), mean (SD) | 24.0 (2.7) |
| Waist circumference (cm), mean (SD) | 83.7 (7.2) |
| Current smoking (%) | 48.2 |
| Alcohol use (%) | 66.1 |
| Physical activity (MET-hours/week)*, median (IQR) | 16 (5–27) |
| Serum total cholesterol (mg/dL), mean (SD) | 206.7 (34.5) |
| Serum HDL cholesterol (mg/dL), mean (SD) | 57.2 (16.4) |
| Serum triglycerides (mg/dL), median (IQR) | 127 (91–178) |
| Fasting plasma glucose (mmol/L), median (IQR) | 5.6 (5.2–6.0) |
| Fasting plasma insulin (pmol/L), median (IQR) | 34 (22–50) |
| HOMA-IR, median (IQR) | 1.18 (0.77–1.80) |
| History of myocardial infarction (%) | 0.5 |
| History of stroke (%) | 0.9 |
| Use of lipid-lowering drug (%) | 3.1 |
| Use of antihypertensive drug (%) | 9.9 |
| Oral medication for diabetes mellitus (%) | 1.3 |
* Leisure-time physical activity.
IQR, interquartile range; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; MET, metabolic equivalent.
Figure 1Age-adjusted geometric means of HOMA-IR according to categories of waist circumference. HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance.
Age-adjusted and multivariate-adjusted odds ratios of elevated HOMA-IR according to categories of waist circumference
| Number of men (%) | Odds ratio (95% confidence interval) | |||
| Waist (cm) | Total | Elevated HOMA-IR* | Age-adjusted | Multivariate-adjusted† |
| < 80 | 1375 | 58 (4.2) | 1.0 (referent) | 1.0 (referent) |
| 80–84 | 1307 | 156 (11.9) | 3.0 (2.2–4.2) | 3.2 (2.3–4.3) |
| 85–89 | 1141 | 296 (25.9) | 7.8 (5.8–10.5) | 8.2 (6.1–11.0) |
| 90–94 | 645 | 247 (38.3) | 13.9 (10.3–19.0) | 15.2 (11.1–20.8) |
| 95+ | 332 | 216 (65.1) | 42.2 (29.8–59.7) | 45.2 (31.8–64.4) |
* The top quintile of HOMA-IR (≥ 2.00).
† Adjusted for age, rank in the Self-Defense Forces, smoking, and alcohol use.
HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance.
Optimal cutoffs of waist circumference in different HOMA-IR values from ROC curve analysis
| HOMA-IR | Prevalence (%) | Cutoff of WC (cm) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Youden index |
| 1.50 | 34.9 | 80 | 91.5 | 39.5 | 0.310 |
| 85 | 70.4 | 70.0 | 0.403 | ||
| 90 | 38.8 | 89.5 | 0.284 | ||
| 2.00 | 20.3 | 80 | 94.0 | 34.4 | 0.285 |
| 85 | 78.0 | 64.5 | 0.425 | ||
| 90 | 47.6 | 86.6 | 0.342 | ||
| 2.50 | 12.0 | 80 | 96.0 | 32.0 | 0.280 |
| 85 | 83.8 | 61.3 | 0.451 | ||
| 90 | 56.1 | 84.5 | 0.406 | ||
| 3.00 | 7.8 | 80 | 96.3 | 30.7 | 0.270 |
| 85 | 85.3 | 59.3 | 0.446 | ||
| 90 | 60.1 | 83.0 | 0.430 |
ROC, receiver operating characteristics; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; WC, waist circumference.
Figure 2ROC curves for different waist circumferences in relation to insulin resistance. panel A: HOMA-IR ≥ 1.50; panel B: HOMA-IR ≥ 2.00; and panel C: HOMA-IR ≥ 2.50. ROC curves are shown for waist circumferences of 80 cm (blue line), 85 cm (red line), and 90 cm (green line). Logistic regression analysis was used with adjustment for age, rank in the Self-Defense Forces, smoking, and alcohol use. ROC, receiver operating characteristics; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance.