| Literature DB >> 25047354 |
Chuan Wang1, Jun Song1, Zeqiang Ma2, Weifang Yang3, Chengqiao Li4, Xiuping Zhang5, Xinguo Hou1, Yu Sun1, Peng Lin1, Kai Liang1, Lei Gong1, Meijian Wang1, Fuqiang Liu1, Wenjuan Li1, Fei Yan1, Junpeng Yang1, Lingshu Wang1, Meng Tian1, Jidong Liu1, Ruxing Zhao1, Li Chen1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how the glucose variability between fasting and a 2-h postload glucose state (2-h postload plasma glucose [2hPG]-fasting plasma glucose [FPG]) is associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD) in middle-aged and elderly Chinese patients previously diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 1054 previously diagnosed type 2 diabetes patients who were 40 years of age and older. First, the subjects were divided into two groups based on a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) value of 7%. Each group was divided into two subgroups, with or without CKD. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation was used to estimate the glomerular filtration rate (GFR). CKD was defined as eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to estimate the association between the 2hPG-FPG and eGFR. The 2hPG-FPG value was divided into four groups increasing in increments of 36 mg/dl (2.0 mmol/L): 0-72, 72-108, 108-144 and ≥144 mg/dl, based on the quartiles of patients with HbA1c levels ≥7%; then, binary logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the association between 2hPG-FPG and the risk of CKD.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25047354 PMCID: PMC4105498 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102941
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
eGFR calculated from the creatinine levels using the CKD-EPI formula.
| Sex | Cr (mg/dl) | eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2) |
| Females | ≤0.7 | 144×(Cr/0.7)−0.329×(0.993)age |
| >0.7 | 144×(Cr/0.7)−1.209×(0.993)age | |
| Males | ≤0.9 | 141×(Cr/0.9)−0.411×(0.993)age |
| >0.9 | 141×(Cr/0.9)−1.209×(0.993)age |
eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; Cr: creatinine.
Characteristics of the study participants by HbA1c and CKD.
| HbA1c (%) <7 (n = 276) | HbA1c (%) ≥7 (n = 778) | |||
| Characteristics | CKD (n = 25) | non-CKD (n = 251) | CKD (n = 86) | non-CKD (n = 692) |
| Female (%) | 3 (12.0%) | 144 (57.4%)** | 21 (24.4%) | 436 (63.0%)** |
| Age (years) | 70.80±7.48 | 62.84±9.74** | 69.35±8.86 | 62.62±8.25** |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26.73±3.74 | 26.80±3.66 | 26.71±3.23 | 27.24±3.62 |
| Systolic BP (mmHg) | 149.50±22.23 | 145.45±21.67 | 149.93±21.12 | 145.71±21.87 |
| Diastolic BP (mmHg) | 76.09±9.61 | 79.51±10.34 | 79.89±11.44 | 80.04±11.74 |
| FPG (mg/dl) | 146.61±27.11 | 137.35±20.13 | 194.89±64.46 | 174.13±47.36* |
| 2hPG (mg/dl) | 219.67±49.98 | 218.42±44.30 | 327.37±84.81 | 283.66±73.01** |
| 2hPG-FPG (mg/dl) | 73.06±44.56 | 81.08±43.36 | 132.48±52.02 | 109.52±49.53** |
| HbA1c (%) | 6.50 (6.10–6.80) | 6.50 (6.20–6.80) | 8.40 (7.68–9.93) | 8.20 (7.50–9.30)* |
| Fasting insulin (mIU/L) | 9.00 (7.05–14.80) | 8.90 (6.10–11.90) | 9.10 (5.90–1.38) | 9.40 (6.48–13.73) |
| HOMA-IR index | 3.33 (2.46–4.67) | 2.96 (1.98–4.03) | 3.98 (2.70–6.43) | 3.77 (2.65–5.90) |
| Cholesterol (mg/dl) | 223.36±44.14 | 202.36±38.02* | 210.41±45.51 | 215.46±40.08 |
| Triglyceride (mg/dl) | 136.44 (91.70–167.90) | 129.36 (93.92–183.40) | 157.27 (108.98–206.44) | 139.10 (100.12–207.32) |
| Smoking (%) | 4 (16.0%) | 22 (8.8%) | 17 (19.8%) | 74 (10.7%)* |
| Drinking (%) | 2 (8.0%) | 24 (9.6%) | 6 (7.0%) | 42 (6.1%) |
| Creatinine (mg/dl) | 1.08 (1.00–1.19) | 0.74 (0.68–0.83)** | 1.08 (0.99–1.25) | 0.75 (0.69–0.82)** |
| eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m2) | 52.62 (16.92–58.05) | 84.35 (74.45–92.45)** | 53.49 (43.57–56.60) | 85.26 (75.62–93.09)** |
The data are expressed as the means ± SD or numbers (%). CKD, chronic kidney disease; BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; 2hPG, 2-h postload plasma glucose; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate. *P<0.05 vs the CKD group; **P<0.01 vs the CKD group.
Multiple linear regression analysis of the relationship between 2hPG-FPG and eGFR.
| HbA1c (%) <7 | HbA1c (%) ≥7 | ||||
| Models | Independent variable | β Coefficient (95% CI) |
| β Coefficient (95% CI) |
|
| Model 1 | 2hPG-FPG, per mg/dl | −0.018 (−0.062 to 0.026) | 0.417 | −0.042 (−0.064 to −0.020) |
|
| Model 2 | 2hPG-FPG, per mg/dl | 0.013 (−0.018 to 0.043) | 0.417 | −0.035 (−0.053 to −0.017) |
|
| Model 3 | 2hPG-FPG, per mg/dl | 0.011 (−0.020 to 0.041) | 0.492 | −0.023 (−0.041 to −0.004) |
|
| Log (HbA1c), per unit | −46.082 (−90.153 to −2.012) |
| −23.194 (-35.654 to −10.733) |
| |
Model 1: not adjusted; Model 2: adjusted for age, gender, BMI, systolic BP and diastolic BP; Model 3: Model 2 plus Log (fasting insulin), cholesterol, Log (triglyceride), drinking and smoking.
Binary logistic regression analysis of the relationship between 2hPG-FPG and CKD.
| HbA1c (%) <7 | HbA1c (%) ≥7 | ||||
| Models | Independent variable | Odds ratio (95% CI) |
| Odds ratio (95% CI) |
|
| Model 1 | 2hPG-FPG, mg/dl | ||||
| Group 1 (0–72) | 1 (reference) | 1 (reference) | |||
| Group 2 (72–108) | 1.292 (0.509–3.279) | 0.589 | 1.385 (0.611–3.138) | 0.435 | |
| Group 3 (108–144) | 0.762 (0.232–2.508) | 0.655 | 2.339 (1.094–4.999) |
| |
| Group 4 (≥144) | 0.472 (0.058–3.852) | 0.483 | 3.298 (1.577–6.895) |
| |
| Model 2 | 2hPG-FPG, mg/dl | ||||
| Group 1 (0–72) | 1 (reference) | 1 (reference) | |||
| Group 2 (72–108) | 0.862 (0.266–2.788) | 0.804 | 1.448 (0.589–3.558) | 0.420 | |
| Group 3 (108–144) | 0.364 (0.088–1.511) | 0.164 | 2.397 (1.038–5.534) |
| |
| Group 4 (≥144) | 0.200 (0.017–2.325) | 0.198 | 3.662 (1.575–8.514) |
| |
| Model 3 | 2hPG-FPG, mg/dl | ||||
| Group 1 (0–72) | 1 (reference) | 1 (reference) | |||
| Group 2 (72–108) | 0.812 (0.233–2.832) | 0.743 | 1.220 (0.477–3.120) | 0.678 | |
| Group 3 (108–144) | 0.330 (0.068–1.606) | 0.170 | 2.076 (0.874–4.929) | 0.098 | |
| Group 4 (≥144) | 0.240 (0.020–2.878) | 0.260 | 2.640 (1.083–6.436) |
| |
| HbA1c, per % unit | 0.717 (0.232–2.222) | 0.565 | 1.295 (1.096–1.529) |
| |
Model 1: not adjusted; Model 2: adjusted for age, gender, BMI, systolic BP and diastolic BP; Model 3: Model 2 plus Log (fasting insulin), cholesterol, Log (triglyceride), drinking and smoking.