| Literature DB >> 30455723 |
Jing Luo1,2, Qian Chen1,2,3, Tianran Shen1,2, Xu Wang1,2, Wanjun Fang1,2, Xiaocai Wu4, Zenan Yuan4, Gengdong Chen2,5, Wenhua Ling1,2, Yuming Chen2,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), a glycoprotein synthesized by hepatocytes, has been linked to insulin resistance and hepatic lipid metabolism and is suggested to be associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). This study aimed to investigate the association of SHBG with NAFLD in Chinese adults.Entities:
Keywords: Hepatic steatosis; Intrahepatic triglyceride; Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; Sex hormone-binding globulin
Year: 2018 PMID: 30455723 PMCID: PMC6225668 DOI: 10.1186/s12986-018-0313-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr Metab (Lond) ISSN: 1743-7075 Impact factor: 4.169
Fig. 1Flow-chart of the recruitment of community participants
Fig. 2Serum SHBG concentrations (nmol/L) in non-NAFLD subjects and NAFLD patients. Serum levels of SHBG in individuals with or without NAFLD stratified by sex (a), BMI (b) and HOMA-IR (c). The box plots display median values and 25th and 75th percentiles; the whiskers represent 25th percentiles - 1.5 * interquartile range and 75th percentiles + 1.5 * interquartile range. (d) Multivariable adjusted means (SEM) of SHBG (log-transformed) according to the severity of NAFLD. After being logarithmically transformed, SHBG was adjusted for age, postmenopausal status (for females), household income, WHR, trunk fat, current smoking and drinking, physical activity (MET), hypertension and diabetes, serum glucose, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), TG, HDL-C, ALT, UA, testosterone and DHEAS levels using ANCOVA
Univariate and multivariate-adjusted Spearman correlation coefficients of SHBG and metabolic risk factors
| Variables | SHBG | SHBG (age, sex and BMI-adjusted) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Age (years) | 0.027 | 0.144 | – | – |
| Sex | −0.177 | < 0.001 | – | – |
| BMI (kg/m2) | −0.455 | < 0.001 | – | – |
| WHR | −0.327 | < 0.001 | −0.186 | < 0.001 |
| Trunk fat percentage (%) | −0.205 | < 0.001 | −0.232 | < 0.001 |
| ALT (U/L) | −0.206 | < 0.001 | −0.029 | 0.117 |
| Glucose (mmol/L) | −0.208 | < 0.001 | −0.114 | < 0.001 |
| HOMA-IR | −0.467 | < 0.001 | −0.177 | < 0.001 |
| Triglyceride (mmol/L) | −0.386 | < 0.001 | −0.192 | < 0.001 |
| Cholesterol (mmol/L) | −0.067 | < 0.001 | −0.015 | 0.406 |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) | 0.390 | < 0.001 | 0.269 | < 0.001 |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 0.023 | 0.215 | −0.026 | 0.168 |
| UA (μmol/L) | −0.331 | < 0.001 | −0.206 | < 0.001 |
| Testosterone (ng/dL) | −0.105 | < 0.001 | 0.235 | < 0.001 |
| DHEAS (μg/dL) | −0.216 | < 0.001 | −0.122 | < 0.001 |
The age, sex and BMI-adjusted associations between serum SHBG levels and several relevant factors were estimated by partial correlation
SHBG sex hormone-binding globulin; BMI body mass index; WHR waist-to-hip ratio; ALT alanine aminotransferase; HOMA-IR homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; HDL-C high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; UA uric acid; DHEAS dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate
Adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of NAFLD according to sex and serum SHBG quartiles using adjusted logistic regression
| SHBG (nmol/L) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quartile 1 | Quartile 2 | Quartile 3 | Quartile 4 | ||
| Total ( | < 38.70 | 38.70–52.45 | 52.46–71.3 | > 71.3 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.38 (0.30–0.48) | 0.21 (0.16–0.26) | 0.09 (0.07–0.11) | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.46 (0.36–0.59) | 0.30 (0.23–0.38) | 0.18 (0.13–0.23) | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.54 (0.42–0.70) | 0.38 (0.29–0.50) | 0.24 (0.18–0.32) | < 0.001 |
| Females ( | < 40.65 | 40.65–55.70 | 55.71–75.80 | > 75.80 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.34 (0.25–0.45) | 0.18 (0.14–0.24) | 0.07 (0.05–0.09) | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.40 (0.30–0.54) | 0.24 (0.18–0.33) | 0.13 (0.09–0.18) | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.49 (0.36–0.67) | 0.33 (0.24–0.45) | 0.19 (0.13–0.27) | < 0.001 |
| Males ( | < 35.50 | 35.50–47.10 | 47.11–61.00 | > 61.00 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.67 (0.45–1.00) | 0.31 (0.21–0.46) | 0.13 (0.09–0.21) | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.83 (0.53–1.29) | 0.47 (0.30–0.73) | 0.35 (0.22–0.57) | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.95 (0.59–1.53) | 0.57 (0.35–0.95) | 0.42 (0.23–0.77) | 0.001 |
Model 1: Adjusted for age, sex, postmenopausal status (for females) and household income
Model 2: Adjusted for the variables in Model 1 plus WHR, trunk fat, current smoking and drinking, physical activity (MET), hypertension and diabetes
Model 3: Adjusted for the variables in Model 2 plus serum glucose, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), TG, HDL-C, ALT, UA, testosterone and DHEAS levels
NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; SHBG, sex hormone-binding globulin
Adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) of NAFLD according to BMI and HOMA-IR status and serum SHBG quartiles using adjusted logistic regression
| SHBG (nmol/L) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quartile 1 | Quartile 2 | Quartile 3 | Quartile 4 | ||
| BMI < 24 kg/m2 | < 45.03 | 45.03–60.90 | 60.91–80.98 | > 80.98 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.50 (0.38–0.66) | 0.23 (0.17–0.31) | 0.15 (0.11–0.21) | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.56 (0.42–0.75) | 0.29 (0.21–0.40) | 0.24 (0.17–0.34) | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.60 (0.46–0.84) | 0.35 (0.25–0.48) | 0.31 (0.21–0.45) | < 0.001 |
| BMI ≥ 24 kg/m2 | < 32.70 | 32.70–43.10 | 43.11–56.30 | > 56.30 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.53 (0.34–0.83) | 0.33 (0.21–0.51) | 0.17 (0.11–0.27) | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.57 (0.36–0.89) | 0.37 (0.24–0.57) | 0.21 (0.14–0.32) | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.70 (0.44–1.12) | 0.49 (0.30–0.78) | 0.31 (0.19–0.51) | < 0.001 |
| – | – | – | – | 0.150 | |
| HOMA-IR < 2 | < 45.20 | 45.20–60.10 | 60.11–79.38 | > 79.38 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.55 (0.42–0.72) | 0.29 (0.22–0.39) | 0.17 (0.13–0.23) | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.64 (0.49–0.85) | 0.40 (0.29–0.54) | 0.32 (0.23–0.44) | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.67 (0.50–0.89) | 0.43 (0.31–0.59) | 0.34 (0.24–0.49) | < 0.001 |
| HOMA-IR ≥ 2 | < 31.50 | 31.50–41.60 | 41.61–55.68 | > 55.68 | |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.76 (0.47–1.21) | 0.41 (0.27–0.64) | 0.16 (0.10–0.25) | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.84 (0.52–1.36) | 0.46 (0.29–0.73) | 0.21 (0.14–0.33) | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.83 (0.50–1.36) | 0.43 (0.27–0.70) | 0.22 (0.13–0.36) | < 0.001 |
| – | – | – | – | 0.021 | |
Model 1: Adjusted for age, sex and household income
Model 2: Adjusted for the variables in Model 1 plus WHR, trunk fat, current smoking and drinking, physical activity (MET), hypertension and diabetes
Model 3: Adjusted for the variables in Model 2 plus serum glucose, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), TG, HDL-C, ALT, UA, testosterone and DHEAS levels
NAFLD nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; SHBG sex hormone-binding globulin; BMI body mass index; HOMA-IR homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance
Fig. 3SHBG and HNF4α mRNA expression in fatty liver tissues. (a) Correlation analysis of the relationship between SHBG (log-transformed) and serum SHBG levels. (b-c) Serum SHBG levels and SHBG and HNF4α mRNA expression in fatty liver tissue [mean (SEM)] between Grade 0 (n = 12), Grade 1 (n = 10) and Grade 2–3 (n = 10) versus Grade 0 steatosis, *p < 0.05 **p < 0.01. (D) Correlation of SHBG mRNA expression (log-transformed) with HNF4αmRNA expression (log-transformed). (e-g) Correlations of hepatic TG with serum SHBG levels, SHBG mRNA expression (log-transformed) and HNF4α mRNA expression (log-transformed)