4.7 Article

The progression of cardiometabolic disease: Validation of a new cardiometabolic disease staging system applicable to obesity

Journal

OBESITY
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 110-118

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/oby.20585

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Merit Review program of the Department of Veterans Affairs
  2. National Institutes of Health [DK-038765, DK-083562]
  3. UAB Diabetes Research Center [P60-DK079626]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To validate a Cardiometabolic Disease Staging (CMDS) system for assigning risk level for diabetes, and all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality. Design and Methods Two large national cohorts, CARDIA and NHANES III, were used to validate CMDS. CMDS: Stage 0: metabolically healthy; Stage 1: one or two metabolic syndrome risk factors [other than impaired fasting glucose (IFG)]; Stage 2: IFG or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or metabolic syndrome (without IFG); Stage 3: two of three (IFG, IGT, and/or metabolic syndrome); and Stage 4: type 2 diabetes mellitus/CVD. Results In the CARDIA study, compared with Stage 0 metabolically healthy subjects, adjusted risk for diabetes exponentially increased from Stage 1 [hazard ratio (HR) 2.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.76-4.55], to Stage 2 (HR 8.06, 95% CI 4.91-13.2), to Stage 3 (HR 23.5, 95% CI 13.7-40.1) (P for trend <0.001). In NHANES III, both cumulative incidence and multivariable adjusted HRs markedly increased for both all-cause and CVD mortality with advancement of the risk stage from Stages 0 to 4. Adjustment for body mass index (BMI) minimally affected the risks for diabetes and all-cause/CVD mortality using CMDS. Conclusion CMDS can discriminate a wide range of risk for diabetes, CVD mortality, and all-cause mortality independent of BMI, and should be studied as a risk assessment tool to guide interventions that prevent and treat cardiometabolic disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available