Evidence Hub

Different Contributions of Dyslipidemia and Obesity to the Natural History of Type 2 Diabetes: 3-Year Cohort Study in China

Lu Liu, Xiao-Ling Guan, Zhong-Shang Yuan, Meng Zhao, Qiu Li, Xu Zhang, Hai-Qing Zhang, Dong-Mei Zheng et al.

Journal of Diabetes Research, 2019

17 citations

Abstract

Aim It is known that different stages of type 2 diabetes represent distinct pathophysiological changes, but how the spectrum of risk factors varies at different stages is not yet clarified. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare the effect of different metabolic variables on the natural history of type 2 diabetes. Methods A total of 5,213 nondiabetic (normal glucose tolerance (NGT) and prediabetes) Chinese older than 40 years participated this prospective cohort study, and 4,577 completed the 3-year follow-up. Glycemic status was determined by standard oral glucose tolerance test both at enrollment and follow-up visit. Predictors for conversion in glycemic status were studied in a corresponding subcohort using the multiple logistic regression analysis. Results The incidence of prediabetes and diabetes of the cohort was 93.6 and 42.2 per 1,000 person-years, respectively. After a 3-year follow-up, 33.1% of prediabetes patients regressed to NGT. The predictive weight of body mass index (BMI), serum triglyceride, total cholesterol, and systolic blood pressure in different paths of conversions among diabetes, prediabetes, and NGT differed. Specifically, BMI was the strongest predictor for regression from prediabetes to NGT, while triglyceride was most prominent for onset of diabetes. One SD increase in serum triglyceride was associated with a 1.29- (95% CI 1.10–1.52; P = 0.002) or 1.12- (95% CI 1.01–1.27; P = 0.039) fold higher risk of diabetes for individuals with NGT or…

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.

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