CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 27Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and Management

Change in fasting plasma glucose and incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: results from a prospective cohort study

Open access
Mozaffary, Amirhossein, Asgari, Samaneh, Tohidi, Maryam, Kazempour-Ardebili, Sara, Azizi, Fereidoun, Hadaegh, Farzad·2016·BMJ Open
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010889PMC PMC4885425
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the association between changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) values and incident type 2 diabetes (T2D) in a cohort of the Iranian population. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: This study was conducted within the framework of the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study (TLGS) to investigate the association between change in FPG between baseline examination (1999–2001) and the second visit (2002–2005) with incident T2D. Participants: A total of 3981 non-diabetic participants aged ≥20 years. Outcome measure: T2D was defined if the participant was using antidiabetic drugs or if FPG was ≥7 mmol/L or if the 2 h post-challenge plasma glucose (2-hPCG) was ≥11.1 mmol/L. Results: During a median follow-up of 6.17 years, after the second examination, 288 new cases of T2D were identified. In a multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis using age as timescale, we presented a simple model including FPG change (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.33) and baseline waist circumference (WC) (HR 1.004, 95% CI 1.001 to 1.008) with a discriminative power (C-index) of 72%. Furthermore, we showed that the highest quartile of FPG change enhanced the T2D risk to 1.65 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.27) compared with the lowest quartile (p for trend=0.004).The independent risk of FPG change resisted further adjustment with 2-hPCG change. Adding the 2-hPCG change only slightly increased the discriminative power of the model including FPG change and baseline value of WC (0.73% vs 0.72%). After the study population had been limited to those with normal fasting glucose/normal glucose tolerance, FPG change remained an independent predictor (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.88). Conclusions: Two measurements of FPG obtained about 3 years apart can help to identify populations at risk of incident T2D independently of important traditional risk factors and their changes, including 2-hPCG change.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010889

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. [1]Yoon U, Kwok LL, Magkidis A Efficacy of lifestyle interventions in reducing diabetes incidence in patients with impaired glucose tolerance: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Metab Clin Exp 2013; 62: 303– 14. 10.1016/j.metabol.2012.07.009 22959500 · DOI
  2. [2]Shaw JE, Sicree RA, Zimmet PZ Global estimates of the prevalence of diabetes for 2010 and 2030. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2010; 87: 4– 14. 10.1016/j.diabres.2009.10.007 19896746 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [3]Cowie CC, Rust KF, Byrd-Holt DD Prevalence of diabetes and high risk for diabetes using A1C criteria in the U.S. population in 1988–2006. Diabetes Care 2010; 33: 562– 8. 20067953 PMC2827508
  4. [4]Soriguer F, Goday A, Bosch-Comas A Prevalence of diabetes mellitus and impaired glucose regulation in Spain: the Di@bet.es Study. Diabetologia 2012; 55: 88– 93. 10.1007/s00125-011-2336-9 21987347 PMC3228950 · DOI
  5. [5]Carstensen B, Kristensen JK, Ottosen P The Danish National Diabetes Register: trends in incidence, prevalence and mortality. Diabetologia 2008; 51: 2187– 96. 10.1007/s00125-008-1156-z 18815769 · DOI
  6. [6]Wild S, Roglic G, Green A Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care 2004; 27: 1047– 53. 10.2337/diacare.27.5.1047 15111519 · DOI · Paper page
  7. [7]Derakhshan A, Sardarinia M, Khalili D Sex specific incidence rates of type 2 diabetes and its risk factors over 9 years of follow-up: Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study. PLoS ONE 2014; 9: e102563 10.1371/journal.pone.0102563 25029368 PMC4100911 · DOI
  8. [8]Hitman GA, Sudagani J Searching for genes in diabetes and the metabolic syndrome. Int J Clin Pract 2004; 58(Suppl 143): 3– 8. 10.1111/j.1368-504X.2004.00374.x 16035391 · DOI
  9. [9]Bozorgmanesh M, Hadaegh F, Ghaffari S A simple risk score effectively predicted type 2 diabetes in Iranian adult population: population-based cohort study. Eur J Public Health 2011; 21: 554– 9. 10.1093/eurpub/ckq074 20534689 · DOI
  10. [10]Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Robson J Predicting risk of type 2 diabetes in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QDScore. BMJ 2009; 338: b880 10.1136/bmj.b880 19297312 PMC2659857 · DOI
  11. [12]Simmons RK, Unwin N, Griffin SJ International diabetes federation: an update of the evidence concerning the prevention of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2010; 87: 143– 9. 10.1016/j.diabres.2009.10.003 19913319 · DOI
  12. [13]Noble D, Mathur R, Dent T Risk models and scores for type 2 diabetes: systematic review. BMJ 2011; 343: d7163 10.1136/bmj.d7163 22123912 PMC3225074 · DOI · Paper page
  13. [14]Tabák AG, Jokela M, Akbaraly TN Trajectories of glycaemia, insulin sensitivity, and insulin secretion before diagnosis of type 2 diabetes: an analysis from the Whitehall II study. Lancet 2009; 373: 2215– 21. 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60619-X 19515410 PMC2726723 · DOI · Paper page
  14. [15]Hadaegh F, Jahangiri Noudeh Y, Tohidi M Change in general and central adiposity measures in prediction of incident dysglycemia; Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study. Prev Med 2012; 55: 608– 12. 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.09.025 23046898 · DOI
  15. [16]Tirosh A, Shai I, Bitzur R Changes in triglyceride levels over time and risk of type 2 diabetes in young men. Diabetes Care 2008; 31: 2032– 7. 10.2337/dc08-0825 18591400 PMC2551650 · DOI
  16. [17]Azizi F, Ghanbarian A, Momenan AA Prevention of non-communicable disease in a population in nutrition transition: Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study phase II. Trials 2009; 10: 5 10.1186/1745-6215-10-5 19166627 PMC2656492 · DOI
  17. [18]Chen Y, Zhang X, Pan B A modified formula for calculating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values. Lipids Health Dis 2010; 9: 52 10.1186/1476-511X-9-52 20487572 PMC2890624 · DOI
  18. [19]American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2013. Diabetes Care 2013; 36(Suppl 1): S11– 66. 10.2337/dc13-S011 23264422 PMC3537269 · DOI · Paper page
  19. [20]Pencina MJ, Larson MG, D'Agostino RB Choice of time scale, and its effect on significance of predictors in longitudinal studies. Stat Med 2007; 26: 1343– 59. 16955538
  20. [21]Agresti A An introduction to categorical data analysis. Vol 1 35 New York: Wiley, 1996.
  21. [22]Pencina MJ, D'Agostino RB Overall C as a measure of discrimination in survival analysis: model specific population value and confidence interval estimation. Stat Med 2004; 23: 2109– 23. 10.1002/sim.1802 15211606 · DOI
  22. [23]Strandberg AY, Pienimäki T, Pitkälä KH Comparison of normal fasting and one-hour glucose levels as predictors of future diabetes during a 34-year follow-up. Ann Med 2013; 45: 336– 40. 10.3109/07853890.2013.785233 23688029 · DOI
  23. [24]Danaei G, Finucane MM, Lu Y National, regional, and global trends in fasting plasma glucose and diabetes prevalence since 1980: systematic analysis of health examination surveys and epidemiological studies with 370 country-years and 2.7 million participants. Lancet 2011; 378: 31– 40. 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60679-X 21705069 · DOI · Paper page
  24. [25]Wareham NJ, Griffin SJ Risk scores for predicting type 2 diabetes: comparing axes and spades. Diabetologia 2011; 54: 994– 5. 10.1007/s00125-011-2101-0 21380593 · DOI
  25. [26]Chen L, Magliano DJ, Balkau B AUSDRISK: an Australian Type 2 Diabetes Risk Assessment Tool based on demographic, lifestyle and simple anthropometric measures. Med J Aust 2010; 192: 197– 202. 20170456
  26. [27]Wilson PW, Meigs JB, Sullivan L Prediction of incident diabetes mellitus in middle-aged adults: the Framingham Offspring Study. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167: 1068– 74. 10.1001/archinte.167.10.1068 17533210 · DOI · Paper page
  27. [28]Hartwig S, Kluttig A, Tiller D Anthropometric markers and their association with incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: which marker is best for prediction? Pooled analysis of four German population-based cohort studies and comparison with a nationwide cohort study. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e009266 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009266 PMC4735317 26792214 · DOI
  28. [29]Feng R-N, Zhao C, Wang C BMI is strongly associated with hypertension, and waist circumference is strongly associated with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidemia, in northern Chinese adults. J Epidemiol 2012; 22: 317– 23. 10.2188/jea.JE20110120 22672914 PMC3798650 · DOI
  29. [31]Mamtani M, Kulkarni H, Dyer TD Waist circumference independently associates with the risk of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes in Mexican American families. PLoS ONE 2013; 8: e59153 10.1371/journal.pone.0059153 23536864 PMC3594157 · DOI
  30. [32]Unwin N, Shaw J, Zimmet P Impaired glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glycaemia: the current status on definition and intervention. Diabet Med 2002; 19: 708– 23. 10.1046/j.1464-5491.2002.00835.x 12207806 · DOI
  31. [33]Stern MP, Williams K, Haffner SM Identification of persons at high risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus: do we need the oral glucose tolerance test? Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 575– 81. 11955025
  32. [34]Aekplakorn W, Bunnag P, Woodward M A risk score for predicting incident diabetes in the Thai population. Diabetes Care 2006; 29: 1872– 7. 10.2337/dc05-2141 16873795 · DOI
  33. [35]Wannamethee SG, Shaper AG, Lennon L Metabolic syndrome vs Framingham Risk Score for prediction of coronary heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 2644– 50. 10.1001/archinte.165.22.2644 16344423 · DOI
  34. [36]Kanaya AM, Fyr CLW, de Rekeneire N Predicting the development of diabetes in older adults: the derivation and validation of a prediction rule. Diabetes Care 2005; 28: 404– 8. 10.2337/diacare.28.2.404 15677800 · DOI
  35. [37]McNeely MJ, Boyko EJ, Leonetti DL Comparison of a clinical model, the oral glucose tolerance test, and fasting glucose for prediction of type 2 diabetes risk in Japanese Americans. Diabetes Care 2003; 26: 758– 63. 10.2337/diacare.26.3.758 12610034 · DOI
  36. [38]Lindström J, Tuomilehto J The diabetes risk score: a practical tool to predict type 2 diabetes risk. Diabetes Care 2003; 26: 725– 31. 10.2337/diacare.26.3.725 12610029 · DOI
  37. [39]Bozorgmanesh M, Hadaegh F, Saadat N Fasting glucose cutoff point: where does the risk terminate? Tehran lipid and glucose study. Acta Diabetol 2012; 49: 341– 8. 10.1007/s00592-011-0298-5 21617883 · DOI
  38. [40]Sullivan LM, Massaro JM, D'Agostino RB Presentation of multivariate data for clinical use: the Framingham Study risk score functions. Stat Med 2004; 23: 1631– 60. 10.1002/sim.1742 15122742 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mozaffary, A., Asgari, S., Tohidi, M., Kazempour-Ardebili, S., Azizi, F., & Hadaegh, F.
Affiliations
  • Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences (IR)
  • Prevention of Metabolic Disorders Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences (RIES), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Corresponding author
Hadaegh, Farzad
ORCID
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2016-05
Volume
6
Issue
5
Pages
e010889
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010889
PMC
PMC4885425
OpenAlex
W2398538078
Cited by
27
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
fasting blood glucose, type 2 diabetes, new-onset diabetes, waist circumference, diabetes risk prediction, Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study, Iranian population, normal glucose tolerance, risk discrimination, prediabetes screening, glycemic control, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, hypertension
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Iran, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Incidence, Multivariate Analysis, Waist Circumference

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review