| Literature DB >> 27165166 |
Luigi Barrea1, Paolo Emidio Macchia2, Carolina Di Somma3, Maddalena Napolitano4, Anna Balato4, Andrea Falco5, Maria Cristina Savanelli5, Nicola Balato4, Annamaria Colao2, Silvia Savastano2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity, metabolic syndrome (MetS), and psoriasis, largely driven by environmental factors, show multiple bidirectional associations, with important metabolic implications in psoriatic patients. Besides body mass index (BMI) as a measure of obesity, data on phase angle (PhA), a direct measure by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), used as a marker of cellular health and a predictor of morbidity and mortality in various diseases, are still lacking in psoriasis. In this case-control, cross-sectional study, we investigated the PhA in 180 pairs of adult psoriatic patients and healthy controls, evaluating also the potential use of the PhA as marker of the clinical severity, the quality of life, and the presence of the MetS in psoriatic patients.Entities:
Keywords: Dermatology life quality index (DLQI); Environmental factors; Metabolic syndrome (MetS); Phase angle (PhA); Psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) score
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27165166 PMCID: PMC4863378 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-016-0889-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Fig. 1Flow chart of study design
Descriptive and comparative statistics: psoriatic patient versus control group
| Parameters | Psoriatic patients | Control group |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 50 (21.0–65.0) | 48.0 (29.0–65.0) | 0.623 |
| Anthropometric variables | |||
| Weight (kg) | 85.7 ± 20.1 | 84.1 ± 21.7 | 0.447 |
| Height (m) | 1.69 (1.49–1.92) | 1.70 (1.50–1.85) | 0.878 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 30.2 ± 6.1 | 29.6 ± 7.3 | 0.422 |
| Normal weight n (%) | 40 (22.2 %) | 55 (30.6 %) | 0.094 |
| Overweight n (%) | 55 (30.6 %) | 47 (26.1 %) | 0.413 |
| Obesity n (%) | 85 (47.2 %) | 78 (43.3 %) | 0.525 |
| WC (cm) males | 108.8 ± 17.0 | 96.3 ± 21.5 |
|
| WC (cm) females | 110.5 ± 26.3 | 95.2 ± 24.2 |
|
| Metabolic profile | |||
| SBP (mmHg) | 130.0 (100.0–165.0) | 125.0 (95.0–165.0) |
|
| DBP (mmHg) | 80.0 (50.0–100.0) | 75.0 (50.0–100.0) |
|
| Glucose (mg/dl) | 105.0 (65.0–197.0) | 96.0 (61.0–190.0) |
|
| Total cholesterol (mg/dl) | 197.5 (97.0–315.0) | 171.0 (102.0–332.0) |
|
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | 43.3 ± 11.0 | 45.7 ± 7.9 |
|
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | 132.6 ± 44.7 | 121.7 ± 51.8 |
|
| Triglycerides (mg/ml) | 164.0 (36.0–402.0) | 139.0 (66.0–273.0) |
|
| AST (U/l) | 28.0 (10.0–94.0) | 27.0 (5.0–65.0) |
|
| ALT (U/l) | 29.0 (7.0–150.0) | 25.0 (3.0–63.0) |
|
| CRP levels (ng/ml) | 3.1 (0.1–16.2) | 1.1 (0.0–3.9) |
|
| Bioelectrical variables | |||
| R (Ohm) | 504.5 ± 85.8 | 492.9 ± 87.2 | 0.215 |
| Xc (Ohm) | 45.4 ± 9.2 | 50.1 ± 10.4 |
|
| PhA (°) | 5.2 ± 1.0 | 5.8 ± 0.7 |
|
Psoriatic patients exhibited statistically significant differences compared with controls for anthropometric measurements, metabolic profile and bioelectrical variables. Results are expressed as mean ± SD or as median plus range according to variable distributions evaluated by Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. A p value in italic denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05). Differences between groups were analyzed by paired t test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test, when appropriate
BMI body mass index, WC waist circumference, SBP systolic blood pressure, DBP diastolic blood pressure, HDL high-density lipoprotein, LDL low-density lipoprotein, AST aspartate aminotransferase, ALT alanine aminotransferase, CRP c-reactive protein, R resistance, Xc reactance, PhA phase angle
Fig. 2Frequency of metabolic risk factors and MetS in psoriatic patients and control group. The psoriatic patients exhibited statistically significant differences compared with controls for all the parameters of the MetS. In particular: WC (72.8 vs 51.1 %; χ2 = 17.0, p < 0.001), SBP/DBP (44.4 vs 31.1 %; χ2 = 6.3, p < 0.001), triglycerides (63.9 vs 22.8 %; χ2 = 60.3, p < 0.001), HDL-C (61.7 vs 30.6 %; χ2 = 33.8, p = 0.012); glucose (63.9 vs 47.8 %; χ2 = 8.8, p = 0.003) and MetS presence/absence (65.0 vs 31.7 %; χ2 = 38.7, p < 0.001); in psoriatic patients and control group, respectively. According to the NCEP ATP III definition, the MetS is defined as the coexistence of three or more of the following findings: (1) increased WC (≥102 cm for men and ≥88 cm for women), (2) hypertension (SBP/DBP ≥130/85 mmHg), (3) hypertriglyceridaemia (≥150 mg/dl), (4) low HDL cholesterol levels (≤40 mg/dl for men and ≤50 mg/dl for women) and (5) elevated fasting plasma glucose (≥100 mg/dl). Results are expressed as percentage. The Chi square (χ2) test was used to test the significance of differences between the two groups. A p value in bold type denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05). WC waist circumference, SBP systolic blood pressure, DBP diastolic blood pressure, HDL-C high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, MetS metabolic syndrome
Fig. 3Difference in the PhA between psoriatic patients and control group according to gender. The gender-specific difference in the PhA between males and females was evidenced in psoriatic patients and control group (5.3 ± 1.0 vs 4.9 ± 0.9, p = 0.008 and 6.0 ± 0.7 vs 5.5 ± 0.7, p < 0.001; in males and females, respectively), (a) Although the PhA was smaller in males and females psoriatic patients than in controls, (5.3 ± 1.0 vs 6.0 ± 0.7, p < 0.001 and 4.9 ± 0.9 vs 5.5 ± 0.7, p < 0.001, respectively), (b). Results are expressed as mean ± SD according to variable distributions evaluated by Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. A p value in bold type denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05). Differences between groups were analyzed by paired t test
Correlations among the PhA and study variables in psoriatic patient and control group
| Parameters | Psoriatic patients | Control group | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simple correlation | Adjusted for BMI | Simple correlation | Adjusted for BMI | |||||
| r |
| r |
| r |
| r |
| |
| Age (years) | −0.098 | 0.191 | −0.101 | 0.189 | −0.790 |
| −0.709 |
|
| Anthropometric variables | ||||||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | −0.220 |
| – | – | −0.551 |
| – | – |
| WC (cm) | −0.273 |
| −0.155 |
| −0.537 |
| −0.112 | 0.156 |
| Metabolic profile | ||||||||
| SBP (mmHg) | −0.119 | 0.112 | −0.097 | 0.211 | −0.259 |
| 0.100 | 0.203 |
| DBP (mmHg) | −0.125 | 0.094 | −0.074 | 0.337 | −0.311 |
| 0.013 | 0.871 |
| Glucose (mg/dl) | −0.027 | 0.721 | 0.001 | 0.990 | −0.096 | 0.655 | −0.049 | 0.539 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dl) | −0.261 |
| −0.331 |
| −0.332 |
| 0.031 | 0.696 |
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | 0.286 |
| 0.247 |
| 0.269 |
| 0.045 | 0.570 |
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | −0.331 |
| −0.303 |
| −0.315 |
| 0.015 | 0.853 |
| Triglycerides (mg/ml) | −0.368 |
| −0.343 |
| −0.148 |
| 0.060 | 0.447 |
| AST (U/l) | −0.200 |
| −0.183 |
| −0.248 |
| 0.014 | 0.855 |
| ALT (U/l) | −0.235 |
| −0.127 | 0.099 | −0.261 |
| 0.162 |
|
| MetS (n. parameters) | −0.380 |
| −0.334 |
| −0.425 |
| −0.020 | 0.805 |
| CRP levels (ng/ml) | −0.320 |
| −0.283 |
| −0.522 |
| 0.036 | 0.647 |
| Bioelectrical variables | ||||||||
| R (Ohm) | −0.400 |
| −0.444 |
| −0.154 |
| −0.069 | 0.385 |
| Xc (Ohm) | 0.625 |
| 0.579 |
| 0.516 |
| 0.449 |
|
Simple correlations and partial correlation adjusted for BMI among the PhA and anthropometric measurements, metabolic profile and bioelectrical variables. There was a significant negative association among the PhA and BMI, WC, lipid and hepatic profile, MetS and R and Xc; and significant positive association with HDL-cholesterol. In addition, after adjusting for BMI, the associations among the PhA, metabolic parameters and CRP levels remained still significant in psoriatic patients only
Correlations among variables were analyzed using Pearson r or Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients. A p value in italic denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
PhA phase angle, BMI body mass index, WC waist circumference, SBP systolic blood pressure, DBP diastolic blood pressure, HDL high-density lipoprotein, LDL low-density lipoprotein, AST aspartate aminotransferase, ALT alanine aminotransferase, MetS metabolic syndrome, CRP c-reactive protein, R resistance, Xc reactance
Correlations among PASI score and study variable in psoriatic patients
| Parameters | Simple correlation | Adjusted for BMI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PASI score | PASI score | |||
| r |
| r |
| |
| Age (years) | 0.129 | 0.083 | 0.147 | 0.057 |
| DLQI | 0.632 |
| 0.612 |
|
| Anthropometric variables | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.306 |
| – | – |
| WC (cm) | 0.405 |
| 0.272 |
|
| Metabolic profile | ||||
| SBP (mmHg) | 0.219 |
| 0.162 |
|
| DBP (mmHg) | 0.177 |
| 0.110 | 0.153 |
| Glucose (mg/dl) | 0.181 |
| 0.109 | 0.158 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dl) | 0.398 |
| 0.499 |
|
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | −0.368 |
| −0.339 |
|
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | 0.489 |
| 0.462 |
|
| Triglycerides (mg/ml) | 0.503 |
| 0.474 |
|
| AST (U/l) | 0.203 |
| 0.131 | 0.089 |
| ALT (U/l) | 0.184 |
| 0.096 | 0.215 |
| MetS (n. parameters) | 0.450 |
| 0.362 |
|
| CRP levels (ng/ml) | 0.430 |
| 0.383 |
|
| Bioelectrical variables | ||||
| R (Ohm/m) | 0.312 |
| 0.414 |
|
| Xc (Ohm/m) | −0.587 |
| −0.529 |
|
Simple and partial correlation among PASI score, age, DLQI, anthropometric variables, metabolic profile and bioelectrical variables. There was a significant positive correlation among PASI score and DLQI, BMI, WC, SBP, DBP, glucose, lipid and hepatic profile, MetS and R; moreover there was a significant negative association with HDL-cholesterol and Xc. After adjustment for BMI, the association among PASI score and DBP, glucose, AST and ALT, were lost
Correlations among variables were analyzed using Pearson r or Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients. A p value in italic denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
PASI psoriasis area and severity index, DLQI dermatology life quality index, BMI body mass index, WC waist circumference, SBP systolic blood pressure, DBP diastolic blood pressure, HDL high-density lipoprotein, LDL low-density lipoprotein, AST aspartate aminotransferase, ALT alanine aminotransferase, MetS metabolic syndrome, CRP c-reactive protein, R resistance, Xc reactance
Correlations among DLQI and study variable in psoriatic patients
| Parameters | Simple correlation | Adjusted for BMI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DLQI | DLQI | |||
| r |
| r |
| |
| Age (years) | 0.128 | 0.086 | 0.117 | 0.131 |
| Anthropometric variables | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.254 |
| – | – |
| WC (cm) | 0.264 |
| 0.087 | 0.258 |
| Metabolic profile | ||||
| SBP (mmHg) | 0.247 |
| 0.202 |
|
| DBP (mmHg) | 0.136 | 0.069 | 0.094 | 0.224 |
| Glucose (mg/dl) | 0.154 |
| 0.105 | 0.174 |
| Total cholesterol (mg/dl) | 0.221 |
| 0.285 |
|
| HDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | −0.200 |
| −0.155 |
|
| LDL cholesterol (mg/dl) | 0.282 |
| 0.245 |
|
| Triglycerides (mg/ml) | 0.387 |
| 0.301 |
|
| AST (U/l) | 0.106 | 0.156 | −0.007 | 0.930 |
| ALT (U/l) | 0.117 | 0.117 | 0.029 | 0.706 |
| MetS (n. parameters) | 0.280 |
| 0.186 |
|
| CRP levels (ng/ml) | 0.357 |
| 0.312 |
|
| Bioelectrical variables | ||||
| R (Ohm) | 0.082 | 0.273 | 0.150 |
|
| Xc (Ohm) | −0.404 |
| −0.336 |
|
Simple and partial correlation among DLQI and age, anthropometric variables, metabolic profile and bioelectrical variables. There were significant positive correlations among BMI, WC, SBP, glucose, lipid profile and MetS; moreover there were significant negative associations with HDL-cholesterol and Xc. After adjustment for BMI, the association among DLQI and WC and glucose, were lost. Correlations among variables were analyzed using Pearson r or Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients. A p value in italic denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
DLQI dermatology life quality index, BMI body mass index, WC waist circumference, SBP systolic blood pressure, DBP diastolic blood pressure, HDL high-density lipoprotein, LDL low-density lipoprotein, AST aspartate aminotransferase, ALT alanine transaminase, MetS metabolic syndrome, CRP c-reactive protein, R resistance, Xc reactance
Fig. 4Correlation among PASI score and DLQI with the PhA. There was a significant negative association among PASI score (a) and DLQI (b) with the PhA. Correlations among variables were analyzed using Pearson r correlation coefficient. PASI psoriasis area and severity index, DLQI dermatology life quality index, PhA phase angle
Bivariate proportional odds ratio models performed to assess the association of MetS (Yes/No) and BMI, PhA, PASI score and DLQI in psoriatic patients
| Odds |
| 95 % CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| MetS Yes | 2.23 | 1.93–2.58 | ||
| MetS No | 1.21 | 1.05–1.40 | ||
|
| ||||
|
|
| |||
| MetS Yes | 5.87 | 5.07–6.79 | ||
| MetS No | 0.46 | 0.39–0.53 | ||
|
|
| |||
| MetS Yes | 2.20 | 1.90–2.55 | ||
| MetS No | 1.23 | 1.06–1.42 | ||
|
|
| |||
| MetS Yes | 2.23 | 2.03–2.73 | ||
| MetS No | 1.15 | 0.99–1.33 |
Bivariate proportional odds ratio models performed to assess the association of MetS (yes/no) and BMI (model 1), PhA (model 2), PASI score (model 3) and DLQI (model 4) in psoriatic patients. In model 2, the model fitting is better with presence of MetS than absence of MetS: small values of the PhA influence the presence of MetS among psoriatic patients. At model fittings, the PhA is a major index value for diagnosis of MetS. AIC value fitting and R2 are higher and lower, respectively, than the AIC value fitting and R2 of BMI, PASI score and DLQI. A p value in bold type denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
MetS metabolic syndrome, BMI body mass index, PhA phase angle, PASI psoriasis area and severity index, DLQI dermatology life quality index, AIC akaike information criterion, CI confidence interval
Multiple Regression analysis models (stepwise method) with the PhA as dependent variables to estimate the predictive value of: (i) BMI, MetS parameters, and PASI score; (ii) BMI, MetS parameters, and DLQI
| Multiple regression analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | r2 |
| t |
|
|
| ||||
| PASI score | 0.670 | −0.820 | −19.10 |
|
| Variables excluded | ||||
| BMI, MetS parameters | ||||
|
| ||||
| DLQI | 0.204 | −0.380 | −5.70 |
|
| MetS parameters | 0.269 | −0.274 | −4.11 |
|
| Variable excluded | ||||
| BMI | ||||
Multiple linear regression analysis with the PhA as dependent variables were used to estimate the predictive value of PASI score BMI, MetS parameters and DLQI. In the model 1, the PhA was the major predictor of PASI score, while, in the model 2 DLQI and MetS parameters were the major predictor of the PhA. A p value in italic denotes a significant difference (p < 0.05)
PASI psoriasis area and severity index, BMI body mass index, MetS metabolic syndrome, DLQI dermatology life quality index, PhA phase angle
Fig. 5Receiver operating characteristic analysis (ROC) for predictive values of the PhA in detecting clinical severity and quality of life. Based on ROC curves, the most sensitive and specific cutoffs of the PhA to predict the highest PASI score (a) and the lowest DQLI (b) were ≤4.8° and ≤4.9°, respectively. PhA phase angle, PASI psoriasis area and severity index, DQLI dermatology life quality index, ROC receiver operating characteristic