| Literature DB >> 33253307 |
Morgan Obura1, Joline W J Beulens1,2, Roderick Slieker1,3, Anitra D M Koopman1, Trynke Hoekstra1,4, Giel Nijpels5, Petra Elders5, Robert W Koivula6,7, Azra Kurbasic6, Markku Laakso8, Tue H Hansen9,10, Martin Ridderstråle9, Torben Hansen9,11, Imre Pavo12, Ian Forgie13, Bernd Jablonka14, Hartmut Ruetten14, Andrea Mari15, Mark I McCarthy7,16, Mark Walker17, Alison Heggie17, Timothy J McDonald18, Mandy H Perry19, Federico De Masi20, Søren Brunak20,21, Anubha Mahajan16, Giuseppe N Giordano6, Tarja Kokkola8, Emmanouil Dermitzakis22,23,24, Ana Viñuela22,23,24, Oluf Pedersen9, Jochen M Schwenk25, Jurek Adamski26,27,28, Harriet J A Teare29, Ewan R Pearson30, Paul W Franks6,7,31, Leen M 't Hart1,3,32, Femke Rutters1.
Abstract
AIM: Subclasses of different glycaemic disturbances could explain the variation in characteristics of individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aimed to examine the association between subgroups based on their glucose curves during a five-point mixed-meal tolerance test (MMT) and metabolic traits at baseline and glycaemic deterioration in individuals with T2D.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33253307 PMCID: PMC7703960 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242360
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow chart of inclusion (n = 668) and exclusion (n = 221) of participants in the DIRECT study.
Characteristics of 787 individuals with type 2 diabetes stratified by glucose curve groups.
| Characteristic | Glucose curve groups | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Subgroup 1 | Subgroup 2 | Subgroup 3 | |
| Number of participants | 139 | 466 | 182 |
| Age (years) | 61.3 (7.5) | 62.2 (8.0) | 61.1 (8.6) |
| Sex, men [n] | 87 (63%) | 272 (58%) | 97 (53%) |
| BMI (kg/m | 30.0 (5.0) | 30.9 (5.0) | 30.2 (4.8) |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 101.4 (13.5) | 104.3 (13.3) | 102.2 (12.8) |
| Smoking Status | 21 (15%) | 65 (14%) | 20 (11%) |
| Alcohol Status | 26 (19%) | 71 (15%) | 35 (19%) |
| Physical activity (mgs) | 37.6 (11.2) | 33.8 (9.3) | 33.8 (9.8) |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 127.5 (15.4) | 131.1 (15.0) | 133.5 (17.0) |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 74.6 (9.3) | 75.2 (9.7) | 76.5 (9.0) |
| HbA1c (mmol/mol) | 43 (5) | 46 (5) | 50 (6) |
| HbA1c (%) | 6.1 (0.4) | 6.4 (0.5) | 6.7 (0.6) |
| C-peptide (pmol/l) | 908.6 (303.7) | 1117.9 (416.9) | 1122.2 (375.9) |
| Total cholesterol (mmol/l) | 4.2 (1.4) | 4.2 (1.1) | 4.4 (1.1) |
| LDL (mmol/l) | 2.4 (1.1) | 2.3 (0.9) | 2.4 (1.0) |
| HDL (mmol/l) | 1.2 (0.4) | 1.2 (0.4) | 1.2 (0.4) |
| Triglycerides (mmol/l) | 1.1 [0.9,1.5] | 1.4 [1.0,1.9] | 1.5 [1.1,2.0] |
| Fasting insulin (pmol/l) | 83.8 (54.9) | 110.5 (74.3) | 113.8 (69.8) |
| Glucose peak values (mmol/l)2 | 8.4 | 10.0 | 13.1 |
| 2h postprandial insulin (pmol/l) | 150.7 [99.8,258.5] | 405.8 [253.4,615.0] | 463.4 [321.7,624.1] |
| Fasting plasma glucose (mmol/l) | 6.4 (1.3) | 7.1 (1.2) | 7.9 (1.7) |
| 1h postprandial glucose(mmol/l) | 8.0 (2.3) | 10.0 (2.1) | 12.3 (2.5) |
| 2h postprandial glucose(mmol/l) | 5.0 (1.3) | 8.3 (1.6) | 12.3 (1.9) |
| Diabetes duration | 1.2 (0.9) | 1.7 (6.6) | 1.8 (5.4) |
| Diabetes meds at baseline (metformin) | 32 (23%) | 158 (35%) | 82 (45%) |
| Changed diabetes meds during follow-up | 12 (8%) | 81 (17%) | 61 (35%) |
| Center [n (row %)] | |||
| | 10 (19) | 25 (48) | 17 (33) |
| | 25 (26) | 58 (60) | 13 (14) |
| | 12 (9) | 84 (60) | 45 (32) |
| | 32 (23) | 103 (62) | 31 (15) |
| | 35 (19) | 100 (62) | 31 (19) |
| | 25 (15) | 96 (57) | 45 (27) |
| Family history, parents | 55 (40) | 168 (36) | 67 (37) |
1 Mean ± SD for continuous data and all such values unless stated otherwise.
2 We assessed the highest glucose value in each subgroup as the peak.
Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; 2h:2 hour; LDL: low density lipoproteins; HDL: high density lipoproteins.
Fig 2Glucose curve subgroups following a MMT depicting estimated mean trajectories with 95% confidence intervals identified by the latent class trajectory analysis in individuals with type 2 diabetes (n = 787).
Bayesian and Akaike Information Criterion and mean posterior probability values.
| Highest mean posterior probabilities in each class >80% | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of classes | BIC | AIC | Class 1 | Class 2 | Class 3 | Class 4 |
| 1-class | 14952.48 | 14910.47 | ||||
| 2-class | 14633.14 | 14567.79 | 0.90 | 0.90 | ||
| 3-class | 14535.27 | 14446.57 | 0.86 | 0.89 | 0.88 | |
| 4-class | 14393.16 | 14505.20 | 0.85 | 0.82 | 0.87 | 0.75 |
Abbreviations: BIC: Bayesian Information Criterion; AIC: Akaike Information Criterion.
Association between glucose curve groups and metabolic traits measured at 18 months in 668 individuals with type 2 diabetes.
| Characteristics | Glucose curve groups | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subgroup 1 | Subgroup 2 | Subgroup 3 | P-Value | |
| Number of participants | 125 | 389 | 154 | |
| Follow up (months) | 18.2 (0.5) | 18.2 (0.6) | 18.3 (0.8) | |
| HBA1c (mmol/mol) | - | |||
| Model 1 | - | 0.48 (-1.01,1.99) | 2.66 (0.76,4.57) | |
| Model 2 | - | 0.37 (-0.18,1.92) | 1.88 (-0.08,3.85) | |
| Triglycerides (mmol/l) | ||||
| Model 1 | - | 0.09 (-0.06,0.24) | 0.09 (-0.10,0.28) | |
| Model 2 | - | 0.10 (-0.06,0.25) | 0.13 (-0.05,0.31) | |
| Total cholesterol (mmol/l) | ||||
| Model 1 | - | -0.11 (-0.28,0.05) | -0.05 (-0.24,0.15) | |
| Model 2 | - | -0.10 (-0.27,0.19) | -0.02 (-0.23,0.44) | |
| LDL (mmol/l) | ||||
| Model 1 | - | -0.07 (-0.22,0.07) | -0.01 (-0.19,0.35) | |
| Model 2 | - | -0.07 (-0.22,0.08) | 0.01 (-0.17,0.19) | |
| HDL (mmol/l) | ||||
| Model 1 | - | -0.09 (-0.14,-0.04) | -0.11 (-0.17,-0.05) | |
| Model 2 | - | -0.08 (-0.13,-0.03) | -0.09 (-0.15, 0.03) | |
| Plasma insulin (pmol/l) | ||||
| Model 1 | - | -3.24 (-15.17,8.68) | -11.50 (-25.62,2.62) | |
| Model 2 | - | -5.06 (-17.85,7.73) | -15.88 (-31.08,0.68) | |
| Fasting glucose (mmol/l) | ||||
| Model 1 | - | 0.12 (-0.19,0.43) | 0.79 (0.39,1.18) | |
| Model 2 | - | 0.06 (-0.26,0.38) | 0.59 (0.19,0.99) | |
1 Values are Beta coefficients (95% confidence intervals).
2 Variables were log transformed before analysis.
Abbreviations: HbA1c: glycated haemoglobin; T2D: type 2 diabetes. Model 1 is adjusted for age, sex, study center, baseline values and follow up. Model 2 is adjusted for model 1 plus DM medication, family history of parents DM status, DM duration, physical activity and smoking status. P-values (significance level <0.05) remained robust after Bonferroni correction for multiple testing.
Fig 3Glucose curve subgroups following a MMT depicting estimated mean trajectories of the 4 group solution identified by the latent class trajectory analysis in 651 individuals with type 2 diabetes at 18 months of follow-up.
Comparisons of subgroups identified at baseline and at follow-up.
| Baseline groups [n(row%)] | Follow-up groups | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subgroup 1 | Subgroup 2 | Subgroup 3 | Subgroup 4 | |
| Subgroup 1 | 78 (62) | 42 (34) | 5 (4) | 0 (0) |
| Subgroup 2 | 104 (27) | 220 (57) | 61 (16) | 1 (0) |
| Subgroup 3 | 8 (6) | 55 (40) | 67 (48) | 10 (7) |