| Literature DB >> 28231268 |
Junna Wang1, Dandan Zhang2, Rongzhong Huang3, Xingsheng Li2, Wenxiang Huang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Serum gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) elevation likely contributes to cardiovascular (CV) mortality, however it has remained unknown whether a dose-response relationship exists between serum GGT and CV mortality.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28231268 PMCID: PMC5322906 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172631
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
The basic characteristics of the nine cohort prospective studies included in meta-analysis.
| Study | Region | Name of study or source of participants | Year of Baseline survey | Gender (female/ Male/Both) | Follow-up (mean± SD) (yr) | Age or range mean (yr) | HR/RR | Case/Total | GGT Level (U/L) | 95%CI | Adjusted confounders | Study quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kengne A P, 2012 [ | Britain | HSE/SHeS | 1994–2009 | M | 10.1 | 53.8 | HR | 402/7866 | 12 18 25 49 | 1 0.95 (0.78–1.16) 0.94 (0.76–1.16) 1.46 (1.22–1.75) | Age and sex | 8 |
| F | 317/9403 | 11 17 25 49 | 1 1.04 (0.82–1.32) 1.29 (1.03–1.61) 1.77 (1.47–2.13) | |||||||||
| Ruttmann E, 2005 [ | Austria | VHM&PP | 1985–2001 | M | 10.1±5.0 | 41.8 | HR | 1571/74830 | <14 14–27 28–41 42–55 ≥56 | 1 1.17 (1.02–1.33) 1.28 (1.08–1.53) 1.39 (1.09–1.78) 1.64 (1.35–2.0) | Age, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, triglycerides, glucose, smoking, work status, and year of examination. | 9 |
| F | 10.8±4.9 | 42 | HR | 1455/89114 | <9 9–17 18–26 27–35 ≥36 | 1 1.04 (0.88–1.22) 1.35 (1.11–1.64) 1.46 (1.14–1.88) 1.51 (1.21–1.89) | ||||||
| Wannamethee S G,2008 [ | Britain | BRHS | 1978–2004 | M | 24 | 40–59 | RR | 1043/6997 | <11 11–14 15–21 ≥22 | 1 1.10 (0.91,1.32) 1.13 (0.93,1.37) 1.40 (1.16,1.70) | Age, social class, smoking, alcohol intake, physical activity, pre-existing evidence of undiagnosed CHD, BMI, systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, blood glucose and HDL-cholesterol. | 9 |
| Breitling L P, 2011[ | Germany | WCB | 1986–1992 | M | 17 | 25–64 | HR | 507/19090 | <11 11–14 15–21 22–38 ≥39 | 1 1.07 (0.71–1.62) 1.27 (0.87–1.86) 1.61 (1.11–2.35) 2.02 (1.39–2.94) | Age, Nationality, DM, IHD, occupation, HT, BMI, smoking, elevated blood glucose, triglycerides, cholesterol, alcohol. | 8 |
| Koehler E M, 2014 [ | Netherlands | Rotterdam | 1990–2009 | Both | 19.5 | 70.3 | HR | 672/5186 | GGT(1) GGT(2) GGT(3) GGT(4) GGT(5) | 1 1.40 (1.10,1.77) 1.58 (1.24,2.01) 1.47 (1.14,1.91) 2.07 (1.43,2.99) | Age, sex, education, smoking status, alcohol intake, BMI, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and total cholesterol levels. | 8 |
| Sung K C, 2015 [ | Korea | HSP | 2002–2009 | Both | 7 | 40.2 | HR | 178/260260 | 1–12 13–19 20–34 ≥35 | 1 0.92 (0.50–1.70) 1.21 (0.67–2.20) 1.35 (0.72–2.56) | Age, sex, smoking status, alcohol intake, diabetes, LDL cholesterol, history of heart disease, hypertension, history of stroke and fatty liver, HDL cholesterol, regular exercise, and BMI. | 8 |
| Li Y, 2016 [ | Japan | EPOCH-JAPAN | NP | M | 8.7 | 40–79 | HR | 361/15987 | 1–16 17–24 25–40 41–837 | 1 1.32(0.99–1.76) 1.33(0.96–1.82) 1.39(0.97–1.99) | Age, drinking status, smoking status, BMI, systolic blood pressure, serum triglycerides levels, serum total cholesterol levels, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase. | 9 |
| F | 340/25053 | 1–9 10–13 14–18 19–435 | 1 1.04(0.73–1.47) 1.01(0.69–1.48) 1.58(1.08–2.29) | |||||||||
| Haring R, 2009 [ | Germany | SHIP | NP | M | 7.3 | 20–79 | HR | NP | Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 | 1 1.67 (0.72–3.88) 1.86 (0.81–4.30) 1.48 (0.61–3.60) 2.80 (1.24–6.31) | Age in decades, waist circumference, alcohol consumption, physical activity, educational level, civil status, equalized income, and Functional Comorbidity Index. | 9 |
| F | NP | Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 | 1 1.52 (0.36–6.43) 1.22 (0.28–5.33) 1.85 (0.47–7.21) 2.34 (0.61–8.96) | |||||||||
| Hozawa A, 2007 [ | Japan | NIPPON DATA | 1990–2000 | M | 9.6 | 52.5 | HR | 83/2724 | 1–12 13–24 25–49 50–468 | 1 0.99 (0.48–2.04) 0.77 (0.34–1.76) 0.84 (0.30–2.39) | Age, alcohol consumption, cigarette, smoking, GOT, GPT, body mass index, HDL-cholesterol, total-cholesterol, triglyceride, habitual exercise, systolic BP, use of antihypertensive medication and diabetes. | 9 |
| F | HR | 82/4122 | 1–12 13–24 25–49 50–295 | 1 1.16 (0.68–1.98) 1.89 (0.95–3.75) 2.97 (1.06–8.34) |
Abbreviations: M, male; F, female; SD, standard deviation; BMI, Body mass index; NP, not provided; Q, Quintile; BP, blood pressure; GOT, Glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase; GPT, Glutamicpyruvic transaminase; HDL, High-density lipoprotein; LDL, Low-density lipoprotein; CHD, coronary heart disease; IHD, ischemic heart disease; HT, hypertension; DM, Diabetes mellitus; VHM&PP, Vorarlberg Health Monitoring and Promotion Program; NIPPON DATA, National Integrated Project for Prospective Observation of Non-communicable Disease and Its Trends in the Aged; SHIP, Study of Health in Pomerania; EPOCH-JAPAN, The Evidence for Cardiovascular Prevention from Observational Cohorts; BRHS, British Regional Heart Study; HSE, Health Survey of England; SHeS, Scottish Health Survey; WCB, Workmen’s Compensation Board; HSP, Health screening program; HRs, hazard ratios; RRs, relative risks; CIs, confidence intervals.
Fig 1Flow diagram of eligible literature selection.
Fig 2Forest plot of hazard ratios of the moderate, the high and the highest vs. the lowest category of serum GGT with CV mortality risk.
The squares represent the risk estimate for each individual study, with the area reflecting the weight assigned to the study. The horizontal line across each square represents the 95% confidence interval. The diamond represents the summary risk estimate, with width representing 95% confidence interval. The pooled hazard ratios were calculated by a fixed-effect model for all p values for heterogeneity >0.05. Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio. The hazard ratios were adjusted for potential confounders.
Fig 3Dose-response relationship between serum GGT levels and risk of CV-mortality in prospective studies.
Restricted cubic splines and generalized least squares dose-response models on evaluation of association between GGT and risk of CV mortality. (A) Overall analysis; (B) females; (C) males; (D) Europe; (E) Asia. The solid line represents the fitted hazard Ratio curve compared to the subgroup with the lowest mean levels of serum GGT, and Lines with long dashes represent 95% CI of this risk by restricted cubic splines model. Lines with short dashes represent the weighted regression index compared to subgroup with lowest mean levels of serum GGT by generalized least squares model.
Fig 4The two-stage dose-response meta-analysis on serum GGT and CV mortality.
The squares represent the risk estimate for each individual study, with the area reflecting the weight assigned to the study. The horizontal line across each square represents the 95% confidence interval. The diamond represents the summary risk estimate, with width representing 95% confidence interval. CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.
Subgroup analyses of pooled Hazard Ratios (HRs) of CV mortality per 10 U/L increase in GGT level.
| Subgroup | Number of studies | HR(95%CI) | P value | Test for heterogenity | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I2(%) | Pheterogensity | Pinteraction | ||||
| All studies | 11 | 1.10 (1.08, 1.11) | 0 | 58.9 | 0.007 | |
| sex | ||||||
| Male | 6 | 1.09 (1.07, 1.10) | 0 | 70.4 | 0.005 | 0.039 |
| Female | 4 | 1.12 (1.09, 1.15) | 0 | 0.10 | 0.391 | |
| Follow-up duration | ||||||
| ≥10y | 6 | 1.09 (1.08, 1.11) | 0 | 60.0 | 0.029 | 0.109 |
| <10y | 5 | 1.12 (1.09, 1.16) | 0 | 56.9 | 0.054 | |
| Sample size | ||||||
| ≥10000 | 6 | 1.09 (1.07, 1.11) | 0 | 64.1 | 0.016 | 0.249 |
| <10000 | 5 | 1.11 (1.08, 1.13) | 0 | 56.0 | 0.059 | |
| Age | ||||||
| ≥50 y | 5 | 1.11 (1.08, 1.13) | 0 | 57.5 | 0.052 | 0.039 |
| <50y | 2 | 1.07 (1.05, 1.09) | 0 | 50.0 | 0.157 | |
| Study location | ||||||
| Europe | 6 | 1.09 (1.08, 1.11) | 0 | 60.0 | 0.029 | 0.109 |
| Asia | 5 | 1.12 (1.09, 1.16) | 0 | 56.9 | 0.054 | |
| Adjusted for DM | ||||||
| Yes | 4 | 1.10 (1.06, 1.15) | 0 | 60.7 | 0.054 | 0.776 |
| No | 7 | 1.09 (1.08, 1.11) | 0 | 63.9 | 0.011 | |
| Adjusted for alcohol | ||||||
| Yes | 7 | 1.12 (1.09, 1.15) | 0 | 37.4 | 0.143 | 0.029 |
| No | 4 | 1.09 (1.07, 1.10) | 0 | 69.9 | 0.019 | |
| Adjusted for BMI | ||||||
| Yes | 9 | 1.09(1.07,1.11) | 0 | 60.2 | 0.010 | |
| No | 2 | 1.11(1.09,1.14) | 0 | 56.2 | 0.131 | 0.160 |
*For the test of heterogeneity in each subgroup, we also calculated the I2 statistic, and 50% was regarded as the cutoff point for non-significant and significant levels. Moderate heterogeneity was detected in our dose-response meta-analysis and heterogeneity was found when stratified by sex, age and adjustment for alcohol.
Abbreviations: HRs, hazard ratios; RRs, relative risks; CIs, confidence intervals; DM, Diabetes mellitus; BMI, Body mass index.