| Literature DB >> 34389769 |
Jan Pieter R Koopman1,2, Swaib A Lule3,4, Christopher Zziwa4, Hellen Akurut4, Lawrence Lubyayi4, Margaret Nampijja4,5, Florence Akello4, Priscilla Balungi4, Josephine Tumusiime4, Gloria Oduru4, Alison M Elliott4,6, Emily L Webb7, John Bradley7.
Abstract
Dyslipidaemia in adolescence tracks into adulthood and is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Little is known about the effects of environmental exposures and early-life exposure to infectious diseases common to tropical regions on lipids. In 1119 early adolescent participants in the Entebbe Mother and Baby Study, we used linear regression to examine whether prenatal, childhood or adolescent factors are associated with lipid levels. Reduced high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and elevated triglyceride levels were common (prevalence 31% and 14%, respectively), but elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) or total cholesterol (TC) were rare. Current malaria infection was associated with lower mean LDL (adjusted ß - 0.51; 95% CI - 0.81, - 0.21), HDL (adjusted ß - 0.40; 95% CI - 0.56, - 0.23), and TC levels (adjusted ß - 0.62; 95% CI - 0.97, - 0.27), but higher mean triglyceride levels (geometric mean ratio (GMR) 1.47; 95% CI 1.18-1.84). Early-life asymptomatic malaria was associated with modest reductions in HDL and TC. Body mass index (BMI) was positively associated with LDL, TC, and triglycerides. No associations with helminth infection were found. Our findings suggest that early-life factors have only marginal effects on the lipid profile. Current malaria infection and BMI are strongly associated with lipids and important to consider when trying to improve the lipid profile.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34389769 PMCID: PMC8363641 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96035-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Characteristics of study participants (N = 1119).
| N (%) | Mean (SD) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level 1: Socioeconomic factors | Household SES (missing: n = 5) | Low | 142 (12.9) | |
| Middle | 642 (58.1) | |||
| High | 320 (29.0) | |||
| Maternal education (missing: n = 2) | None | 28 (2.5) | ||
| Primary | 542 (48.5) | |||
| Senior | 438 (39.2) | |||
| Tertiary | 109 (9.8) | |||
| Marital status (missing: n = 1) | Single | 116 (10.4) | ||
| Married | 967 (86.5) | |||
| Other | 35 (3.1) | |||
| Area of residence (missing: n = 3) | Urban | 770 (69.6) | ||
| Rural | 336 (30.4) | |||
| Level 2: Reproductive factors | Maternal age (years) | 14–19 | 220 (19.7) | |
| 20–24 | 429 (38.3) | |||
| 25–29 | 269 (24.0) | |||
| 30 + | 201 (18.0) | |||
| Maternal BMI (kg/m2) (missing: n = 9) | 24.1 (3.37) | |||
| Alcohol during pregnancy (missing: n = 1) | No | 775 (69.3) | ||
| Yes | 343 (30.7) | |||
| (Maternal infection) | No | 908 (81.7) | ||
| Yes | 204 (18.3) | |||
| (Maternal infection) | No | 1084 (97.5) | ||
| Yes | 28 (2.5) | |||
| (Maternal infection) | No | 1015 (91.3) | ||
| Yes | 97 (8.7) | |||
| (Maternal infection) | Hookworm (missing: n = 7) | No | 662 (59.5) | |
| Yes | 450 (40.5) | |||
| (Maternal infection) | Asymptomatic malaria (missing: n = 9) | No | 991 (90.1) | |
| Yes | 109 (9.9) | |||
| Treatment allocation 1 | Placebo | 566 (50.6) | ||
| Albendazole | 553 (49.4) | |||
| Treatment allocation 2 | Placebo | 564 (50.4) | ||
| Praziquantel | 555 (49.6) | |||
| Level 3: Perinatal factors | Sex | Female | 536 (47.9) | |
| Male | 583 (52.1) | |||
| Low birthweight (missing: n = 187) | No | 867 (93.0) | ||
| Yes | 65 (7.0) | |||
| Mode of delivery (missing: n = 2) | Vaginal | 1005 (90.0) | ||
| C-section/instrument | 112 (10.0) | |||
| Place of delivery (missing n = 1) | Hospital | 824 (73.7) | ||
| Home | 120 (10.7) | |||
| Other | 174 (15.6) | |||
| Season | Wet | 568 (50.8) | ||
| Dry | 551 (49.2) | |||
| Exclusively breastfed at 6 weeks (missing: n = 13) | No | 358 (32.4) | ||
| Yes | 748 (67.6) | |||
| Level 4: Childhood infections | Treatment allocation 3 (missing n = 12) | Placebo | 553 (50.0) | |
| Albendazole | 554 (50.0) | |||
| (Infection age ≤ 5) | No | 1076 (97.0) | ||
| Yes | 33 (3.0) | |||
| (Infection age ≤ 5) | No | 1052 (94.9) | ||
| Yes | 57 (5.1) | |||
| (Infection age ≤ 5) | No | 997 (89.9) | ||
| Yes | 112 (10.1) | |||
| (Infection age ≤ 5) | Hookworm (missing: n = 10) | No | 1085 (97.8) | |
| Yes | 24 (2.2) | |||
| (Infection age ≤ 5) | Asymptomatic malaria (missing: n = 12) | No | 983 (88.8) | |
| Yes | 124 (11.2) | |||
| (Infection age ≤ 5) | Clinical malaria | No | 474 (42.4) | |
| Yes | 645 (57.6) | |||
| (Infection age ≤ 5) | HIV exposure status | Unexposed | 1001 (89.5) | |
| Exposed, but uninfected | 100 (8.9) | |||
| Infected | 18 (1.6) | |||
| Level 5: Lifestyle factors and current infections | Age (years) | 10.4 (0.50) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 16.0 (1.88) | |||
| Tanner pubic hair growth stage (missing: n = 509) | Stage 1 | 441 (72%) | ||
| Stage 2 | 149 (24%) | |||
| Stage 3 | 20 (3%) | |||
| Tanner breast development stage, only in girls (missing: n = 262) | Stage 1 | 178 (65%) | ||
| Stage 2 | 79 (29%) | |||
| Stage 3 | 17 (6%) | |||
| (Current infection) | No | 964 (89.6) | ||
| Yes | 112 (10.4) | |||
| (Current infection) | No | 1036 (96.3) | ||
| Yes | 40 (3.7) | |||
| (Current infection) | Hookworm (missing: n = 43) | No | 1066 (99.1) | |
| Yes | 10 (0.9) | |||
| (Current infection) | Asymptomatic malaria (missing n = 30) | No | 1067 (98.0) | |
| Yes | 22 (2.0) | |||
| Days of fruit eaten/week (missing: n = 35) | None | 114 (10.5) | ||
| 1–3 | 620 (57.2) | |||
| 4–7 | 350 (32.3) | |||
| Days of vegetables eaten/week (missing: n = 33) | None | 106 (9.7) | ||
| 1–3 | 575 (52.5) | |||
| 4–7 | 415 (37.8) | |||
| Days of animal-protein eaten/week (missing: n = 9) | None | 122 (11.1) | ||
| 1–3 | 786 (71.4) | |||
| 4–7 | 192 (17.5) | |||
| Days of sugared drinks taken/week (missing: n = 26) | None | 427 (39.1) | ||
| 1–3 | 492 (45.0) | |||
| 4–7 | 174 (15.9) | |||
| Physical education at school (missing: n = 15) | No | 385 (34.9) | ||
| Yes | 719 (65.1) |
Figure 1Distribution of lipid levels into categories according to AHA guidelines.
Hierarchical multiple linear regression of risk factors for LDL.
| Crude change in LDL (mmol/L) for every one-unit increase of the exposure variable from baseline (95% CI) | p value | Adjusted change in LDL (mmol/L) for every one-unit increase of the exposure variable from baseline (95% CI) | p value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 (n = 1080) | |||||
| Low | Reference | 0.09 | Reference | 0.09 | |
| Middle | − 0.05 (− 0.17, 0.07) | − 0.08 (− 0.20, 0.05) | |||
| High | 0.05 (− 0.09, 0.18) | 0.02 (− 0.11, 0.16) | |||
| Single | − 0.05 (− 0.17, 0.08) | 0.03 | − 0.07 (− 0.20, 0.06) | 0.06 | |
| Married | Reference | Reference | |||
| Othera | − 0.30 (− 0.52, − 0.08) | − 0.26 (− 0.50, 0.02) | |||
| Model 2 (n = 1061) | Maternal BMI (kg/m2) | 0.01 (0.00–0.03) | 0.01 | 0.01 (0.00, 0.02) | 0.08 |
| Model 3 (n = 890) | |||||
| Female | Reference | 0.008 | Reference | 0.10 | |
| Male | − 0.11 (− 0.18, − 0.03) | − 0.07 (− 0.16, 0.01) | |||
| Model 4 (n = 1063) | |||||
| No | Reference | 0.05 | Reference | 0.03 | |
| Yes | 0.13 (0.00, 0.26) | 0.15 (0.02, 0.29) | |||
| No | Reference | 0.02 | Reference | 0.10 | |
| Yes | − 0.15 (− 0.27, − 0.02) | − 0.11 (− 0.24, 0.02) | |||
| Model 5 (n = 954) | BMI (kg/m2) | 0.04 (0.02, 0.06) | < 0.001 | 0.03 (0.01, 0.06) | 0.006 |
| No | Reference | < 0.001 | Reference | 0.001 | |
| Yes | − 0.53 (− 0.82, − 0.24) | − 0.51 (− 0.81, − 0.21) | |||
| None | Reference | 0.53 | Reference | 0.03 | |
| 1–3 | − 0.08 (− 0.21, 0.06) | − 0.20 (− 0.35, − 0.05) | |||
| 4–7 | − 0.07 (− 0.21, 0.07) | − 0.14 (− 0.30, 0.03) | |||
| None | Reference | 0.01 | Reference | 0.002 | |
| 1–3 | 0.06 (− 0.06, 0.19) | 0.10 (− 0.04, 0.24) | |||
| 4–7 | 0.20 (0.05, 0.35 | 0.27 (0.11, 0.44) | |||
Model 1: Age, sex + other variables at level 1.
Model 2: Age, sex, household SES, marital status + other variables at level 2.
Model 3: Age, sex, household SES, marital status, maternal BMI + other variables at level 3.
Model 4: Age, sex, household SES, marital status, maternal BMI + other variables at level 4.
Model 5: Age, sex, household SES, marital status, maternal BMI, trichuris below age of 5, malaria below age of 5 + other variables at level 5.
aOther: widowed, divorced, or separated.
Hierarchical multiple linear regression of risk factors for HDL.
| Crude change in HDL (mmol/L) for every one-unit increase of the exposure variable from baseline (95% CI) | p value | Adjusted change in HDL (mmol/L) for every one-unit increase of the exposure variable from baseline (95% CI) | p value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 (n = 1068) | |||||
| Low | Reference | < 0.001 | Reference | < 0.001 | |
| Middle | 0.06 (0.00, 0.12) | 0.05 (− 0.01, 0.12) | |||
| High | 0.14 (0.07, 0.21) | 0.13 (0.05, 0.19) | |||
| None | − 0.19 (− 0.31, − 0.06) | 0.005 | − 0.17 (− 0.30, − 0.04) | 0.03 | |
| Primary | Reference | Reference | |||
| Senior | 0.04 (− 0.01, 0.08) | 0.03 (− 0.02, 0.07) | |||
| Tertiary | 0.03 (− 0.03, 0.10) | 0.02 (− 0.06, 0.09) | |||
| Model 2 (n = 1046) | |||||
| 14–19 | Reference | 0.03 | Reference | 0.04 | |
| 20–24 | − 0.05 (− 0.11, 0.00) | − 0.04 (− 0.10, 0.02) | |||
| 25–29 | − 0.05 (− 0.11, 0.01) | − 0.03 (− 0.11, 0.05) | |||
| 30+ | 0.02 (− 0.05, 0.09) | 0.05 (− 0.05, 0.14) | |||
| No | Reference | < 0.001 | Reference | 0.01 | |
| Yes | − 0.07 (− 0.12, − 0.03) | − 0.06 (− 0.10, − 0.01) | |||
| No | Reference | 0.08 | Reference | 0.08 | |
| Yes | − 0.04 (− 0.08, 0.01) | − 0.04 (− 0.08, 0.00) | |||
| Model 3 (n = 882) | |||||
| Vaginal | Reference | 0.004 | Reference | 0.01 | |
| C-section/instrument | 0.10 (0.03, 0.17) | 0.10 (0.02, 0.17) | |||
| Wet | Reference | 0.03 | Reference | 0.007 | |
| Dry | − 0.04 (− 0.08, 0.00) | − 0.06 (− 0.11, − 0.02) | |||
| No | Reference | 0.01 | Reference | 0.04 | |
| Yes | − 0.11(− 0.19. − 0.03) | − 0.08 (− 0.15, 0.00) | |||
| Model 4 (n = 875) | |||||
| No | Reference | 0.005 | Reference | 0.04 | |
| Yes | − 0.09 (− 0.16, − 0.03) | − 0.08 (− 0.16, − 0.01) | |||
| Model 5 (n = 784) | |||||
| No | Reference | < 0.001 | Reference | < 0.001 | |
| Yes | − 0.49 (− 0.64, − 0.35) | − 0.40 (− 0.56, − 0.23) | |||
| None | Reference | 0.98 | Reference | 0.09 | |
| 1–3 | 0.00 (− 0.07, 0.07) | − 0.09 (− 0.18, 0.00) | |||
| 4–7 | 0.00 (− 0.07, 0.07) | − 0.09 (− 0.18, 0.04) | |||
| None | Reference | < 0.001 | Reference | < 0.001 | |
| 1–3 | 0.02 (− 0.03, 0.06) | 0.01 (− 0.04, 0.07) | |||
| 4–7 | 0.13 (0.07, 0.19) | 0.13 (0.06, 0.20) | |||
Model 1: Age, sex + other variables at level 1.
Model 2: Age, sex, household SES, maternal education + other variables at level 2.
Model 3: Age, sex, household SES, maternal education, maternal age, maternal hookworm infection, treatment allocation to praziquantel + other variables at level 3.
Model 4: Age, sex, household SES, maternal education, maternal age, maternal hookworm infection, treatment allocation to praziquantel, low birthweight, mode of delivery, season + other variables at level 4.
Model 5: Age, sex, household SES, maternal education, maternal age, maternal hookworm infection, treatment allocation to praziquantel, low birthweight, mode of delivery, season, malaria infection below the age of 5 + other variables at level 5.
Hierarchical multiple linear regression of risk factors for total cholesterol.
| Crude change in TC (mmol/L) for every one-unit increase of the exposure variable from baseline (95% CI) | p value | Adjusted change in TC (mmol/L) for every one-unit increase of the exposure variable from baseline (95% CI) | p value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 (n = 1098) | |||||
| Low | Reference | 0.02 | Reference | 0.03 | |
| Middle | − 0.01 (− 0.15, 0.13) | − 0.04 (− 0.19, − 0.11) | |||
| High | 0.14 (− 0.01, 0.30) | 0.10 (− 0.05, 0.26) | |||
| Single | 0.01 (− 0.14, 0.16) | 0.02 | − 0.01 (− 0.16, 0.14) | 0.08 | |
| Married | Reference | Reference | |||
| Othera | − 0.39 (− 0.65, − 0.12) | − 0.32 (− 0.61, − 0.04) | |||
| Model 2 (n = 1047) | |||||
| 14–19 | Reference | 0.12 | Reference | 0.08 | |
| 20–24 | − 0.04 (− 0.17, 0.09) | 0.01 (− 0.13, 0.16) | |||
| 25–29 | 0.11 (− 0.03, 0.25) | 0.19 (0.01, 0.37) | |||
| 30 + | 0.03 (− 0.12, 0.18) | 0.14 (− 0.07, 0.35) | |||
| No | Reference | 0.05 | Reference | 0.08 | |
| Yes | − 0.16 (− 0.31, 0.00) | − 0.15 (− 0.31, − 0.02) | |||
| Model 3 (n = 885) | |||||
| Female | Reference | 0.005 | Reference | 0.08 | |
| Male | − 0.13 (− 0.22, 0.04) | − 0.09 (− 0.20, 0.01) | |||
| Wet | Reference | 0.24 | Reference | 0.04 | |
| Dry | − 0.06 (− 0.15, 0.04) | − 0.11 (− 0.21, 0.00) | |||
| Model 4 (n = 1058) | |||||
| No | Reference | 0.02 | Reference | 0.07 | |
| Yes | − 0.17 (− 0.32, − 0.02) | − 0.14 (− 0.30, 0.01) | |||
| Model 5 (n = 952) | BMI (kg/m2) | 0.05 (0.03, 0.08) | < 0.001 | 0.04 (0.02, 0.08) | 0.001 |
| No | Reference | < 0.001 | Reference | < 0.001 | |
| Yes | − 0.70 (− 1.04, − 0.37) | − 0.62 (− 0.97, − 0.27) | |||
| None | Reference | 0.43 | Reference | 0.07 | |
| 1–3 | − 0.07 (− 0.23, 0.08) | − 0.21 (− 0.39, − 0.03) | |||
| 4–7 | − 0.11 (− 0.28, 0.06) | − 0.19 (− 0.38, 0.00) | |||
| None | Reference | 0.02 | Reference | 0.001 | |
| 1–3 | 0.08 (− 0.07, 0.23) | 0.11 (− 0.06, 0.27) | |||
| 4–7 | 0.23 (0.05, 0.41) | 0.33 (0.13, 0.53) | |||
Model 1: Age, sex + other variables at level 1.
Model 2: Age, sex, household SES, marital status + other variables at level 2.
Model 3: Age, sex, household SES, marital status, maternal age, maternal malaria infection + other variables at level 3.
Model 4: Age, sex, household SES, marital status, maternal age, maternal malaria infection, season + other variables at level 4.
Model 5: Age, sex, household SES, marital status, maternal age, maternal malaria infection, season, malaria infection below the age of 5 + other variables at level 5.
TC total cholesterol.
aOther: widowed, divorced, or separated.
Hierarchical multiple linear regression of risk factors for triglyceride levels.
| Crude geometric mean ratio (95% CI) | P value | Adjusted geometric mean ratio (95% CI) | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 2 (n = 1077) | |||||
| 14–19 | Reference | 0.08 | Reference | 0.01 | |
| 20–24 | 1.03 (0.98, 1.11) | 1.04 (0.96, 1.12) | |||
| 25–29 | 1.10 (1.02, 1.19) | 1.10 (1.00, 1.22) | |||
| 30 + | 0.97 (0.89, 1.05) | 0.97 (0.86, 1.09) | |||
| No | Reference | 0.07 | Reference | 0.08 | |
| Yes | 1.05 (1.00, 1.11) | 1.05 (0.99, 1.11) | |||
| Model 3 (n = 912) | |||||
| No | Reference | 0.07 | Reference | 0.05 | |
| Yes | 1.11 (1.00, 1.24) | 1.12 (1.00, 1.25) | |||
| Hospital | Reference | 0.09 | Reference | 0.06 | |
| Home | 1.01 (0.93, 1.10) | 0.91 (0.76, 1.08) | |||
| Other | 1.08 (1.01, 1.16) | 1.10 (1.00, 1.21) | |||
| Model 4 (n = 905) | |||||
| No | Reference | 0.08 | Reference | 0.05 | |
| Yes | 1.05 (1.00, 1.12) | 1.06 (1.00, 1.12) | |||
| Model 5 (n = 807) | BMI (kg/m2) | 1.02 (1.01, 1.04) | < 0.001 | 1.03 (1.01, 1.05) | < 0.001 |
| No | Reference | < 0.001 | Reference | 0.001 | |
| Yes | 1.49 (1.24, 1.80) | 1.47 (1.18, 1.84) | |||
Model 2: Age, sex + other variables at level 2.
Model 3: Age, sex, maternal age, maternal hookworm infection + other variables at level 3.
Model 4: Age, sex, maternal age, maternal hookworm infection, low birthweight, place of delivery + other variables at level 4.
Model 5: Age, sex, maternal age, maternal hookworm infection, low birthweight, place of delivery, treatment allocation to albendazole (child) + other variables at level 5.
Figure 2Proposed hierarchical conceptual framework for relationship between risk factors and lipid levels in adolescents. The boxes with grey shading indicate that these factors also depend on sex and age. The arrows represent the hypothesised relationships between the factors and can be bi-directional.