4.3 Article

Sex hormone-binding globulin levels and metabolic syndrome and its features in adolescents#

期刊

PEDIATRIC DIABETES
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 188-194

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-5448.2009.00559.x

关键词

adolescents; HOMA; insulin; MS; SHBG

资金

  1. Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria [FIS 08/1189]
  2. Fundacion de Investigacion Medica Mutua Madrilena Automovilistica
  3. Conchita Rabago Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Low levels of sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) are associated with obesity, insulin resistance, and metabolic syndrome (MS) in men and women, and it has been suggested that SHBG could be a useful marker for MS risk. Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship of SHBG levels with MS and its components in Spanish adolescents. Methods: The sample population of this cross-sectional study was comprised of 386 male and 429 female adolescents, aged 12-16 yr. Anthropometric parameters and blood pressure (BP) were measured. Total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, insulin, glucose, and SHBG levels were determined. The pediatric International Diabetes Federation (IDF) definition was used to classify adolescents for MS. Results: SHBG levels were lower in adolescents with MS or with some MS features. More than 90% of the abdominally obese adolescents were in the lowest and medium SHBG tertiles. In girls, BP was significantly higher in the lowest SHBG tertile than in the two others, whereas in boys BP levels were significantly higher in the lowest and medium tertiles than in the highest one. Insulin levels and homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index were also significantly higher in the lowest SHBG tertile than in the two others. Conclusions: The associations of SHBG with MS and its components, such as abdominal obesity, high BP or insulin levels, are already present in normal adolescents. This may suggest the possibility of using SHBG levels as a biomarker for MS risk in adolescents as well as adults.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据