Jinping Zhang1, Zhaojun Yang1, Jianzhong Xiao1, Xiaoyan Xing1, Juming Lu2, Jianping Weng3, Weiping Jia4, Linong Ji5, Zhongyan Shan6, Jie Liu7, Haoming Tian8, Qiuhe Ji9, Dalong Zhu10, Jiapu Ge11, Li Chen12, Xiaohui Guo13, Zhigang Zhao14, Qiang Li15, Zhiguang Zhou16, Lixiang Lin17, Na Wang1, Wenying Yang1. 1. Department of Endocrinology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Endocrinology, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, China. 3. Department of Endocrinology, Sun Yat-sen University Third Hospital, Guangzhou, China. 4. Department of Endocrinology, Shanghai Jiaotong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China. 5. Department of Endocrinology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. 6. Department of Endocrinology, First Affiliated Hospital, Chinese Medical University, Liaoling, China. 7. Department of Endocrinology, Shanxi Province People's Hospital, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China. 8. Department of Endocrinology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. 9. Department of Endocrinology, Xijing Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, Shanxi, China. 10. Department of Endocrinology, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 11. Department of Endocrinology, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region's Hospital, Urmqi, Xinjiang, China. 12. Department of Endocrinology, Qilu Hospital, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China. 13. Department of Endocrinology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China. 14. Department of Endocrinology, Henan Province People's Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan, China. 15. Department of Endocrinology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China. 16. Department of Endocrinology, Xiangya Second Hospital, Changsha, Hunan, China. 17. Department of Endocrinology, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujiang, China.
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the association between different family history risk categories and prevalence of diabetes in the Chinese population. METHODS: The family history of diabetes was obtained from each subject, and an oral glucose tolerance test was performed for measuring the fasting and postload glucose and insulin levels based on a national representative cross-sectional survey of 46,239 individuals (age ≥ 20 years) in the 2007-2008 China National Diabetes and Metabolism Disorders Study. The family history risk categories of diabetes were high, moderate, and average (FH2 and FH1: at least two generations and one generation of first-degree relatives with diabetes, respectively; FH0: no first-degree relatives with diabetes). RESULTS: The age- and gender-adjusted prevalence rates of diabetes were 32.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 26.4-39.7%) in FH2, 20.1% (95% CI: 18.2-22.1%) in FH1, and 8.4% (95% CI: 7.9-8.9%) in FH0 (P < 0.0001). The calculated homeostatic model assessment-estimated insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), Matsuda insulin sensitivity index (ISI), and insulinogenic index (ΔI30/ΔG30) values showed significant trending changes among the three risk categories, with the most negative effects in FH2. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the odds ratios of having diabetes were 6.16 (95% CI: 4.46-8.50) and 2.86 (95% CI: 2.41-3.39) times higher in FH2 and FH1, respectively, than in FH0 after adjustment for classical risk factors for diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Family history risk categories of diabetes have a significant, independent, and graded association with the prevalence of this disease in the Chinese population.
AIM: To investigate the association between different family history risk categories and prevalence of diabetes in the Chinese population. METHODS: The family history of diabetes was obtained from each subject, and an oral glucose tolerance test was performed for measuring the fasting and postload glucose and insulin levels based on a national representative cross-sectional survey of 46,239 individuals (age ≥ 20 years) in the 2007-2008 China National Diabetes and Metabolism Disorders Study. The family history risk categories of diabetes were high, moderate, and average (FH2 and FH1: at least two generations and one generation of first-degree relatives with diabetes, respectively; FH0: no first-degree relatives with diabetes). RESULTS: The age- and gender-adjusted prevalence rates of diabetes were 32.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 26.4-39.7%) in FH2, 20.1% (95% CI: 18.2-22.1%) in FH1, and 8.4% (95% CI: 7.9-8.9%) in FH0 (P < 0.0001). The calculated homeostatic model assessment-estimated insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), Matsuda insulin sensitivity index (ISI), and insulinogenic index (ΔI30/ΔG30) values showed significant trending changes among the three risk categories, with the most negative effects in FH2. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the odds ratios of having diabetes were 6.16 (95% CI: 4.46-8.50) and 2.86 (95% CI: 2.41-3.39) times higher in FH2 and FH1, respectively, than in FH0 after adjustment for classical risk factors for diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Family history risk categories of diabetes have a significant, independent, and graded association with the prevalence of this disease in the Chinese population.
Authors: R L Hanson; R E Pratley; C Bogardus; K M Narayan; J M Roumain; G Imperatore; A Fagot-Campagna; D J Pettitt; P H Bennett; W C Knowler Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2000-01-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: V Grill; G Persson; S Carlsson; A Norman; M Alvarsson; C G Ostensson; L Svanström; S Efendic Journal: Diabetologia Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Michael I Goran; Kate Coronges; Richard N Bergman; Martha L Cruz; Barbara A Gower Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Steven E Kahn; Yi-Chun Chen; Nathalie Esser; Austin J Taylor; Daniël H van Raalte; Sakeneh Zraika; C Bruce Verchere Journal: Endocr Rev Date: 2021-09-28 Impact factor: 25.261
Authors: Young Hoon Lee; Min Ho Shin; Hae Sung Nam; Kyeong Soo Park; Seong Woo Choi; So Yeon Ryu; Sun Seog Kweon Journal: Yonsei Med J Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 2.759