Cited by 198Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Management and ResearchChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes

The Prediction of Major Outcomes of Type 1 Diabetes: a 12-Year Prospective Evaluation of Three Separate Definitions of the Metabolic Syndrome and Their Components and Estimated Glucose Disposal Rate

Open access
Pambianco, Georgia, Costacou, Tina, Orchard, Trevor J.·2007·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—The metabolic syndrome has been shown to confer an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in both the general and type 2 diabetic populations, but few studies have assessed the metabolic syndrome in type 1 diabetic patients. In a type 1 diabetic cohort, we assessed the prevalence and value of the metabolic syndrome in improving the prediction of major complication outcomes compared with its components and a surrogate measure of insulin resistance, estimated glucose disposal rate (eGDR). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—A total of 514 (78%) subjects participating in the Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications Study with complete 12-year follow-up clinical data were classified by baseline metabolic syndrome status according to three definitions: those of the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (modified by the American Heart Association), the International Diabetes Federation (IDF), and the World Health Organization (WHO). The complication outcomes included coronary artery disease, renal failure, diabetes-related death, and the aggregate of these three major outcomes of diabetes (MOD). RESULTS—Metabolic syndrome prevalence ranged from 8% (IDF) to 21% (WHO). All definitions showed reasonable specificity (≥83%) for each outcome, while the WHO definition had the highest sensitivity for all outcomes except renal failure, for which eGDR was most sensitive. However, the components of each definition predicted better than the overall syndrome. Microalbuminuria was clearly the strongest predictor of all individual measures, yielding hazard ratios of 9 and 6 for mortality and MOD, respectively. CONCLUSIONS—Though the three metabolic syndrome classifications predict major complication outcomes in type 1 diabetes, their individual components predict better. Of the variables studied, including HbA1, microalbuminuria appears to be the best single predictor of MOD.

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 · 10.2337/dc06-2053

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Albuminuria is a continuous variable for cardiovascular risk.

    “reinforcing the notion that albuminuria is a continuous variable for cardiovascular risk (466-468).”

    From Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus (2023) · cites this paper as [466]

    The Results section concludes that microalbuminuria predicts cardiovascular risk in people with type 1 diabetes. The WHO definition section uses an albumin-excretion cutoff, however, and the paper does not establish that cardiovascular risk varies continuously with albuminuria levels or extend its finding beyond this population. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Recent data suggest that cardiovascular risk extends below the lower limit of 20 mg/min, reinforcing that albuminuria is a continuous variable for cardiovascular risk.

    “Recent data, however, suggest that risk extends below the lower limit of 20 mg/min (328-330), reinforcing the notion that this factor is a continuous variable for cardiovascular risk (331)(332)(333).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pambianco, G., Costacou, T., & Orchard, T. J.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2007-05-01
Volume
30
Issue
5
Pages
1248-1254
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2097169420
Cited by
198
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 15
FWCI
14.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (DK34818)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK-34818)
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 › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Keywords
type 1 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, metabolic syndrome definitions, estimated glucose disposal rate, insulin resistance, microalbuminuria, cardiovascular disease, renal failure, diabetes mortality, HbA1c, Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications Study
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Death Certificates, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diet, Female, Glucose, Humans, Male, Pennsylvania, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Risk Factors, Treatment Outcome, Glucose Intolerance, Metabolic Syndrome, Diabetes Complications, Body Size

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