Ye-Li Wang1, Woon-Puay Koh1,2, Mohammad Talaei1, Jian-Min Yuan3,4, An Pan5. 1. Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore (NUS) and National University Health System, Singapore. 2. Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore. 3. Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased triglycerides (TG) and decreased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) are risk factors for type 2 diabetes (T2D). The relationship between TG:HDL-C ratio and T2D risk is not clear, and it is not known whether the association is modified by gender, body mass index, or fasting status. This study examined the relationship between TG:HDL-C ratio and risk of incident T2D, and the predictive ability of the ratio on top of other diabetes risk factors. METHODS: Blood biomarkers were determined in 571 T2D cases and 571 controls nested within a prospective, population-based cohort study, the Singapore Chinese Health Study. Participants were free of diagnosed diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer at the time of blood collection (1999-2004). Incident self-reported T2D cases were identified at follow-up interview (2006-10). Controls were matched 1: 1 for age, sex, dialect group, and date of blood collection. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compute the odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The ORs (95 % CI) of T2D per 1-SD increment in TG and TG: HDL-C ratio were 1.70 (1.39-2.09) and 1.72 (1.37-2.17), respectively. The relationships were stronger among females than males (Pinteraction = 0.028 and 0.017, respectively), and stronger among lean (<23 kg/m2 ) than overweight/obese participants (Pinteraction = 0.051 and 0.046, respectively). Both TG and TG: HDL-C improved T2D prediction to a similar degree. CONCLUSIONS: Both TG and TG:HDL-C ratio are independent risk factors for incident T2D, and confer greater risk in women and lean participants. The TG: HDL-C ratio is not a better predictor of diabetes than TG alone.
BACKGROUND: Increased triglycerides (TG) and decreased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) are risk factors for type 2 diabetes (T2D). The relationship between TG:HDL-C ratio and T2D risk is not clear, and it is not known whether the association is modified by gender, body mass index, or fasting status. This study examined the relationship between TG:HDL-C ratio and risk of incident T2D, and the predictive ability of the ratio on top of other diabetes risk factors. METHODS: Blood biomarkers were determined in 571 T2D cases and 571 controls nested within a prospective, population-based cohort study, the Singapore Chinese Health Study. Participants were free of diagnosed diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer at the time of blood collection (1999-2004). Incident self-reported T2D cases were identified at follow-up interview (2006-10). Controls were matched 1: 1 for age, sex, dialect group, and date of blood collection. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compute the odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The ORs (95 % CI) of T2D per 1-SD increment in TG and TG: HDL-C ratio were 1.70 (1.39-2.09) and 1.72 (1.37-2.17), respectively. The relationships were stronger among females than males (Pinteraction = 0.028 and 0.017, respectively), and stronger among lean (<23 kg/m2 ) than overweight/obeseparticipants (Pinteraction = 0.051 and 0.046, respectively). Both TG and TG: HDL-C improved T2D prediction to a similar degree. CONCLUSIONS: Both TG and TG:HDL-C ratio are independent risk factors for incident T2D, and confer greater risk in women and lean participants. The TG: HDL-C ratio is not a better predictor of diabetes than TG alone.
Authors: Brian G Drew; Kerry-Anne Rye; Stephen J Duffy; Philip Barter; Bronwyn A Kingwell Journal: Nat Rev Endocrinol Date: 2012-01-24 Impact factor: 43.330
Authors: Naishi Li; Jingyuan Fu; Debby P Koonen; Jan Albert Kuivenhoven; Harold Snieder; Marten H Hofker Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2014-01-07 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Andrew O Odegaard; Mark A Pereira; Woon-Puay Koh; Kazuko Arakawa; Hin-Peng Lee; Mimi C Yu Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Alexander Tenenbaum; Michael Motro; Enrique Z Fisman; Ehud Schwammenthal; Yehuda Adler; Ilan Goldenberg; Jonathan Leor; Valentina Boyko; Lori Mandelzweig; Solomon Behar Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-05-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: N Maneka G De Silva; Rachel M Freathy; Tom M Palmer; Louise A Donnelly; Jian'an Luan; Tom Gaunt; Claudia Langenberg; Michael N Weedon; Beverley Shields; Beatrice A Knight; Kirsten J Ward; Manjinder S Sandhu; Roger M Harbord; Mark I McCarthy; George Davey Smith; Shah Ebrahim; Andrew T Hattersley; Nicholas Wareham; Debbie A Lawlor; Andrew D Morris; Colin N A Palmer; Timothy M Frayling Journal: Diabetes Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Protasio Lemos da Luz; Desiderio Favarato; Jose Rocha Faria-Neto; Pedro Lemos; Antonio Carlos Palandri Chagas Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 2.365