| Literature DB >> 29529073 |
Kristine S Alexander1, Neil A Zakai1,2, Steven D Lidofsky1, Peter W Callas3, Suzanne E Judd4, Russell P Tracy2,5, Mary Cushman1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29529073 PMCID: PMC5847237 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194153
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Case-cohort study design.
Baseline characteristics by FLI score in the cohort random sample.
| Low FLI (<20) | Intermediate FLI (20–60) | High FLI (>60) | p | FLI ≥90th Percentile (≥91.4) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19% | 36% | 44% | ||||
| 64.5 (11) | 66.1 (9) | 64.0 (8) | 0.11 | 61 (8) | <0.001 | |
| 73% | 53% | 49% | <0.001 | 56% | 0.85 | |
| 35% | 38% | 46% | 0.05 | 47% | 0.34 | |
| 36% | 38% | 30% | 0.39 | 33% | 0.78 | |
| 23.1 (2.5) | 27.2 (3.0) | 33.7 (5.6) | <0.001 | 40.0 (6.4) | <0.001 | |
| 78 (8) | 91 (7) | 107 (12) | <0.001 | 119 (12) | <0.001 | |
| 121 (15) | 126 (16) | 131 (17) | <0.001 | 131 (16) | 0.04 | |
| 13% | 11% | 15% | 0.43 | 15% | 0.66 | |
| 37% | 55% | 68% | <0.001 | 75% | 0.002 | |
| 37% | 60% | 69% | <0.001 | 64% | 0.24 | |
| 12% | 16% | 18% | 0.25 | 12% | 0.26 | |
| 8% | 14% | 34% | <0.001 | 40% | <0.001 | |
| 10% | 7% | 10% | 0.51 | 4% | 0.06 | |
| 2% | 8% | 10% | 0.003 | 10% | 0.43 | |
| 3.9 (15.8) | 2.6 (7.9) | 1.7 (4.0) | 0.15 | 1.0 (3.3) | 0.006 | |
| 23% | 34% | 35% | 0.04 | 32% | 0.86 |
BMI: body mass index, SBP: systolic blood pressure, CVD: cardiovascular disease, LVH: left ventricular hypertrophy
* p values for differences between the groups, by Rao-Scott χ2 statistic (categorical variables) or linear regression (continuous variables)
† p values for ≥90th percentile compared with all others, by Rao-Scott χ2 statistic (categorical variables) or linear regression (continuous variables)
Hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of ischemic stroke by FLI*.
| Model | NAFLD (FLI >60) vs FLI <20 | FLI >90th Percentile vs Lower | Per 10 unit increment of FLI Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| All | 1.00 (0.69, 1.43) | 1.02 (0.97, 1.07) | |
| Men | 0.67 (0.39, 1.17) | 1.26 (0.69, 2.30) | 0.96 (0.90, 1.03) |
| Women | 1.55 (0.98, 2.46) | ||
| p for interaction | 0.06 | 0.47 | 0.10 |
| All | 1.18 (0.68, 2.06) | 0.95 (0.90, 1.01) | |
| Men | 0.75 (0.35, 1.60) | ||
| Women | 1.03 (0.58, 1.82) | 1.03 (0.95, 1.12) | |
| p for interaction | 0.09 | 0.11 | 0.14 |
* Hazard ratios shown in bold were statistically significant based on the confidence interval
† Model 1: adjusted for age, race, and age*race
Model 2: additionally adjusted for the Framingham stroke risk factors
Fig 2Hazard ratio of ischemic stroke by (A) AST, (B) ALT, and (C) GGT.
Model 1: Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for age, race, and age*race
Model 2: Additionally adjusted for the Framingham stroke risk factors
Percentile cut-off values (U/L) for 20th, 40th, 60th, 80th for men: AST (15.4, 18.5, 21.3, 25.5), ALT (12.1, 15.1, 18.9, 24.2), GGT (17.0 21.6, 28.1, 41.8). For women: AST (14.1, 16.4, 19.4, 23.1), ALT (9.3, 12.5, 14.9, 19.2), GGT (12.8, 16.9, 22.6, 31.2).