Luca A Lotta1, Ali Abbasi2, Stephen J Sharp1, Anna-Stina Sahlqvist3, Dawn Waterworth4, Julia M Brosnan5, Robert A Scott1, Claudia Langenberg1, Nicholas J Wareham6. 1. MRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K. 2. MRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K. Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. 3. Genetics, GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development, Stevenage, U.K. 4. Genetics, GlaxoSmithKline, King of Prussia, PA. 5. Cardiovascular and Metabolic Diseases Research Unit, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Cambridge, MA. 6. MRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, U.K. nick.wareham@mrc-epid.cam.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Various definitions of metabolic health have been proposed to explain differences in the risk of type 2 diabetes within BMI categories. The goal of this study was to assess their predictive relevance. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed systematic searches of MEDLINE records for prospective cohort studies of type 2 diabetes risk in categories of BMI and metabolic health. In a two-stage meta-analysis, relative risks (RRs) specific to each BMI category were derived by network meta-analysis and the resulting RRs of each study were pooled using random-effects models. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess predictive performance. RESULTS: In a meta-analysis of 140,845 participants and 5,963 incident cases of type 2 diabetes from 14 cohort studies, classification as metabolically unhealthy was associated with higher RR of diabetes in all BMI categories (lean RR compared with healthy individuals 4.0 [95% CI 3.0-5.1], overweight 3.4 [2.8-4.3], and obese 2.5 [2.1-3.0]). Metabolically healthy obese individuals had a high absolute risk of type 2 diabetes (10-year cumulative incidence 3.1% [95% CI 2.6-3.5]). Current binary definitions of metabolic health had high specificity (pooled estimate 0.88 [95% CI 0.84-0.91]) but low sensitivity (0.40 [0.31-0.49]) in lean individuals and satisfactory sensitivity (0.81 [0.76-0.86]) but low specificity (0.42 [0.35-0.49]) in obese individuals. However, positive (<3.3 in all BMI categories) and negative (>0.4) likelihood ratios were consistent with insignificant to small improvements in prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Although individuals classified as metabolically unhealthy have a higher RR of type 2 diabetes compared with individuals classified as healthy in all BMI categories, current binary definitions of metabolic health have limited relevance to the prediction of future type 2 diabetes.
OBJECTIVE: Various definitions of metabolic health have been proposed to explain differences in the risk of type 2 diabetes within BMI categories. The goal of this study was to assess their predictive relevance. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed systematic searches of MEDLINE records for prospective cohort studies of type 2 diabetes risk in categories of BMI and metabolic health. In a two-stage meta-analysis, relative risks (RRs) specific to each BMI category were derived by network meta-analysis and the resulting RRs of each study were pooled using random-effects models. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess predictive performance. RESULTS: In a meta-analysis of 140,845 participants and 5,963 incident cases of type 2 diabetes from 14 cohort studies, classification as metabolically unhealthy was associated with higher RR of diabetes in all BMI categories (lean RR compared with healthy individuals 4.0 [95% CI 3.0-5.1], overweight 3.4 [2.8-4.3], and obese 2.5 [2.1-3.0]). Metabolically healthy obese individuals had a high absolute risk of type 2 diabetes (10-year cumulative incidence 3.1% [95% CI 2.6-3.5]). Current binary definitions of metabolic health had high specificity (pooled estimate 0.88 [95% CI 0.84-0.91]) but low sensitivity (0.40 [0.31-0.49]) in lean individuals and satisfactory sensitivity (0.81 [0.76-0.86]) but low specificity (0.42 [0.35-0.49]) in obese individuals. However, positive (<3.3 in all BMI categories) and negative (>0.4) likelihood ratios were consistent with insignificant to small improvements in prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Although individuals classified as metabolically unhealthy have a higher RR of type 2 diabetes compared with individuals classified as healthy in all BMI categories, current binary definitions of metabolic health have limited relevance to the prediction of future type 2 diabetes.
Authors: Juliana C N Chan; Vasanti Malik; Weiping Jia; Takashi Kadowaki; Chittaranjan S Yajnik; Kun-Ho Yoon; Frank B Hu Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-05-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Rachel P Wildman; Paul Muntner; Kristi Reynolds; Aileen P McGinn; Swapnil Rajpathak; Judith Wylie-Rosett; MaryFran R Sowers Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2008-08-11
Authors: Scott A Lear; Karin H Humphries; Simi Kohli; Arun Chockalingam; Jiri J Frohlich; C Laird Birmingham Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Eun-Jung Rhee; Min Kyung Lee; Jong Dae Kim; Won Seon Jeon; Ji Cheol Bae; Se Eun Park; Cheol-Young Park; Ki-Won Oh; Sung-Woo Park; Won-Young Lee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-05-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: G C Kabat; W Y-Y Wu; J W Bea; C Chen; L Qi; M L Stefanick; R T Chlebowski; D S Lane; J Wactawski-Wende; S Wassertheil-Smoller; T E Rohan Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Tao Zhang; Jie Xu; Shengxu Li; Lydia A Bazzano; Jiang He; Paul K Whelton; Wei Chen Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2018-10-20 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Justin B Echouffo-Tcheugui; Meghan I Short; Vanessa Xanthakis; Patrick Field; Todd R Sponholtz; Martin G Larson; Ramachandran S Vasan Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 5.958