| Literature DB >> 26862898 |
Shuxia Li1, Kirsten Ohm Kyvik2, Zengchang Pang3, Dongfeng Zhang4, Haiping Duan3, Qihua Tan1,5, Jacob Hjelmborg5, Torben Kruse1, Christine Dalgård6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The rate of change in metabolic phenotypes can be highly indicative of metabolic disorders and disorder-related modifications. We analyzed data from longitudinal twin studies on multiple metabolic phenotypes in Danish and Chinese twins representing two populations of distinct ethnic, cultural, social-economic backgrounds and geographical environments.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26862898 PMCID: PMC4749287 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148396
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Basic statistics for baseline (time 1) and follow up (time 2) in Danish and Chinese twins.
| Danish Twins (n = 1004) | Chinese Twins (n = 362) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | Mean, 1 | 95% CIs | Mean, 2 | 95% CIs | P value | Mean, 1 | 95% CIs | Mean, 2 | 95% CIs | P value |
| 5.36 | 3.30–8.00 | 5.48 | 3.59–7.70 | 9.47E-07 | 5.26 | 3.26–7.60 | 4.91 | 2.91–7.01 | 1.13E-10 | |
| 1.27 | 0.60–2.90 | 1.23 | 0.50–2.90 | 3.91E-03 | 1.18 | 0.38–3.00 | 1.25 | 0.37–3.13 | 3.76E-01 | |
| 1.52 | 0.86–2.50 | 1.55 | 0.90–2.50 | 2.90E-05 | 1.57 | 0.90–2.25 | 1.57 | 0.91–2.59 | 7.17E-01 | |
| 3.29 | 1.50–5.56 | 3.37 | 1.70–5.30 | 4.74E-06 | 3.10 | 1.88–4.62 | 2.68 | 1.55–4.14 | 7.24E-33 | |
| 4.76 | 3.90–6.00 | 5.58 | 4.70–7.00 | 1.64E-276 | 4.71 | 3.50–6.40 | 5.42 | 4.12–8.99 | 3.13E-59 | |
| 73.18 | 50.30–100.29 | 76.59 | 52.60–110.69 | 1.36E-27 | 62.70 | 47.21–87.19 | 64.03 | 47.10–88.00 | 1.83E-06 | |
| 24.43 | 19.03–32.61 | 25.73 | 19.42–36.92 | 5.16E-37 | 23.89 | 18.50–31.22 | 24.45 | 19.00–31.80 | 2.98E-08 | |
| 83.77 | 66.00–108.00 | 88.04 | 68.00–112.01 | 2.31E-45 | 77.32 | 61.00–97.00 | 81.94 | 65.80–106.50 | 6.29E-18 | |
| 96.40 | 81.00–115.00 | 102.17 | 86.48–120.00 | 2.14E-95 | 96.82 | 84.15–111.93 | 96.92 | 85.00–112.01 | 3.97E-02 | |
| 0.87 | 0.72–1.04 | 0.86 | 0.71–1.13 | 2.62E-02 | 0.80 | 0.69–0.92 | 0.84 | 0.72–0.97 | 2.76E-26 | |
| 116.36 | 93.33–145.33 | 123.43 | 101.67–150.00 | 5.36E-62 | 118.11 | 90.00–160.00 | 125.38 | 100.00–169.90 | 1.51E-12 | |
| 68.16 | 50.67–90.00 | 79.42 | 64.50–98.33 | 1.61E-224 | 80.36 | 60.00–103.83 | 81.55 | 62.05–109.90 | 3.20E-02 | |
TC: total cholesterol; TG: triglycerides; HDL: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; GLU: fasting blood glucose; WT: body weight; BMI: body mass index; WAIST: waist circumference; HIP: hip circumference; WHR: waist-to-hip ratio; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure.
Fig 1Trend of metabolic phenotypes over time in Danish twins.
Scatter plots showing the residuals of phenotype measurement from the mixed effect model at time 1 (horizontal axis) against that at time 2 (vertical axis) for 12 phenotypes in Danish twins (females in red; males in black). TC: total cholesterol; TG: triglycerides; HDL: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; GLU: fasting blood glucose; WT: body weight; BMI: body mass index; WAIST: waist circumference; HIP: hip circumference; WHR: waist-to-hip ratio; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: DP: diastolic blood pressure.
Fig 2Trend of metabolic phenotypes over time in Chinese twins.
Scatter plots showing the residuals of phenotype measurement from the mixed effect model at time 1 (horizontal axis) against that at time 2 (vertical axis) for 12 phenotypes in Chinese twins (females in red; males in black). TC: total cholesterol; TG: triglycerides; HDL: high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL: low density lipoprotein cholesterol; GLU: fasting blood glucose; WT: body weight; BMI: body mass index; WAIST: waist circumference; HIP: hip circumference; WHR: waist-to-hip ratio; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: DP: diastolic blood pressure.
ICCs for longitudinal change of each phenotype in Danish and Chinese twins.
| Danish Twins | Chinese Twins | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | ICCMZ (n = 452) | 95% CIs | ICCDZ (n = 552) | 95% CIs | ICCMZ (n = 202) | 95% CIs | ICCDZ (n = 160) | 95% CIs |
| 0.50 | 0.38–0.60 | 0.18 | 0.06–0.29 | 0.54 | 0.37–0.67 | 0.29 | 0.06–0.50 | |
| 0.29 | 0.17–0.41 | 0.26 | 0.14–0.38 | 0.58 | 0.40–0.72 | 0.37 | 0.16–0.55 | |
| 0.47 | 0.36–0.57 | 0.12 | 0.00–0.24 | 0.68 | 0.40–0.84 | 0.63 | 0.35–0.81 | |
| 0.51 | 0.39–0.61 | 0.20 | 0.08–0.31 | 0.53 | 0.35–0.68 | 0.34 | 0.12–0.53 | |
| 0.42 | 0.29–0.53 | 0.12 | 0.00–0.24 | 0.56 | 0.38–0.71 | 0.41 | 0.19–0.59 | |
| 0.40 | 0.27–0.51 | 0.17 | 0.06–0.28 | 0.38 | 0.18–0.54 | 0.35 | 0.15–0.53 | |
| 0.41 | 0.29–0.52 | 0.16 | 0.04–0.27 | 0.27 | 0.05–0.46 | 0.35 | 0.15–0.51 | |
| 0.41 | 0.31–0.51 | 0.13 | -0.02–0.27 | 0.37 | 0.10–0.59 | 0.46 | 0.23–0.64 | |
| 0.44 | 0.33–0.54 | 0.41 | 0.29–0.52 | 0.36 | 0.11–0.57 | 0.42 | 0.18–0.62 | |
| 0.48 | 0.37–0.57 | 0.13 | -0.01–0.26 | 0.49 | 0.22–0.68 | 0.43 | 0.21–0.61 | |
| 0.36 | 0.22–0.48 | 0.20 | 0.08–0.30 | 0.30 | 0.05–0.51 | 0.10 | -0.17–0.36 | |
| 0.49 | 0.37–0.59 | 0.17 | 0.06–0.28 | 0.32 | 0.05–0.55 | 0.23 | -0.01–0.45 | |
*ICCMZ>2 times ICCDZ
Δ No statistical difference between ICCMZ and ICCDZ with p>0.05.
Full models for longitudinal change of each phenotype in the Danish twins and statistics for best fitting models.
| Parameter estimates | Likelihood Ratio Test | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | Full models | A (95% CIs) | C/D (95% CIs) | E (95% CIs) | AIC | Best models | AIC | ||
| ADE | 0.21 (0.00–0.66) | 0.29 (0.00–0.77) | 0.50 (0.40–0.60) | -786.50 | AE | -787.10 | 1.40 | 0.24 | |
| ACE | 0.06 (0.00–0.38) | 0.23 (0.00–0.49) | 0.71 (0.59–0.82) | 771.89 | CE | 770.02 | 0.12 | 0.73 | |
| ADE | 0.02 (0.00–0.48) | 0.45 (0.00–0.94) | 0.53 (0.43–0.63) | -495.54 | AE | -494.54 | 3.00 | 0.08 | |
| ADE | 0.29 (0.00–0.74) | 0.22 (0.00–0.70) | 0.49 (0.39–0.59) | -121.07 | AE | -122.24 | 0.83 | 0.36 | |
| ADE | 0.07 (0.00–0.51) | 0.35 (0.00–0.82) | 0.58 (0.47–0.69) | -2078.00 | AE | -2078.23 | 1.77 | 0.18 | |
| ADE | 0.29 (0.00–0.72) | 0.10 (0.00–0.56) | 0.60 (0.50–0.71) | -2154.63 | AE | -2156.46 | 0.17 | 0.68 | |
| ADE | 0.22 (0.00–0.65) | 0.19 (0.00–0.65) | 0.59 (0.48–0.70) | -2140.59 | AE | -2142.01 | 0.58 | 0.45 | |
| ADE | 0.10 (0.00–0.60) | 0.31 (0.00–0.83) | 0.59 (0.50–0.68) | -2115.32 | AE | -2116.18 | 1.14 | 0.29 | |
| ACE | 0.06 (0.00–0.32) | 0.38 (0.17–0.60) | 0.56 (0.47–0.66) | -2843.69 | CE | -2845.53 | 0.16 | 0.69 | |
| ADE | 0.03 (0.00–0.49) | 0.45 (0.00–0.93) | 0.52 (0.43–0.61) | -2336.23 | AE | -2335.66 | 2.57 | 0.11 | |
| ACE | 0.33 (0.02–0.63) | 0.03 (0.00–0.27) | 0.64 (0.52–0.76) | -2071.94 | AE | -2073.88 | 0.07 | 0.80 | |
| ADE | 0.20 (0.00–0.63) | 0.29 (0.00–0.75) | 0.51 (0.41–0.61) | -1940.42 | AE | -1940.98 | 1.44 | 0.23 | |
Full models for longitudinal change of each phenotype in the Chinese twins and statistics for best fitting models.
| Parameter estimates | Likelihood Ratio Test | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | Full models | A (95% CIs) | C/D (95% CIs) | E (95%CIs) | AIC | Best models | AIC | ||
| ACE | 0.49 (0.00–0.97) | 0.05 (0.00–0.49) | 0.46 (0.33–0.59) | -362.90 | AE | -364.85 | 0.05 | 0.82 | |
| ACE | 0.42 (0.00–0.84) | 0.16 (0.00–0.53) | 0.42 (0.29–0.54) | 459.65 | AE | 458.30 | 0.65 | 0.42 | |
| ACE | 0.09 (0.00–0.38) | 0.58 (0.33–0.84) | 0.32 (0.22–0.42) | -131.95 | CE | -133.53 | 0.42 | 0.52 | |
| ACE | 0.38 (0.00–0.84) | 0.15 (0.00–0.56) | 0.47 (0.33–0.61) | -154.34 | AE | -155.86 | 0.48 | 0.49 | |
| ACE | 0.31 (0.00–0.75) | 0.25 (0.00–0.63) | 0.44 (0.30–0.57) | -495.38 | AE | -495.96 | 1.42 | 0.23 | |
| ACE | 0.05 (0.00–0.51) | 0.33 (0.00–0.70) | 0.62 (0.46–0.79) | -965.73 | CE | -967.69 | 0.04 | 0.84 | |
| ACE | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.31 (0.18–0.44) | 0.69 (0.56–0.82) | -969.89 | CE | -971.89 | 0.00 | 1.00 | |
| ACE | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.42 (0.27–0.57) | 0.58 (0.43–0.73) | -546.17 | CE | -548.17 | 0.00 | 1.00 | |
| ACE | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.39 (0.24–0.55) | 0.61 (0.45–0.76) | -841.78 | CE | -843.78 | 0.00 | 1.00 | |
| ACE | 0.11 (0.00–0.62) | 0.38 (0.00–0.77) | 0.51 (0.31–0.72) | -677.13 | CE | -678.97 | 0.17 | 0.68 | |
| ADE | 0.10 (0.00–1.00) | 0.20 (0.00–1.00) | 0.70 (0.48–0.93) | -437.99 | AE | -439.87 | 0.12 | 0.73 | |
| ACE | 0.17 (0.00–0.81) | 0.15 (0.00–0.64) | 0.68 (0.44–0.92) | -360.47 | CE | -362.19 | 0.27 | 0.60 | |
Parameter estimates in best fitting models in the Danish and Chinese twins.
| Danish twins | Chinese twins | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | Best model | A (95% CIs) | C/D (95% CIs) | E (95% CIs) | Best model | A (95% CIs) | C/D (95% CIs) | E (95% CIs) |
| AE | 0.48 (0.38–0.57) | 0.52 (0.43–0.62) | AE | 0.54 (0.42–0.66) | 0.46 (0.34–0.58) | |||
| CE | 0.28 (0.19–0.36) | 0.72 (0.64–0.81) | AE | 0.59 (0.48–0.71) | 0.41 (0.29–0.52) | |||
| AE | 0.44 (0.33–0.54) | 0.56 (0.46–0.67) | CE | 0.66 (0.57–0.74) | 0.34 (0.26–0.43) | |||
| AE | 0.49 (0.39–0.59) | 0.51 (0.41–0.61) | AE | 0.54 (0.42–0.67) | 0.46 (0.33–0.58) | |||
| AE | 0.39 (0.28–0.49) | 0.61 (0.51–0.72) | AE | 0.58 (0.46–0.70) | 0.42 (0.30–0.54) | |||
| AE | 0.39 (0.28–0.49) | 0.61 (0.51–0.72) | CE | 0.36 (0.24–0.49) | 0.64 (0.51–0.76) | |||
| AE | 0.39 (0.29–0.49) | 0.61 (0.51–0.71) | CE | 0.31 (0.18–0.44) | 0.69 (0.56–0.82) | |||
| AE | 0.40 (0.30–0.49) | 0.60 (0.51–0.70) | CE | 0.42 (0.27–0.57) | 0.58 (0.43–0.73) | |||
| CE | 0.43 (0.35–0.50) | 0.57 (0.50–0.65) | CE | 0.39 (0.24–0.55) | 0.61 (0.45–0.76) | |||
| AE | 0.45 (0.36–0.54) | 0.55 (0.46–0.64) | CE | 0.45 (0.31–0.60) | 0.55 (0.40–0.69) | |||
| AE | 0.36 (0.26–0.47) | 0.64 (0.53–0.74) | AE | 0.28 (0.07–0.50) | 0.72 (0.50–0.93) | |||
| AE | 0.47 (0.37–0.56) | 0.53 (0.44–0.63) | CE | 0.27 (0.10–0.44) | 0.73 (0.56–0.90) | |||