| Literature DB >> 29204365 |
Claire K Inman1, Abdullah Aljunaibi2, Hyunwook Koh3, Abdishakur Abdulle1, Raghib Ali1, Abdullah Alnaeemi4, Eiman Al Zaabi5, Naima Oumeziane6, Marina Al Bastaki6, Mohammed Al-Houqani7, Fatma Al-Maskari8, Ayesha Al Dhaheri9, Syed M Shah8, Laila Abdel Wareth10, Wael Al Mahmeed11, Habiba Alsafar12,13, Fatme Al Anouti14, Ayesha Al Hosani1, Muna Haji1, Divya Galani1, Matthew J O'Connor15, Jiyoung Ahn3, Tomas Kirchhoff3, Scott Sherman3, Richard B Hayes3, Huilin Li3, Ravichandran Ramasamy16, Ann Marie Schmidt16.
Abstract
AIMS: The transformation of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) from a semi-nomadic to a high income society has been accompanied by increasing rates of obesity and Type 2 diabetes mellitus. We examined if the AGE-RAGE (receptor for advanced glycation endproducts) axis is associated with obesity and diabetes mellitus in the pilot phase of the UAE Healthy Futures Study (UAEHFS).Entities:
Keywords: Advanced glycation endproducts (AGEs); Cohort study; Diabetes mellitus; Obesity; Receptor for AGE (RAGE)
Year: 2017 PMID: 29204365 PMCID: PMC5691216 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcte.2017.08.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Transl Endocrinol ISSN: 2214-6237
Descriptive table on the effect of candidate variables, including the markers of AGE-RAGE axis, obesity indices and other potential covariates, on diabetes status (HbA1c levels) for 517 subjects. Note that the data include 6.2% missing values for HbA1c.
| Continuous variables | All individuals (n = 517) | Normal (HbA1c < 5.7) (n = 331) | Prediabetic (5.7 ≤ HbA1c < 6.5) (n = 121) | Diabetic (6.5 ≤ HbA1c) (n = 33) | % of missing | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |||
| CML-AGE (pmol/ml) | 6853.91 | 13618.98 | 6068.87 | 12182.11 | 8980.72 | 17477.03 | 7192.74 | 10629.61 | 7.74 | 0.095 |
| AGE (Arbitrary Units) | 1318.15 | 1085.66 | 1417.17 | 1196.84 | 1042.72 | 628 | 1222.62 | 1012.27 | 5.42 | 0.003 |
| sRAGE (pg/ml) | 1093.15 | 513.41 | 1151.6 | 544.22 | 1002.96 | 433.74 | 851.33 | 363.24 | 5.61 | <0.001 |
| esRAGE (ng/ml) | 0.22 | 0.16 | 0.23 | 0.17 | 0.21 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.08 | 5.61 | 0.034 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 28.24 | 6.24 | 26.88 | 5.2 | 30.57 | 6.4 | 34.54 | 7.89 | 16.83 | <0.001 |
| WC/HC (ratio) | 0.88 | 0.1 | 0.86 | 0.09 | 0.91 | 0.1 | 0.95 | 0.09 | 21.86 | <0.001 |
| Age (years) | 31.78 | 10.48 | 29.08 | 8.45 | 36.41 | 10.5 | 43.84 | 13.03 | 9.09 | <0.001 |
| eGFR (ml/min/1.73m2) | 102.71 | 26.63 | 105.15 | 26.91 | 97.79 | 21.5 | 98.75 | 35.7 | 14.31 | 0.008 |
| Systolic blood pressure (SBP) (mm Hg) | 116.86 | 15.59 | 113.8 | 13.86 | 121.51 | 16.21 | 131.29 | 19.18 | 17.41 | <0.001 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (mm Hg) | 77.49 | 9.94 | 76.01 | 9.02 | 79.49 | 11.23 | 85.6 | 9.44 | 17.41 | <0.001 |
| Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 196.01 | 40.8 | 192.31 | 37.19 | 208.85 | 43.11 | 188.24 | 57 | 5.42 | 0.009 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 120.58 | 88.71 | 108.98 | 74.73 | 131.55 | 83.7 | 196.85 | 167.58 | 5.42 | <0.001 |
| HDL (mg/dL) | 52.07 | 12.82 | 53.32 | 12.89 | 50.81 | 12.63 | 44.59 | 10.19 | 7.16 | 0.001 |
| HS-CRP (mg/dL) | 0.85 | 0.22 | 0.84 | 0.23 | 0.87 | 0.21 | 0.86 | 0.24 | 6 | 0.17 |
| Vitamin D (ng/ml) | 22.06 | 10.55 | 21.36 | 10.28 | 22.37 | 10.7 | 26.32 | 11.14 | 7.16 | 0.041 |
| Serum creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.17 |
| Categorical variables | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | % of missing | |
| Sex | 473 | 304 | 173 | 31 | 8.51 | 0.142 | ||||
| Male | 323 | 62.48 | 200 | 65.79 | 81 | 73.64 | 22 | 70.97 | ||
| Female | 150 | 29.01 | 104 | 34.21 | 29 | 26.36 | 9 | 29.03 | ||
Univariate analyses: The P-values were estimated based on univariate proportional odds models for the effect of each candidate covariate on diabetes status. Diabetes status was coded as 0 for normal (HbA1c < 5.7), 1 for prediabetic (5.7 ≤ HbA1c < 6.5), and 2 for diabetic (6.5 ≤ HbA1c). SD = standard deviation.
The proportional odds models were fitted for the association between diabetes status and each of CML-AGE, AGE, sRAGE, and esRAGE. Separate models were fitted for different covariate adjustments. Diabetes status was coded as ordinal: 0 for normal stat (HbA1c < 5.7), 1 for prediabetic state (5.7 ≤ HbA1c < 6.5), and 2 for diabetic state (6.5 ≤ HbA1c). Each continuous predictor was standardized to have mean 0 and standard deviation 1.
| CML-AGE | AGE | sRAGE | esRAGE | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | |
| 1 | 0.099 | 0.103 | 0.334 | −0.302 | 0.144 | 0.036 | −0.287 | 0.132 | 0.029 | −0.173 | 0.118 | 0.143 |
| 2 | 0.099 | 0.103 | 0.333 | −0.31 | 0.145 | 0.033 | −0.284 | 0.132 | 0.031 | −0.17 | 0.118 | 0.15 |
| 3 | 0.073 | 0.112 | 0.515 | −0.382 | 0.165 | 0.021 | −0.063 | 0.138 | 0.649 | −0.03 | 0.125 | 0.809 |
| 4 | 0.124 | 0.127 | 0.329 | −0.308 | 0.159 | 0.053 | −0.213 | 0.141 | 0.13 | −0.126 | 0.126 | 0.318 |
| 5 | 0.061 | 0.115 | 0.597 | −0.307 | 0.155 | 0.047 | −0.235 | 0.141 | 0.094 | −0.123 | 0.124 | 0.322 |
| 6 | 0.104 | 0.105 | 0.324 | −0.273 | 0.144 | 0.058 | −0.25 | 0.134 | 0.062 | −0.15 | 0.12 | 0.212 |
| 7 | 0.09 | 0.103 | 0.378 | −0.301 | 0.145 | 0.038 | −0.181 | 0.133 | 0.173 | −0.117 | 0.12 | 0.33 |
| 8 | 0.097 | 0.103 | 0.347 | −0.367 | 0.154 | 0.017 | −0.258 | 0.132 | 0.051 | −0.159 | 0.118 | 0.178 |
| 9 | 0.098 | 0.103 | 0.343 | −0.307 | 0.145 | 0.034 | −0.284 | 0.132 | 0.031 | −0.171 | 0.118 | 0.149 |
| 0.058 | 0.117 | 0.618 | −0.404 | 0.177 | 0.023 | −0.009 | 0.145 | 0.95 | <0.001 | 0.131 | 0.998 | |
| 0.095 | 0.131 | 0.465 | −0.354 | 0.172 | 0.04 | −0.087 | 0.146 | 0.549 | −0.044 | 0.13 | 0.734 | |
Covariate adjustment: 1: Baseline (age + sex); 2: Baseline + eGFR; 3: Baseline + BMI; 4: Baseline + WC/HC; 5: Baseline + SBP 6: Baseline + total cholesterol + total triglycerides + HDL; 7: Baseline + hs-CRP; 8: Baseline + Vitamin D; 9: Baseline + serum creatinine; 10: Baseline + eGFR + BMI + SBP + total cholesterol + total triglycerides + HDL + hs-CRP + Vitamin D; 11: Baseline + eGFR + WC/HC + SBP + total cholesterol + total triglycerides + HDL + hs-CRP + Vitamin D.
Note: For the covariate adjustment, 10 and 11, the complete estimated models including all covariate estimates for AGE are addressed through Tables S2 and S3. SE: standard error.
Pairwise Spearman correlation coefficient estimates and their p-values among CML-AGE, AGE, sRAGE, esRAGE, BMI, and WC/HC. As the normality of each variable was not satisfied visually and by the Shapiro-Wilk test (Fig. S1), the non-parametric method, Spearman’s rank test, was used (Table S1).
| CML-AGE | AGE | sRAGE | esRAGE | BMI | WC/HC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CML-AGE | – | −0.516, <0.001 | 0.043, 0.351 | 0.076, 0.096 | −0.036, 0.466 | 0.001, 0.986 |
| AGE | −0.516, <0.001 | – | −0.08, 0.076 | −0.037, 0.415 | 0.025, 0.609 | −0.041, 0.42 |
| sRAGE | 0.043, 0.351 | −0.08, 0.076 | – | 0.671, <0.001 | −0.322, <0.001 | −0.201, <0.001 |
| esRAGE | 0.076, 0.096 | −0.037, 0.415 | 0.671, <0.001 | – | −0.194, <0.001 | −0.093, 0.068 |
| BMI | −0.036, 0.466 | 0.025, 0.609 | −0.322, <0.001 | −0.194, <0.001 | – | 0.476, <0.001 |
| WC/HC | 0.001, 0.986 | −0.041, 0.42 | −0.201, <0.001 | −0.093, 0.068 | 0.476, <0.001 | – |
Note: In each cell, the first number in the pair is the Spearman correlation coefficient estimate and the second number is the associated p-value based on the Spearman’s rank test on whether it is significantly different from 0. For example, with respect to the correlation between sRAGE and BMI, the correlation estimate is −0.322 and its p-value is <0.001.
The linear regression models fitted for the association between BMI and each of CML-AGE, AGE, sRAGE, and esRAGE. Separate models were fitted for different covariate adjustments. Each continuous predictor was standardized to have mean 0 and standard deviation 1.
| CML-AGE | AGE | sRAGE | esRAGE | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | |
| 1 | 0.054 | 0.324 | 0.868 | 0.057 | 0.282 | 0.839 | −1.675 | 0.284 | <0.001 | −1.182 | 0.283 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 0.073 | 0.325 | 0.822 | 0.023 | 0.286 | 0.937 | −1.667 | 0.286 | <0.001 | −1.169 | 0.286 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 0.054 | 0.313 | 0.864 | −0.027 | 0.273 | 0.922 | −1.525 | 0.28 | <0.001 | −1.049 | 0.276 | <0.001 |
| 4 | 0.058 | 0.321 | 0.856 | 0.157 | 0.275 | 0.567 | −1.445 | 0.282 | <0.001 | −1.024 | 0.277 | <0.001 |
| 5 | −0.068 | 0.302 | 0.822 | 0.026 | 0.263 | 0.923 | −1.315 | 0.274 | <0.001 | −0.896 | 0.268 | 0.001 |
| 6 | 0.067 | 0.325 | 0.836 | 0.029 | 0.285 | 0.919 | −1.672 | 0.288 | <0.001 | −1.148 | 0.285 | <0.001 |
| 7 | 0.062 | 0.326 | 0.849 | 0.044 | 0.287 | 0.877 | −1.67 | 0.286 | <0.001 | −1.173 | 0.286 | <0.001 |
| 8 | −0.012 | 0.295 | 0.968 | 0.048 | 0.257 | 0.851 | −0.979 | 0.273 | <0.001 | −0.661 | 0.261 | 0.012 |
*Note: For the covariate adjustment, 8, the complete estimated model including all covariate estimates for sRAGE and esRAGE are addressed through Tables S4 and S5 respectively. SE: standard error.
Covariate adjustment: 1: Baseline (age + sex); 2: Baseline + eGFR; 3: Baseline + SBP; 4: Baseline + total cholesterol + total triglycerides + HDL; 5: Baseline + hs-CRP; 6: Baseline + Vitamin D; 7: Baseline + serum creatinine; 8: Baseline + eGFR + SBP + total cholesterol + total triglycerides + HDL + hs-CRP + Vitamin D.
The linear regression models fitted for the association between WC/HC and each of CML-AGE, AGE, sRAGE, and esRAGE. Separate models were fitted for different covariate adjustments. Each continuous predictor was standardized to have mean 0 and standard deviation 1.
| CML-AGE | AGE | sRAGE | esRAGE | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | Estimate | SE | P-value | |
| 1 | <0.001 | 0.005 | 0.993 | −0.005 | 0.004 | 0.22 | −0.016 | 0.004 | <0.001 | −0.009 | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| 2 | <0.001 | 0.005 | 0.972 | −0.004 | 0.004 | 0.282 | −0.015 | 0.004 | 0.001 | −0.008 | 0.004 | 0.051 |
| 3 | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.874 | −0.005 | 0.004 | 0.229 | −0.015 | 0.004 | 0.001 | −0.009 | 0.004 | 0.035 |
| 4 | −0.001 | 0.005 | 0.884 | −0.004 | 0.004 | 0.308 | −0.013 | 0.004 | 0.003 | −0.008 | 0.004 | 0.068 |
| 5 | <0.001 | 0.005 | 0.975 | −0.005 | 0.004 | 0.192 | −0.014 | 0.004 | 0.001 | −0.008 | 0.004 | 0.057 |
| 6 | <0.001 | 0.005 | 0.971 | −0.005 | 0.004 | 0.213 | −0.016 | 0.004 | <0.001 | −0.009 | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| 7 | <0.001 | 0.005 | 0.985 | −0.005 | 0.004 | 0.24 | −0.015 | 0.004 | 0.001 | −0.008 | 0.004 | 0.051 |
| 8 | −0.001 | 0.005 | 0.887 | −0.003 | 0.004 | 0.486 | −0.011 | 0.004 | 0.016 | −0.006 | 0.004 | 0.189 |
*Note: For the covariate adjustment, 8, the complete estimated model including all covariate estimates for sRAGE are addressed through Table S6. SE: standard error.
Covariate adjustment: 1: Baseline (age + sex); 2: Baseline + eGFR; 3: Baseline + SBP; 4: Baseline + total cholesterol + total triglycerides + HDL; 5: Baseline + hs-CRP; 6: Baseline + Vitamin D; 7: Baseline + serum creatinine; 8: Baseline + eGFR + SBP + total cholesterol + total triglycerides + HDL + hs-CRP + Vitamin D.
Fig. 1Pairwise scatter plots among CML-AGE, AGE, sRAGE, esRAGE, BMI, and WC/HC. Green circles are for normal individuals (HbA1c < 5.7), blue circles are for prediabetic individuals (5.7 ≤ HbA1c < 6.5), and red circles are for diabetic individuals (6.5 ≤ HbA1c). As the normality of each variable was not satisfied by the Shapiro-Wilk test, logarithm was taken to each variable. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)