4.7 Article

γ-glutamyltransferase is a predictor of incident diabetes and hypertension:: The coronary artery risk development in young adults (CARDIA) study

期刊

CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 49, 期 8, 页码 1358-1366

出版社

AMER ASSOC CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1373/49.8.1358

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [N01 HC 48049, N01 HC 48048, N01 HC 48050, R01 HL 53560, N01 HC 48047, R01 HL053560] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: gamma-Glutamyltransferase (GGT), which maintains cellular concentrations of glutathione, may be a marker of oxidative stress, and GGT itself may produce oxidative stress. We performed a prospective study to examine whether serum GGT predicts diabetes and hypertension. Methods: Study participants were 4844 black and white men and women 18-30 years of age in 1985-1986; they were reexamined 2, 5, 7, 10, and 15 years later. Year 0 GGT cutpoints were 12, 17, 25, and 36 U/L (overall 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles; the laboratory cutpoints for abnormal are 40 U/L in women and 50 U/L in men). We deleted 32 participants with prevalent diabetes and 140 participants with prevalent hypertension from the respective incidence analyses. Results: After adjustment for study center, race, sex, and age in proportional hazards regression, the hazard ratios across year 0 GGT categories were 1.0. 1.6, 1.7, 4.0 (95% confidence interval, 2.0-8.1), and 5.5 (2.7-11.1) for 15-year incident diabetes and 1.0, 1.2, 1.7 (1.2-2.2), 2.3 (1.7-3.2). and 2.3 (1.7-3.2) for hypertension. Additional adjustment for year 0 alcohol consumption, body mass index, cigarette smoking, and physical activity attenuated this relationship, but GGT remained a significant predictor. Conclusions: Serum GGT within a range regarded as physiologically normal is associated with incident diabetes and hypertension. Considering known functionality of GGT, these associations are consistent with a role for oxidative stress in risk for diabetes and hypertension. (C) 2003 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.

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