Tine Vanlancker1, Emmily Schaubroeck1, Krishna Vyncke2, Cristina Cadenas-Sanchez3, Christina Breidenassel4,5, Marcela González-Gross5,6, Frederic Gottrand7,8, Luis A Moreno9,10, Laurent Beghin7,8, Denes Molnár11, Yannis Manios12, Marc J Gunter13, Kurt Widhalm14, Catherine Leclercq15, Jean Dallongeville16, Marcos Ascensión17, Anthony Kafatos18, Manuel J Castillo19, Stefaan De Henauw2, Francisco B Ortega3,20, Inge Huybrechts21,22. 1. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. 2. Department of Public Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. 3. PROFITH "PROmoting FITness and Health through physical activity" Research Group, Department of Physical Education and Sports, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. 4. Institut für Ernährungs und Lebensmittelwissenschaften Ernährungphysiologie, Rheinische Friedrich Wilhelms, Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany. 5. ImFINE Research Group, Faculty of Physical Activity and Sport-INEF, Department of Health and Human Performance, Technical University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain. 6. CIBER: CB12/03/30038 Fisiopatología de la Obesidad y la Nutrición, CIBERobn, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Madrid, Spain. 7. Inserm, CHU Lille, U995-LIRIC-Lille Inflammation Research International Center, Université Lille, 59000, Lille, France. 8. Inserm, CHU Lille, CIC 1403-Centre d'investigation clinique, Université Lille, 59000, Lille, France. 9. GENUD-Growth, Exercise, Nutrition and Development, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. 10. School of Health Sciences, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. 11. Medical Faculty, Department of Paediatrics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. 12. Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Health Science and Education, Harokopio University, Athens, Greece. 13. International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372, Lyon CEDEX 08, France. 14. Department of Paediatrics, Private Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. 15. INRAN (National Research Institute on Food and Nutrition), Rome, Italy. 16. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, U-744 INSERM, Institut Pasteur de Lille, Universite Lille Nord de France, Lille, France. 17. Food Science and Technology and Nutrition Institute, Spanish National Research Council, Metabolism and Nutrition, Immunonutrition Research Group, Madrid, Spain. 18. School of Medicine, Preventive Medicine and Nutrition Unit, Heraklion, University of Crete, Crete, Greece. 19. Department of Medical Physiology, School of Medicine, Granada University, Granada, Spain. 20. Department of Biosciences and Nutrition, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden. 21. Department of Public Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. huybrechtsi@iarc.fr. 22. International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372, Lyon CEDEX 08, France. huybrechtsi@iarc.fr.
Abstract
Various definitions are used to define metabolic syndrome in adolescents. This study aimed to compare, in terms of prevalence and differences, five frequently used definitions for this population: International Diabetes Federation, National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP) modified by Cook, pediatric American Heart Association (AHA), World Health Organization, and Jolliffe and Janssen. A sample of 1004 adolescents (12.5-17.0 years) from the Healthy Lifestyle in Europe by Nutrition in Adolescence (HELENA) study was considered. The components of the definitions (waist circumference/BMI, plasma lipids, glycemia, and blood pressure) were applied, and definitions were compared by using crosstabs, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa coefficient. The prevalence of metabolic syndrome varied from 1.6 to 3.8% depending on the used definitions. Crosstabs comparing the definitions showed the fewest cases being misclassified (having metabolic syndrome or not) between NCEP-ATP and AHA. Analyses for kappa coefficient, sensitivity, and specificity confirmed this finding. CONCLUSION: The different definitions do not classify the same adolescents as having MS and prevalence varied between diagnostic methods. The modified NCEP-ATP and the AHA definitions were most analogous in defining subjects as having metabolic syndrome or not. What is known? • Metabolic syndrome is not only a problem of adulthood but is already present in children and adolescents. • Several diagnostic methods are used to define metabolic syndrome in adolescents. What is new? • Comparing the most frequently used definitions of metabolic syndrome in adolescents showed that they do not indicate the same adolescents as having metabolic syndrome. • The modified National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and the pediatric American Heart Association definitions were most analogous in defining subjects as having metabolic syndrome or not.
Various definitions are used to define metabolic syndrome in adolescents. This study aimed to compare, in terms of prevalence and differences, five frequently used definitions for this population: International Diabetes Federation, National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP) modified by Cook, pediatric American Heart Association (AHA), World Health Organization, and Jolliffe and Janssen. A sample of 1004 adolescents (12.5-17.0 years) from the Healthy Lifestyle in Europe by Nutrition in Adolescence (HELENA) study was considered. The components of the definitions (waist circumference/BMI, plasma lipids, glycemia, and blood pressure) were applied, and definitions were compared by using crosstabs, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa coefficient. The prevalence of metabolic syndrome varied from 1.6 to 3.8% depending on the used definitions. Crosstabs comparing the definitions showed the fewest cases being misclassified (having metabolic syndrome or not) between NCEP-ATP and AHA. Analyses for kappa coefficient, sensitivity, and specificity confirmed this finding. CONCLUSION: The different definitions do not classify the same adolescents as having MS and prevalence varied between diagnostic methods. The modified NCEP-ATP and the AHA definitions were most analogous in defining subjects as having metabolic syndrome or not. What is known? • Metabolic syndrome is not only a problem of adulthood but is already present in children and adolescents. • Several diagnostic methods are used to define metabolic syndrome in adolescents. What is new? • Comparing the most frequently used definitions of metabolic syndrome in adolescents showed that they do not indicate the same adolescents as having metabolic syndrome. • The modified National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and the pediatric American Heart Association definitions were most analogous in defining subjects as having metabolic syndrome or not.
Authors: William D Johnson; Jolanda J M Kroon; Frank L Greenway; Claude Bouchard; Donna Ryan; Peter T Katzmarzyk Journal: Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med Date: 2009-04
Authors: L Béghin; M Castera; Y Manios; C C Gilbert; M Kersting; S De Henauw; A Kafatos; F Gottrand; D Molnar; M Sjöström; C Leclercq; K Widhalm; M I Mesana; L A Moreno; C Libersa Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Pedro Delgado-Floody; Miguel Espinoza-Silva; Felipe García-Pinillos; Pedro Latorre-Román Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2018-04-21 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Cézane Priscila Reuter; Jane Dagmar Pollo Renner; João Francisco de Castro Silveira; Priscila Tatiana da Silva; Rodrigo Antunes Lima; Karin Allor Pfeiffer; Lars Bo Andersen; Elza Daniel de Mello Journal: J Diabetes Metab Disord Date: 2021-07-06
Authors: Non Eleri Thomas; David A Rowe; Elaine M Murtagh; Jeffrey W Stephens; Rhys Williams Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2017-12-22 Impact factor: 3.183