| Literature DB >> 21477504 |
Sushma Sharma1, Robert H Lustig, Sharon E Fleming.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is increasing among young people. We compared the use of homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) with the use of fasting blood glucose to identify MetS in African American children.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21477504 PMCID: PMC3103569
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Chronic Dis ISSN: 1545-1151 Impact factor: 2.830
Anthropometric and Hematologic Characteristics of Participants and Differences by Sex and Body Weight, Taking Action Together Study, Oakland, California, 2007
| Demographic Characteristics | Sex | Body Weight | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Boys, Mean (SE) n = 45 | Girls, Mean (SE) n = 60 |
| Overweight | Obese |
| |
| Age, y (SD) | 10.6 (1.03) | 10.6 (1.18) | .81 | 10.3 (1.01) | 10.7 (1.13) | .16 |
| Pubertal stage (5-point scale) | 2.11 (1.48) | 3.45 (1.21) | <.001 | 2.57 (1.66) | 2.95 (1.44) | .30 |
| Height, cm | 148 (8.93) | 151 (9.27) | .06 | 146 (8.00) | 150 (9.36) | .05 |
| Weight, kg | 59.3 (18.5) | 69.0 (18.8) | .01 | 45.7 (7.32) | 69.6 (18.2) | <.001 |
| BMI percentile | 96.0 (4.34) | 97.8 (2.70) | .02 | 91.0 (3.56) | 98.5 (1.24) | <.001 |
| BMI, | 1.96 (0.50) | 2.21 (0.43) | .007 | 1.37 (0.21) | 2.29 (0.32) | <.001 |
| WC, cm | 84.5 (14.8) | 93.0 (14.9) | .005 | 71.4 (7.11) | 93.9 (13.5) | <.001 |
| WC >75th percentile | 96 | 95 | .90 | 76 | 100 | <.001 |
| HDL-C, mg/dL | 57.4 (13.2) | 52.5 (11.4) | .04 | 63.0 (14.5) | 52.5 (10.9) | <.001 |
| Triglycerides, mg/dL | 63.4 (27.1) | 76.3 (25.2) | .01 | 60.0 (23.7) | 73.5 (26.8) | .04 |
| Fasting glucose, mg/dL | 87.6 (5.94) | 88.3 (15.3) | .76 | 87.4 (6.71) | 88.1 (13.2) | .82 |
| Insulin, μIU/mL | 8.49 (5.08) | 16.3 (12.3) | <.001 | 6.84 (4.02) | 14.5 (11.2) | <.001 |
| HOMA-IR | 1.86 (1.17) | 3.57 (2.68) | <.001 | 1.49 (0.93) | 3.71 (2.44) | <.001 |
| sBP, mm/Hg | 106 (8.79) | 105 (7.38) | .77 | 102 (6.26) | 106 (8.22) | .06 |
| dBP, mm/Hg | 62.5 (8.40) | 62.5 (7.83) | .99 | 59.6 (5.90) | 63.2 (8.37) | .07 |
| sBP, | 0.02 (0.74) | −0.06 (0.72) | .58 | −0.22 (0.56) | 0.02 (0.75) | .17 |
| dBP, | 0.01 (0.69) | −0.03 (0.72) | .81 | −0.22 (0.50) | 0.04 (0.74) | .14 |
| Metabolic syndrome, | 4 (8.9) | 14 (23.3) | .05 | 2 (9.5) | 16 (19.0) | .30 |
Abbreviations: SE, standard error; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; sBP, systolic blood pressure; dBP, diastolic blood pressure.
Differences determined using 2-tailed t test following Levene's test for equality of variances (with exception noted in footnote c).
Overweight is defined as BMI >85 to <95th percentile; obese is defined as BMI ≥95th percentile matched for age and sex.
Waist circumference percentiles calculated using regression equations developed by Fernandez et al (17) for African American children with adjustments for age and sex.
Difference determined using χ2 test.
HOMA-IR, defined as fasting blood glucose (mmol/L) × insulin (μIU/mL)/22.5, and used as an index of insulin resistance. Cutoffs for defining metabolic syndrome in children taken from de Ferranti et al (4).
Of those children with BMIs ≥95th percentile, the proportion of girls (29%) compared with boys (18%) that met the criteria for having metabolic syndrome was not significantly different (χ2 test).
Anthropometric and Hematologic Characteristics of Participants With and Without Metabolic Syndrome Using 2 Sets of Criteria,a Taking Action Together Study, Oakland, California, 2007
| Participant Characteristics | MetSglucose Status | MetSHOMA-IR Status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Negative, Mean (SEM) n = 87 | Positive, Mean (SEM) n = 18 |
| Negative, Mean (SEM) n = 65 | Positive, Mean (SEM) n = 40 |
| |
| Sex (0 = girls; 1 = boys) | 0.47 (0.50) | 0.22 (0.43) | .05 | 0.54 (0.50) | 0.25 (0.44) | .004 |
| Pubertal stage (5-point scale) | 2.80 (1.44) | 3.22 (1.44) | .28 | 2.66 (1.45) | 3.22 (1.49) | .06 |
| BMI, | 2.07 (0.49) | 2.29 (0.37) | .04 | 1.97 (0.49) | 2.31 (0.37) | <.001 |
| Waist circumference, cm | 87.9 (15.5) | 96.3 (13.1) | .03 | 85.2 (14.3) | 96.1 (14.8) | <.001 |
| HDL-C, mg/dL | 56.7 (12.5) | 44.5 (4.18) | <.001 | 60.5 (11.6) | 44.9 (5.65) | <.001 |
| Triglycerides, mg/dL | 62.8 (20.5) | 109.0 (19.1) | <.001 | 60.1 (19.6) | 88.1 (27.8) | <.001 |
| Fasting glucose, mg/dL | 86.6 (5.78) | 94.9 (26.0) | .12 | 86.2 (5.78) | 90.9 (18.1) | .06 |
| Fasting insulin, μIU/mL | 12.0 (10.5) | 17.5 (10.4) | .04 | 9.83 (10.3) | 18.1 (9.04) | <.001 |
| HOMA-IR | 2.61 (2.21) | 4.08 (2.51) | .01 | 2.09 (2.13) | 4.04 (2.12) | <.001 |
| sBP, z score | −0.10 (0.69) | 0.31 (0.80) | .03 | −0.18 (0.65) | 0.22 (0.77) | .004 |
| dBP, z score | −0.05 (0.67) | 0.18 (0.86) | .20 | −0.08 (0.65) | 0.09 (0.78) | .25 |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; sBPz, systolic blood pressure z score; dBPz, diastolic blood pressure z score.
Defined as a glucose concentration cutoff of ≥110mg/dL (MetSglucose) or a HOMA-IR cutoff of ≥2.5 (MetSHOMA-IR).
Differences determined using 2-tailed t tests following Levene's test for equality of variances with the exception that χ2 test was used for the dichotomous variable "sex."
Reliability of Glucose Compared with HOMA-IR as 1 of the 5 Components of Metabolic Syndrome, Taking Action Together Study, Oakland, California, 2007
| Cutoffs | Positives | Negatives | Specificity, | Sensitivity, | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||
| No. of Cases | True, | False, | No. of Cases, | True, | False, | |||
| Glucose ≥110 mg/dL | 18 | 1 (100) | 0 | 87 | 87 (100) | 17 (94) | 100 | 6 |
| HOMA-IR ≥2.5 | 40 | 35 (88) | 11 (17) | 65 | 54 (83) | 5 (13) | 83 | 88 |
| Glucose ≥87.7 mg/dL | 33 | 27 (82) | 20 (28) | 72 | 52 (72) | 6 (18) | 72 | 82 |
Abbreviations: HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; MetS, metabolic syndrome.
For all conditions, 4 components were evaluated: waist circumference, HDL-C, triglycerides, and blood pressure. A fifth component (glucose concentration or HOMA-IR value) was evaluated at the values indicated in the cutoffs column.
True positives, % = [(number of positive cases for which glucose or HOMA-IR values exceeded the indicated cutoff) / (total number of positive cases)] X 100.
False positives, % = [(number of negative cases for which glucose or HOMA-IR values exceeded the indicated cutoff) / (total number of negative cases)] X 100.
False positives, % = [(number of negative cases for which glucose or HOMA-IR values exceeded the indicated cutoff) / (total number of negative cases)] X 100.
False negatives, % = [(number of positive cases for which glucose or HOMA-IR values did not exceed the indicated cutoff) / (total number of positive cases)] X 100.
Specificity = [(number of true negatives) / (number of true negatives + number of false positives)] X 100.
Sensitivity = [(number of true positives) / (number of true positives + number of false negatives)] X 100.
Glucose concentration cutoff for MetS as recommended by de Ferranti et al (4).
HOMA-IR, defined as fasting blood glucose (mmol/L) × insulin (μIU/mL)/22.5. HOMA-IR cutoff for MetS as recommended by Madeira et al (18). In this sample, 57% of participants had HOMA-IR <2.5 and 57% had fasting blood glucose concentrations <87.7 mg/dL.
Pearson's Correlations and Significance Between Values for Blood Glucose or Insulin Resistance and Other Metabolic Risk Factors (n = 105), Taking Action Together Study, Oakland, California, 2007
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Table 4a. Correlations, treating each component as a continuous variable. | ||||
|
| ||||
| MetS Component | Glucose, mg/dL | HOMA-IR | ||
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
| |
| Waist circumference, cm | 0.13 | .19 | 0.51 | <.001 |
| HDL-C, mg/dL | −0.10 | .33 | −0.27 | .006 |
| Triglycerides, mg/dL | 0.19 | .06 | 0.26 | .007 |
| sBP, z score | −0.40 | .69 | 0.21 | .03 |
| dBP, z score | −0.20 | .05 | 0.14 | .15 |
| Insulin, μIU/mL | 0.06 | .57 | 0.98 | <.001 |
Abbreviations: HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; sBP; systolic blood pressure; dBP, diastolic blood pressure; BP, blood pressure.
Glucose concentration cutoff at ≥110 mg/dL: 0 = below cutoff; 1 = above cutoff.
HOMA-IR cutoff of ≥2.5 was at the 57th percentile for this population (0 = below cutoff, 1 = above cutoff). The corresponding 57th percentile glucose concentration in this population was 88 mg/dL.
Waist circumference cutoff for MetS was >75th percentile when matched for age, sex and race: 0 = below cutoff; 1 = above cutoff.
HDL-C cutoff for MetS was <50 mg/dL: 0 = above cutoff; 1 = below cutoff.
Triglycerides cutoff for MetS was ≥100 mg/dL: 0 = below cutoff; 1 = above cutoff.
BP cutoff for MetS: sBP and/or dBP >90th percentile when matched for age, sex, and height: 0 = below cutoff; 1 = above cutoff.