Justin B Echouffo-Tcheugui1,2, Meghan I Short3, Vanessa Xanthakis2,3,4, Patrick Field5, Todd R Sponholtz4, Martin G Larson2,3, Ramachandran S Vasan2,4,6,7. 1. Division of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. National Heart, Blood and Lung Institute, Framingham Heart Study, Framingham, Massachusetts. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Section of Preventive Medicine and Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Medicine, Internal Medicine Residency Program, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. 7. Section of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
Context: The natural histories of obesity subphenotypes are incompletely delineated. Objectives: To investigate dynamic changes in obesity subphenotypes and associations with outcomes. Design, Setting, Participants, and Measurements: Framingham Offspring Cohort participants (n = 4291) who attended the examination cycles 2 (1979 to 1983) to 7 (1998 to 2001), which included 26,508 participant observations. Obesity subphenotypes [metabolically healthy nonobese (MHNO), metabolically healthy obese (MHO), metabolically unhealthy nonobese (MUNO), and metabolically unhealthy obese (MUO)] were ascertained based on metabolic health (<2 Adult Treatment Panel III criteria). The outcomes were subclinical cardiovascular disease (CVD), incident diseases [diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease (CKD), CVD], and all-cause mortality. Results: At baseline, 4% and 31% of participants exhibited the MHO and MUNO subphenotypes, respectively. Four-year probability of MHO participants becoming MUO was 43% in women and 46% in men. Compared with MHNO, MHO participants had 1.28-fold (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.93) and 1.92-fold (95% CI, 1.38 to 2.68) higher odds of subclinical CVD and coronary artery calcification, respectively; corresponding values for MUNO were 1.95 (1.54 to 2.47) and 1.92 (1.38 to 2.68). During follow-up (median of 14 years), 231 participants developed diabetes, 784 hypertension, 423 CKD, 639 CVD, and 1296 died. Compared with MHNO, MHO conferred higher risks of diabetes [hazard ratio (HR), 4.69; 95% CI, 2.21 to 9.96] and hypertension (HR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.66 to 2.94). Compared with MUO, MHO conferred lower risks of diabetes (0.21; 0.12 to 0.39), CVD (0.64; 0.43 to 0.95), and CKD (0.44; 0.27 to 0.73), but similar hypertension, cardiovascular mortality, and overall mortality risks. Conclusion: Over time, most MHO participants developed metabolic abnormalities and clinical disease. The MHO subphenotype is a harbinger of future risk.
Context: The natural histories of obesity subphenotypes are incompletely delineated. Objectives: To investigate dynamic changes in obesity subphenotypes and associations with outcomes. Design, Setting, Participants, and Measurements: Framingham Offspring Cohort participants (n = 4291) who attended the examination cycles 2 (1979 to 1983) to 7 (1998 to 2001), which included 26,508 participant observations. Obesity subphenotypes [metabolically healthy nonobese (MHNO), metabolically healthy obese (MHO), metabolically unhealthy nonobese (MUNO), and metabolically unhealthy obese (MUO)] were ascertained based on metabolic health (<2 Adult Treatment Panel III criteria). The outcomes were subclinical cardiovascular disease (CVD), incident diseases [diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease (CKD), CVD], and all-cause mortality. Results: At baseline, 4% and 31% of participants exhibited the MHO and MUNO subphenotypes, respectively. Four-year probability of MHO participants becoming MUO was 43% in women and 46% in men. Compared with MHNO, MHO participants had 1.28-fold (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.93) and 1.92-fold (95% CI, 1.38 to 2.68) higher odds of subclinical CVD and coronary artery calcification, respectively; corresponding values for MUNO were 1.95 (1.54 to 2.47) and 1.92 (1.38 to 2.68). During follow-up (median of 14 years), 231 participants developed diabetes, 784 hypertension, 423 CKD, 639 CVD, and 1296 died. Compared with MHNO, MHO conferred higher risks of diabetes [hazard ratio (HR), 4.69; 95% CI, 2.21 to 9.96] and hypertension (HR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.66 to 2.94). Compared with MUO, MHO conferred lower risks of diabetes (0.21; 0.12 to 0.39), CVD (0.64; 0.43 to 0.95), and CKD (0.44; 0.27 to 0.73), but similar hypertension, cardiovascular mortality, and overall mortality risks. Conclusion: Over time, most MHO participants developed metabolic abnormalities and clinical disease. The MHO subphenotype is a harbinger of future risk.
Authors: Paul K Whelton; Robert M Carey; Wilbert S Aronow; Donald E Casey; Karen J Collins; Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb; Sondra M DePalma; Samuel Gidding; Kenneth A Jamerson; Daniel W Jones; Eric J MacLaughlin; Paul Muntner; Bruce Ovbiagele; Sidney C Smith; Crystal C Spencer; Randall S Stafford; Sandra J Taler; Randal J Thomas; Kim A Williams; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Alexandra D Ogorodnikova; Mimi Kim; Aileen P McGinn; Paul Muntner; Unab Khan; Rachel P Wildman Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2011-07-28 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: James R Cerhan; Steven C Moore; Eric J Jacobs; Cari M Kitahara; Philip S Rosenberg; Hans-Olov Adami; Jon O Ebbert; Dallas R English; Susan M Gapstur; Graham G Giles; Pamela L Horn-Ross; Yikyung Park; Alpa V Patel; Kim Robien; Elisabete Weiderpass; Walter C Willett; Alicja Wolk; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Patricia Hartge; Leslie Bernstein; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Ellen L de Hollander; Wanda Je Bemelmans; Hendriek C Boshuizen; Nele Friedrich; Henri Wallaschofski; Pilar Guallar-Castillón; Stefan Walter; M Carola Zillikens; Annika Rosengren; Lauren Lissner; Julie K Bassett; Graham G Giles; Nicola Orsini; Noor Heim; Marjolein Visser; Lisette Cpgm de Groot Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-03-31 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Unjali P Gujral; Eric Vittinghoff; Morgana Mongraw-Chaffin; Dhananjay Vaidya; Namratha R Kandula; Matthew Allison; Jeffrey Carr; Kiang Liu; K M Venkat Narayan; Alka M Kanaya Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Joshua A Bell; Mark Hamer; Séverine Sabia; Archana Singh-Manoux; G David Batty; Mika Kivimaki Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Zachary J Ward; Michael W Long; Stephen C Resch; Catherine M Giles; Angie L Cradock; Steven L Gortmaker Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 176.079
Authors: Maoxiang Zhao; Wenjuan Du; Qianqian Zhao; Yating Chen; Bin Li; Zhonghui Xie; Zihao Fu; Nan Zhang; Xiaowei Cheng; Xiaoqian Li; Siyu Yao; Miao Wang; Chi Wang; Shouling Wu; Hao Xue; Yang Li Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-06-28
Authors: Erika Aparecida Silveira; Larissa Silva Barbosa; Ana Paula Santos Rodrigues; Matias Noll; Cesar De Oliveira Journal: Arch Public Health Date: 2020-07-18
Authors: Andreas A Kammerlander; Thomas Mayrhofer; Maros Ferencik; Neha J Pagidipati; Julia Karady; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Michael T Lu; Daniel O Bittner; Stefan B Puchner; Nathan A Bihlmeyer; Nandini M Meyersohn; Hamed Emami; Svati H Shah; Pamela S Douglas; Udo Hoffmann Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Lifang Hou; Donald Lloyd-Jones; Brian T Joyce; Tao Gao; Yinan Zheng; Jiantao Ma; Shih-Jen Hwang; Lei Liu; Drew Nannini; Steve Horvath; Ake T Lu; Norrina Bai Allen; David R Jacobs; Myron Gross; Amy Krefman; Hongyan Ning; Kiang Liu; Cora E Lewis; Pamela J Schreiner; Stephen Sidney; James M Shikany; Daniel Levy; Philip Greenland Journal: Circ Res Date: 2021-08-25 Impact factor: 23.213