| Literature DB >> 35721707 |
Jing-Wan Qi1, Bing Huang2,3, Shuang Wang2,3, Dan Song2,3, Jing Xu2,3, Ying Cui2,3, Bin Guo1.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the relationship between plasma vitamin D2(VD2) and type 2 diabetes(T2DM). Method: Data from electronic medical records of 797 inpatients treated at Sun Yat Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University between June 24, 2019 and December 24, 2020 were collected, and a total of 596 patients were enrolled after screening based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients were divided into diabetic and non-diabetic groups according to whether they had T2DM. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was finally selected for the analysis of differences between groups according to the distribution of patients' plasma VD2, and logistic regression models were used to find the corresponding influencing factors. Result: Of the 596 hospitalized patients, 138 (23.15%) were diagnosed with T2DM. The Wilcoxon test showed no statistically significant difference in plasma VD2 concentrations between the T2DM and non-T2DM groups (p=0.833). After adjustment for confounders by multivariate logistic regression, there was still no significant difference in plasma VD2 concentrations between the two groups (P=0.316, OR: 1.15 (0.88,1.49)). The uncorrelated relationship between VD2 and T2DM was not found to change after incorporating 12 indicators, including demographic characteristics, laboratory indicators and complications, into the logistic regression model by 3 steps, even the OR (1.08 (0.92,1.26)) did not change in the 3 models. Similarly, the adjusted ORs agreed that there was no statistical association between VD2 and T2DM.Entities:
Keywords: China; metabolism; plasma VD2; relationship; type 2 diabetes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35721707 PMCID: PMC9198404 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.897316
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ISSN: 1664-2392 Impact factor: 6.055
Figure 1Article Flow Chart.
Clinical and biochemical characteristics of participants according to the occurrence of T2DM.
| Variables | T2DM (138) | Non-T2DM (458) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 61.00 (55.00, 68.00) | 58.00 (49.00, 65.00) | 0.002 |
| Gender (Male) | 74 (53.62%) | 201 (43.89%) | 0.056 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 25.99 ± 3.09 | 24.36 ± 3.43 | <0.001 |
| BMI<18.5 | 1 (0.72%) | 14 (3.06%) | <0.001 |
| BMI≥18.5 and<24 | 24 (17.39%) | 113 (24.67%) | |
| BMI≥24 and<28 | 89 (64.49%) | 297 (64.85%) | |
| BMI≥28 | 24 (17.39%) | 34 (7.42%) | |
| Smoking | 32 (23.19%) | 64 (13.97%) | 0.014 |
| Drinking | 28 (20.29%) | 73 (15.94%) | 0.287 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 131.81 ± 18.11 | 127.92 ± 17.83 | 0.004 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 82.54 ± 9.42 | 81.50 ± 10.81 | 0.091 |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) | 1.21 (0.99, 1.44) | 1.33 (1.14, 1.60) | <0.001 |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 2.75 (2.18, 3.33) | 2.98 (2.38, 3.52) | 0.022 |
| CHOL (mmol/L) | 4.90 (4.19, 5.69) | 5.10 (4.50, 5.95) | 0.047 |
| VD2 (ng/L) | 1.02 ± 1.33 | 0.91 ± 1.09 | 0.833 |
| CHD | 20 (14.49%) | 24 (5.24%) | <0.001 |
| Heart failure | 4 (2.90%) | 4 (0.87%) | 0.088 |
| DR | 18 (13.04%) | 3 (0.66%) | <0.001 |
| DN | 15 (10.87%) | 3 (0.66%) | <0.001 |
| dyslipidemia | 94 (68.12%) | 305 (66.59%) | 0.818 |
Adjusted P value and odd ratio of VD2 and T2DM.
| Model | crude OR(95%CI) | adj. OR(95%CI) | P (LR-test) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Model1 | 1.08 (0.92,1.26) | 1.08 (0.92,1.26) | 0.371 |
| Model2 | 1.08 (0.92,1.26) | 1.14 (0.88,1.47) | 0.338 |
| Model3 | 1.08 (0.92,1.26) | 1.15 (0.88,1.49) | 0.316 |
Model 1 adjusted for demographic characteristics (Age, BMI, smoking).
Model 2, adjusted for demographic characteristics (Age, BMI, smoking) and laboratory indicators (SBP, HDL-C, LDL-C, CHOL).
Model 3 adjusted for demographic characteristics (Age, BMI, smoking) and laboratory indicators (SBP, HDL-C, LDL-C, CHOL) and complications (coronary heart disease (CHD).