24 research outputs found
which marker is best for prediction? Pooled analysis of four German population-based cohort studies and comparison with a nationwide cohort study
Objective To compare the association between different anthropometric
measurements and incident type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to assess their
predictive ability in different regions of Germany. Methods Data of 10 258
participants from 4 prospective population-based cohorts were pooled to assess
the association of body weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference
(WC), waist-to-hip-ratio (WHR) and waist-to-height-ratio (WHtR) with incident
T2DM by calculating HRs of the crude, adjusted and standardised markers, as
well as providing receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Differences
between HRs and ROCs for the different anthropometric markers were calculated
to compare their predictive ability. In addition, data of 3105 participants
from the nationwide survey were analysed separately using the same methods to
provide a nationally representative comparison. Results Strong associations
were found for each anthropometric marker and incidence of T2DM. Among the
standardised anthropometric measures, we found the strongest effect on
incident T2DM for WC and WHtR in the pooled sample (HR for 1 SD difference in
WC 1.97, 95% CI 1.75 to 2.22, HR for WHtR 1.93, 95% CI 1.71 to 2.17 in women)
and in female DEGS participants (HR for WC 2.24, 95% CI 1.91 to 2.63, HR for
WHtR 2.10, 95% CI 1.81 to 2.44), whereas the strongest association in men was
found for WHR among DEGS participants (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.78). ROC
analysis showed WHtR to be the strongest predictor for incident T2DM.
Differences in HR and ROCs between the different markers confirmed WC and WHtR
to be the best predictors of incident T2DM. Findings were consistent across
study regions and age groups (<65 vs ≥65 years). Conclusions We found stronger
associations between anthropometric markers that reflect abdominal obesity
(ie, WC and WHtR) and incident T2DM than for BMI and weight. The use of these
measurements in risk prediction should be encouraged
Blood pressure and lipid management fall far short in persons with type 2 diabetes: results from the DIAB-CORE Consortium including six German population-based studies
Background: Although most deaths among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are attributable to cardiovascular disease, modifiable cardiovascular risk factors appear to be inadequately treated in medical practice. The aim of this study was to describe hypertension, dyslipidemia and medical treatment of these conditions in a large population-based sample. Methods: The present analysis was based on the DIAB-CORE project, in which data from five regional population-based studies and one nationwide German study were pooled. All studies were conducted between 1997 and 2006. We assessed the frequencies of risk factors and co-morbidities, especially hypertension and dyslipidemia, in participants with and without T2D. The odds of no or insufficient treatment and the odds of pharmacotherapy were computed using multivariable logistic regression models. Types of medication regimens were described. Results: The pooled data set comprised individual data of 15, 071 participants aged 45–74 years, including 1287 (8.5%) participants with T2D. Subjects with T2D were significantly more likely to have untreated or insufficiently treated hypertension, i.e. blood pressure of > = 140/90 mmHg (OR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.26-1.61) and dyslipidemia i.e. a total cholesterol/HDL-cholesterol ratio > = 5 (OR = 1.80, 95% CI 1.59-2.04) than participants without T2D. Untreated or insufficiently treated blood pressure was observed in 48.9% of participants without T2D and in 63.6% of participants with T2D. In this latter group, 28.0% did not receive anti-hypertensive medication and 72.0% were insufficiently treated. In non-T2D participants, 28.8% had untreated or insufficiently treated dyslipidemia. Of all participants with T2D 42.5% had currently elevated lipids, 80.3% of these were untreated and 19.7% were insufficiently treated. Conclusions: Blood pressure and lipid management fall short especially in persons with T2D across Germany. The importance of sufficient risk factor control besides blood glucose monitoring in diabetes care needs to be emphasized in order to prevent cardiovascular sequelae and premature death
Anthropometric markers and their association with incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: which marker is best for prediction? Pooled analysis of four German population-based cohort studies and comparison with a nationwide cohort study
Objective: To compare the association between different anthropometric measurements and incident type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to assess their predictive ability in different regions of Germany. Methods: Data of 10 258 participants from 4 prospective population-based cohorts were pooled to assess the association of body weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), waist-to-hip-ratio (WHR) and waist-to-height-ratio (WHtR) with incident T2DM by calculating HRs of the crude, adjusted and standardised markers, as well as providing receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Differences between HRs and ROCs for the different anthropometric markers were calculated to compare their predictive ability. In addition, data of 3105 participants from the nationwide survey were analysed separately using the same methods to provide a nationally representative comparison. Results: Strong associations were found for each anthropometric marker and incidence of T2DM. Among the standardised anthropometric measures, we found the strongest effect on incident T2DM for WC and WHtR in the pooled sample (HR for 1 SD difference in WC 1.97, 95% CI 1.75 to 2.22, HR for WHtR 1.93, 95% CI 1.71 to 2.17 in women) and in female DEGS participants (HR for WC 2.24, 95% CI 1.91 to 2.63, HR for WHtR 2.10, 95% CI 1.81 to 2.44), whereas the strongest association in men was found for WHR among DEGS participants (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.78). ROC analysis showed WHtR to be the strongest predictor for incident T2DM. Differences in HR and ROCs between the different markers confirmed WC and WHtR to be the best predictors of incident T2DM. Findings were consistent across study regions and age groups
