Katherine E Joyce1, Mary L Biggs2, Luc Djoussé3, Joachim H Ix4, Jorge R Kizer5, David S Siscovick6, Molly M Shores7,8, Alvin M Matsumoto9,10,8, Kenneth J Mukamal1. 1. Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA 02215. 2. Departments of Biostatistics. 3. Division on Aging, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115. 4. Division of Nephrology-Hypertension, University of California San Diego and Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California 92093. 5. Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York 10461. 6. New York Academy of Medicine, New York, New York 10029; and. 7. Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, and. 8. VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington 98108. 9. Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98115. 10. Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center.
Abstract
Context: Although sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) and testosterone (T) have been inversely associated with risk of diabetes, few studies have examined dihydrotestosterone (DHT), a more potent androgen than T, in older adults, whose glycemic pathophysiology differs from younger adults. Objective: To determine the associations of SHBG, T, and DHT with insulin resistance and incident diabetes in older adult men. Design: In a prospective cohort study, we evaluated baseline levels of SHBG, T, and DHT using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry among 852 men free of diabetes and cardiovascular disease in the Cardiovascular Health Study in 1994. Main Outcome: Insulin resistance estimated by Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) and insulin sensitivity estimated by the Gutt index in 1996, and incident diabetes (n = 112) ascertained over a mean follow-up of 9.8 years. Results: In linear regression models adjusted for demographics, alcohol consumption, current smoking, body mass index, and other androgens, SHBG [HOMA-IR 0.30 units lower per doubling; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.08 to 0.52; P = 0.01] and total DHT (HOMA-IR 0.18 units lower per doubling; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30; P = 0.01), but not free T (P = 0.33), were inversely associated with insulin resistance. In corresponding Cox proportional hazards models, total DHT was again inversely associated with risk of diabetes (adjusted hazard ratio per doubling, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.92; P = 0.01), but SHBG (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.59; P = 0.66) and free T (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.43; P = 0.23) were not. Conclusions: Among older men, higher levels of DHT were inversely associated with insulin resistance and risk of diabetes over the ensuing 10 years, whereas levels of T were not. Future studies are still needed to clarify the role of SHBG in risk of diabetes in this population.
Context: Although sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) and testosterone (T) have been inversely associated with risk of diabetes, few studies have examined dihydrotestosterone (DHT), a more potent androgen than T, in older adults, whose glycemic pathophysiology differs from younger adults. Objective: To determine the associations of SHBG, T, and DHT with insulin resistance and incident diabetes in older adult men. Design: In a prospective cohort study, we evaluated baseline levels of SHBG, T, and DHT using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry among 852 men free of diabetes and cardiovascular disease in the Cardiovascular Health Study in 1994. Main Outcome: Insulin resistance estimated by Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) and insulin sensitivity estimated by the Gutt index in 1996, and incident diabetes (n = 112) ascertained over a mean follow-up of 9.8 years. Results: In linear regression models adjusted for demographics, alcohol consumption, current smoking, body mass index, and other androgens, SHBG [HOMA-IR 0.30 units lower per doubling; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.08 to 0.52; P = 0.01] and total DHT (HOMA-IR 0.18 units lower per doubling; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30; P = 0.01), but not free T (P = 0.33), were inversely associated with insulin resistance. In corresponding Cox proportional hazards models, total DHT was again inversely associated with risk of diabetes (adjusted hazard ratio per doubling, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.92; P = 0.01), but SHBG (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.59; P = 0.66) and free T (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.43; P = 0.23) were not. Conclusions: Among older men, higher levels of DHT were inversely associated with insulin resistance and risk of diabetes over the ensuing 10 years, whereas levels of T were not. Future studies are still needed to clarify the role of SHBG in risk of diabetes in this population.
Authors: B H Goodpaster; C L Carlson; M Visser; D E Kelley; A Scherzinger; T B Harris; E Stamm; A B Newman Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2001-06
Authors: Liesbeth Vandenput; Dan Mellström; Mattias Lorentzon; Charlotte Swanson; Magnus K Karlsson; John Brandberg; Lars Lönn; Eric Orwoll; Ulf Smith; Fernand Labrie; Osten Ljunggren; Asa Tivesten; Claes Ohlsson Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2007-08-21 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Bret H Goodpaster; Seok Won Park; Tamara B Harris; Steven B Kritchevsky; Michael Nevitt; Ann V Schwartz; Eleanor M Simonsick; Frances A Tylavsky; Marjolein Visser; Anne B Newman Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: David E Laaksonen; Leo Niskanen; Kari Punnonen; Kristiina Nyyssönen; Tomi-Pekka Tuomainen; Veli-Pekka Valkonen; Riitta Salonen; Jukka T Salonen Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Jonathan M Hazlehurst; Andrei I Oprescu; Nikolaos Nikolaou; Riccardo Di Guida; Annabel E K Grinbergs; Nigel P Davies; Robert B Flintham; Matthew J Armstrong; Angela E Taylor; Beverly A Hughes; Jinglei Yu; Leanne Hodson; Warwick B Dunn; Jeremy W Tomlinson Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Catherine Kim; Ana C Ricardo; Edward J Boyko; Costas A Christophi; Marinella Temprosa; Karol E Watson; Xavier Pi-Sunyer; Rita R Kalyani Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Ronald S Swerdloff; Robert E Dudley; Stephanie T Page; Christina Wang; Wael A Salameh Journal: Endocr Rev Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 19.871
Authors: Michael A Rosenberg; Molly M Shores; Alvin M Matsumoto; Petra Bůžková; Leslie A Lange; Richard A Kronmal; Susan R Heckbert; Kenneth J Mukamal Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: L Antonio; D Vanderschueren; N Narinx; K David; J Walravens; P Vermeersch; F Claessens; T Fiers; B Lapauw Journal: Cell Mol Life Sci Date: 2022-10-07 Impact factor: 9.207
Authors: Allie S Carew; Rania A Mekary; Susan Kirkland; Olga Theou; Ferhan Siddiqi; Robin Urquhart; Michelle George; Chris Blanchard; Mary L Biggs; Luc Djoussé; Kenneth J Mukamal; Leah E Cahill Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 8.472
Authors: João Martin Martins; Mafalda de Pina Jorge; Catarina Martins Maia; João Roque; Carlos Lemos; Daniel Nunes; Dinis Reis; Catarina Mota Journal: Int J Endocrinol Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 3.257
Authors: Emily A Rosenberg; Petra Bůžková; Howard A Fink; John A Robbins; Molly M Shores; Alvin M Matsumoto; Kenneth J Mukamal Journal: Metabolism Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 13.934