Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/03/2022 - 15:19

 

A scoring system that addresses severity of metabolic syndrome successfully predicted risk for future coronary heart disease in individuals with type 2 diabetes; the system identified the association independent of hemoglobin A1c levels, according to work presented at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

The findings may point toward an additional surveillance tool for coronary heart disease (CHD) in patients who have type 2 diabetes, according to Mark D. DeBoer, MD, and his coauthors, who had not previously applied the metabolic syndrome severity scoring system to individuals with diabetes.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Mark D. DeBoer

When broken down by quartile, increasing severity of metabolic syndrome for individuals with type 2 diabetes was associated with an increased risk of future cardiovascular disease, even when blood glucose levels were not included in calculation of metabolic syndrome (P less than .001 with glucose levels and P = .001 without glucose levels).

Dr. DeBoer, of the department of pediatrics and the Child Health Research Center at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, and his coinvestigators, had previously developed the continuous scoring system for metabolic syndrome. The system incorporates the components that form the diagnostic criteria for metabolic syndrome – waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, and levels of HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood glucose.

However, rather than using cutoffs for a dichotomous score of 0 or 1 for each criterion, the investigators developed sex- and race/ethnicity-specific scores of severity. This approach may identify metabolic dysregulation that would not be apparent if measures of several different criteria were just short of missing the cutoff, for example.

“These scores are standardized like z scores such that 2.0 is two standard deviations above the mean,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues. Thus, the scores are dubbed “MetS z scores;” a free online calculator is available.

In developing the model, the investigators performed single-factor confirmatory factor analyses using data from 6,870 adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohort, developing scores specific for non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics.

 

 


In the present work, MetS z scores were applied to data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, which followed 8,660 participants aged 45-64 years for 12 years, with adjudicated follow-up for cardiovascular incidents up to 20 years. Only participants with no baseline CHD and with complete metabolic syndrome risk factor data were included.

Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators compared MetS z scores for patients who were never diagnosed with diabetes, those who had diabetes at baseline, and those who had an incident diagnosis of type 2 diabetes at the second, third, or fourth ARIC study visit. They found that individuals who entered ARIC with diabetes had the highest z scores, while those with incident type 2 diabetes had higher baseline scores, compared with those who never had a diabetes diagnosis. The difference in z scores was lowest for white men, while black men and women “exhibited increased scores after diagnosis, suggesting inadequate treatment,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues.

The investigators also looked for an association between MetS z scores and the primary outcome measure, time to incident CHD, calculating the z score both with and without the inclusion of glucose levels.

Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues analyzed the association between MetS z score and CHD for patients with and without type 2 diabetes. They found metabolic syndrome severity as assessed by MetS z score was independently associated with increased risk for CHD in participants with diabetes (P = .001).

 

 


“We additionally assessed whether the [metabolic syndrome] z score predicted future CHD following adjustment for HbA1c and when using a similar score derived without glucose as a component,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators.

When metabolic syndrome severity as assessed by z score was broken into quartiles, “increasing MetS severity (by quartile) increased the risk of future CVD [cardiovascular disease], both using the traditional 5-component MetS z score and the no-glucose score,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues. “This continuous MetS severity z score confers risk for future CHD among individuals with type 2 diabetes, both with the traditional MetS score and a score without glucose. These findings were independent of HbA1c and may relate to risk associated with the pathophysiologic processes underlying MetS.”

The investigators plan to integrate an automated metabolic syndrome severity score calculator into the electronic medical record “to identify and track risk in individuals over time and identify those who may benefit from increased intervention,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators.

The National Institutes of Health funded the study. Dr. DeBoer reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: DeBoer MD et al. ENDO 2018, Abstract SAT-015.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

A scoring system that addresses severity of metabolic syndrome successfully predicted risk for future coronary heart disease in individuals with type 2 diabetes; the system identified the association independent of hemoglobin A1c levels, according to work presented at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

The findings may point toward an additional surveillance tool for coronary heart disease (CHD) in patients who have type 2 diabetes, according to Mark D. DeBoer, MD, and his coauthors, who had not previously applied the metabolic syndrome severity scoring system to individuals with diabetes.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Mark D. DeBoer

When broken down by quartile, increasing severity of metabolic syndrome for individuals with type 2 diabetes was associated with an increased risk of future cardiovascular disease, even when blood glucose levels were not included in calculation of metabolic syndrome (P less than .001 with glucose levels and P = .001 without glucose levels).

Dr. DeBoer, of the department of pediatrics and the Child Health Research Center at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, and his coinvestigators, had previously developed the continuous scoring system for metabolic syndrome. The system incorporates the components that form the diagnostic criteria for metabolic syndrome – waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, and levels of HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood glucose.

However, rather than using cutoffs for a dichotomous score of 0 or 1 for each criterion, the investigators developed sex- and race/ethnicity-specific scores of severity. This approach may identify metabolic dysregulation that would not be apparent if measures of several different criteria were just short of missing the cutoff, for example.

“These scores are standardized like z scores such that 2.0 is two standard deviations above the mean,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues. Thus, the scores are dubbed “MetS z scores;” a free online calculator is available.

In developing the model, the investigators performed single-factor confirmatory factor analyses using data from 6,870 adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohort, developing scores specific for non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics.

 

 


In the present work, MetS z scores were applied to data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, which followed 8,660 participants aged 45-64 years for 12 years, with adjudicated follow-up for cardiovascular incidents up to 20 years. Only participants with no baseline CHD and with complete metabolic syndrome risk factor data were included.

Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators compared MetS z scores for patients who were never diagnosed with diabetes, those who had diabetes at baseline, and those who had an incident diagnosis of type 2 diabetes at the second, third, or fourth ARIC study visit. They found that individuals who entered ARIC with diabetes had the highest z scores, while those with incident type 2 diabetes had higher baseline scores, compared with those who never had a diabetes diagnosis. The difference in z scores was lowest for white men, while black men and women “exhibited increased scores after diagnosis, suggesting inadequate treatment,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues.

The investigators also looked for an association between MetS z scores and the primary outcome measure, time to incident CHD, calculating the z score both with and without the inclusion of glucose levels.

Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues analyzed the association between MetS z score and CHD for patients with and without type 2 diabetes. They found metabolic syndrome severity as assessed by MetS z score was independently associated with increased risk for CHD in participants with diabetes (P = .001).

 

 


“We additionally assessed whether the [metabolic syndrome] z score predicted future CHD following adjustment for HbA1c and when using a similar score derived without glucose as a component,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators.

When metabolic syndrome severity as assessed by z score was broken into quartiles, “increasing MetS severity (by quartile) increased the risk of future CVD [cardiovascular disease], both using the traditional 5-component MetS z score and the no-glucose score,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues. “This continuous MetS severity z score confers risk for future CHD among individuals with type 2 diabetes, both with the traditional MetS score and a score without glucose. These findings were independent of HbA1c and may relate to risk associated with the pathophysiologic processes underlying MetS.”

The investigators plan to integrate an automated metabolic syndrome severity score calculator into the electronic medical record “to identify and track risk in individuals over time and identify those who may benefit from increased intervention,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators.

The National Institutes of Health funded the study. Dr. DeBoer reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: DeBoer MD et al. ENDO 2018, Abstract SAT-015.

 

A scoring system that addresses severity of metabolic syndrome successfully predicted risk for future coronary heart disease in individuals with type 2 diabetes; the system identified the association independent of hemoglobin A1c levels, according to work presented at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

The findings may point toward an additional surveillance tool for coronary heart disease (CHD) in patients who have type 2 diabetes, according to Mark D. DeBoer, MD, and his coauthors, who had not previously applied the metabolic syndrome severity scoring system to individuals with diabetes.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Mark D. DeBoer

When broken down by quartile, increasing severity of metabolic syndrome for individuals with type 2 diabetes was associated with an increased risk of future cardiovascular disease, even when blood glucose levels were not included in calculation of metabolic syndrome (P less than .001 with glucose levels and P = .001 without glucose levels).

Dr. DeBoer, of the department of pediatrics and the Child Health Research Center at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, and his coinvestigators, had previously developed the continuous scoring system for metabolic syndrome. The system incorporates the components that form the diagnostic criteria for metabolic syndrome – waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, and levels of HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood glucose.

However, rather than using cutoffs for a dichotomous score of 0 or 1 for each criterion, the investigators developed sex- and race/ethnicity-specific scores of severity. This approach may identify metabolic dysregulation that would not be apparent if measures of several different criteria were just short of missing the cutoff, for example.

“These scores are standardized like z scores such that 2.0 is two standard deviations above the mean,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues. Thus, the scores are dubbed “MetS z scores;” a free online calculator is available.

In developing the model, the investigators performed single-factor confirmatory factor analyses using data from 6,870 adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohort, developing scores specific for non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics.

 

 


In the present work, MetS z scores were applied to data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, which followed 8,660 participants aged 45-64 years for 12 years, with adjudicated follow-up for cardiovascular incidents up to 20 years. Only participants with no baseline CHD and with complete metabolic syndrome risk factor data were included.

Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators compared MetS z scores for patients who were never diagnosed with diabetes, those who had diabetes at baseline, and those who had an incident diagnosis of type 2 diabetes at the second, third, or fourth ARIC study visit. They found that individuals who entered ARIC with diabetes had the highest z scores, while those with incident type 2 diabetes had higher baseline scores, compared with those who never had a diabetes diagnosis. The difference in z scores was lowest for white men, while black men and women “exhibited increased scores after diagnosis, suggesting inadequate treatment,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues.

The investigators also looked for an association between MetS z scores and the primary outcome measure, time to incident CHD, calculating the z score both with and without the inclusion of glucose levels.

Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues analyzed the association between MetS z score and CHD for patients with and without type 2 diabetes. They found metabolic syndrome severity as assessed by MetS z score was independently associated with increased risk for CHD in participants with diabetes (P = .001).

 

 


“We additionally assessed whether the [metabolic syndrome] z score predicted future CHD following adjustment for HbA1c and when using a similar score derived without glucose as a component,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators.

When metabolic syndrome severity as assessed by z score was broken into quartiles, “increasing MetS severity (by quartile) increased the risk of future CVD [cardiovascular disease], both using the traditional 5-component MetS z score and the no-glucose score,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his colleagues. “This continuous MetS severity z score confers risk for future CHD among individuals with type 2 diabetes, both with the traditional MetS score and a score without glucose. These findings were independent of HbA1c and may relate to risk associated with the pathophysiologic processes underlying MetS.”

The investigators plan to integrate an automated metabolic syndrome severity score calculator into the electronic medical record “to identify and track risk in individuals over time and identify those who may benefit from increased intervention,” wrote Dr. DeBoer and his collaborators.

The National Institutes of Health funded the study. Dr. DeBoer reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: DeBoer MD et al. ENDO 2018, Abstract SAT-015.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ENDO 2018

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Increasing metabolic syndrome severity was associated with increased risk for cardiovascular disease.

Major finding: Risk for future cardiovascular disease was upped with higher scores, even when glucose wasn’t considered (P = .001).

Study details: A retrospective analysis of Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study data on 1,419 patients with and 7,241 patients without diabetes.

Disclosures: The National Institutes of Health sponsored the study. Dr. DeBoer reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

Source: DeBoer MD et al. ENDO 2018, Abstract SAT-015.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica