BACKGROUND: To investigate the prognostic importance of the metabolic syndrome (MetS) on incident cardiovascular disease (CVD). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: The study was based on 10-year follow-up of 3041 men and women aged 25-84 years without CVD or diabetes who participated in the 1994/1995 Busselton Health Survey. Hazards ratio (HRs) from Cox regression models were used to describe the effect of the MetS as a dichotomous classification and as the number of risk components on incident coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke and all CVD events. RESULTS: All cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors studied showed a strong association with the number of MetS risk components. The age-adjusted and sex-adjusted HR for the MetS was 1.70 (95% confidence interval: 1.15-2.51) for incident CHD but this was reduced to almost unity after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors or the homoeostasis model assessment measure of insulin resistance. However, the number of MetS risk components remained significant (P<0.01) with those having 3+ risk components with a three-fold increase in risk compared with those with no risk components (adjusted HR: 3.59, 95% confidence interval: 1.43-8.99). CONCLUSION: Consideration of the number of MetS risk components seems to be more informative than the (dichotomous) MetS classification when determining risk in clinical practice. Identification of people without any MetS risk components is clinically valuable, as these people seem to have a substantially reduced risk of developing CHD.
BACKGROUND: To investigate the prognostic importance of the metabolic syndrome (MetS) on incident cardiovascular disease (CVD). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: The study was based on 10-year follow-up of 3041 men and women aged 25-84 years without CVD or diabetes who participated in the 1994/1995 Busselton Health Survey. Hazards ratio (HRs) from Cox regression models were used to describe the effect of the MetS as a dichotomous classification and as the number of risk components on incident coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke and all CVD events. RESULTS: All cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors studied showed a strong association with the number of MetS risk components. The age-adjusted and sex-adjusted HR for the MetS was 1.70 (95% confidence interval: 1.15-2.51) for incident CHD but this was reduced to almost unity after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors or the homoeostasis model assessment measure of insulin resistance. However, the number of MetS risk components remained significant (P<0.01) with those having 3+ risk components with a three-fold increase in risk compared with those with no risk components (adjusted HR: 3.59, 95% confidence interval: 1.43-8.99). CONCLUSION: Consideration of the number of MetS risk components seems to be more informative than the (dichotomous) MetS classification when determining risk in clinical practice. Identification of people without any MetS risk components is clinically valuable, as these people seem to have a substantially reduced risk of developing CHD.
Authors: Yi X Chan; Matthew W Knuiman; Mark L Divitini; David J Handelsman; John P Beilby; Bu B Yeap Journal: Horm Cancer Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 3.869
Authors: Matthew Knuiman; Tom Briffa; Mark Divitini; Derek Chew; John Eikelboom; Brendan McQuillan; Joseph Hung Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2014-01-04 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Gemma Cadby; Corey Giles; Phillip E Melton; Kevin Huynh; Natalie A Mellett; Thy Duong; Anh Nguyen; Michelle Cinel; Alex Smith; Gavriel Olshansky; Tingting Wang; Marta Brozynska; Mike Inouye; Nina S McCarthy; Amir Ariff; Joseph Hung; Jennie Hui; John Beilby; Marie-Pierre Dubé; Gerald F Watts; Sonia Shah; Naomi R Wray; Wei Ling Florence Lim; Pratishtha Chatterjee; Ian Martins; Simon M Laws; Tenielle Porter; Michael Vacher; Ashley I Bush; Christopher C Rowe; Victor L Villemagne; David Ames; Colin L Masters; Kevin Taddei; Matthias Arnold; Gabi Kastenmüller; Kwangsik Nho; Andrew J Saykin; Xianlin Han; Rima Kaddurah-Daouk; Ralph N Martins; John Blangero; Peter J Meikle; Eric K Moses Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 17.694
Authors: Gemma Cadby; Phillip E Melton; Nina S McCarthy; Corey Giles; Natalie A Mellett; Kevin Huynh; Joseph Hung; John Beilby; Marie-Pierre Dubé; Gerald F Watts; John Blangero; Peter J Meikle; Eric K Moses Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2020-02-14 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Eliane Said Dutra; Kênia Marabaiocchi de Carvalho; Edina Miyazaki; Edgar Merchán- Hamann; Marina Kiyomi Ito Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr Date: 2012-05-14 Impact factor: 3.320
Authors: Kirsten E Peters; John Beilby; Gemma Cadby; Nicole M Warrington; David G Bruce; Wendy A Davis; Timothy Me Davis; Steven Wiltshire; Matthew Knuiman; Brendan M McQuillan; Lyle J Palmer; Peter L Thompson; Joseph Hung Journal: BMC Med Genet Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 2.103