4.7 Article

Plasma adiponectin levels and type 2 diabetes risk: a nested case-control study in a Chinese population and an updated meta-analysis

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-18709-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Medical Research Council, Singapore [NMRC/CIRG/1354/2013, NMRC/CSA/0055/2013]
  2. National Institutes of Health, USA [RO1 CA144034, UM1 CA182876]
  3. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFC0907504]
  4. MRC [MR/L003120/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Results from previous prospective studies assessing the relation between adiponectin and type 2 diabetes (T2D) were not entirely consistent, and evidence in Chinese population is scarce. Moreover, the last meta-analysis did not examine the impact of metabolic variables on the adiponectin-T2D association. Therefore, we prospectively evaluated the adiponectin-T2D association among 571 T2D cases and 571 age-sex-matched controls nested within the Singapore Chinese Health Study (SCHS). Furthermore, we conducted an updated meta-analysis by searching prospective studies on Pubmed till September 2016. In the SCHS, the odds ratio of T2D, comparing the highest versus lowest tertile of adiponectin levels, was 0.30 (95% confidence interval: 0.17, 0.55) in the fully-adjusted model. The relation was stronger among heavier participants (body mass index >= 23 kg/m(2)) compared to their leaner counterparts (P for interaction = 0.041). In a meta-analysis of 34 prospective studies, the pooled relative risk was 0.53 (95% confidence interval: 0.47, 0.61) comparing the extreme tertiles of adiponectin with moderate heterogeneity (I-2 = 48.7%, P = 0.001). The adiponectin-T2D association remained unchanged after adjusting for inflammation and dyslipidemia markers, but substantially attenuated with adjustment for insulin sensitivity and/or glycaemia markers. Overall evidence indicates that higher adiponectin levels are associated with decreased T2D risk in Chinese and other populations.

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

4.7
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