Evidence Hub

Atherogenic index of plasma and its 5-year changes associated with type 2 diabetes risk: a 10-Year cohort study

Liuding Wen, Yu-Ying Wu, Xueru Fu, Weifeng Huo, Aijun Xu, Canjie Piao, Jingli Kong, Ya-Qin Su et al.

Cardiovascular Diabetology, 2025

14,968 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

The global burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasing, particularly in resource-limited settings like rural China. Although traditional blood glucose remains an essential measurement for diabetes screening, Atherogenic Index of Plasma (AIP) is emerging as a complementary predictor of T2DM risk. Over time, however, the association between AIP and T2DM risk remains insufficiently understood. To investigate the association between baseline AIP levels and its 5-year changes with the risk of T2DM in a rural Chinese cohort. This prospective cohort study enrolled 14,968 participants without baseline diabetes from a rural Chinese population. AIP was calculated (log(TG/HDL-C)) and used to classify participant results into quartiles. We conducted multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, restricted cubic spline analyses, subgroup analyses, and sensitivity analyses to determine the association between baseline AIP and 5-year changes in AIP with the 10-year risk of T2DM. Over a median follow-up of 10.4 years, 2,165(N = 14,968) participants developed T2DM. The hazard ratios [aHRs; 95% confidence interval (CI)] for T2DM increased with quartiles 2, 3, and 4 (versus quartile 1) of AIP: 1.17 (1.00–1.38), 1.38 (1.18–1.62), and 1.96 (1.68–2.29), respectively (p for trend < 0.0001) after multivariable adjustment. Regarding 5-year changes in AIP, participants with increased AIP levels had a 18% higher risk of developing T2DM (aHRs 1.18, 95% CIs: 1.00–1.40) compared…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 14,968 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free