Background: Diabetes and prediabetes are common among African Americans (AA), but the frequency and predictors of transition between normal, impaired glucose metabolism, and diabetes are not well-described. The aim of this study was to examine glucometabolic transitions and their association with the development of type 2 diabetes (T2D).Methods: AA participants of the Jackson Heart Study who attended baseline exam (2000-2004) and at least one of two subsequent exams (2005-2008 and 2009-2013, ~8 years) were classified according to glycemic status. Transitions were defined as progression (deterioration) or remission (improvement) of glycemic status. Multinomial logistic regression models with repeated measures were used to estimate the odds ratios (OR) for remission and progression with adjustment for demographic, anthropometric, behavioral, and biochemical factors.Results: Among 3353 participants, (mean age 54.6±12.3 years), 43% were normoglycemic, 32% were prediabetes, and 25% had diabetes at baseline. For those with normal glucose at a visit, the probability at the next visit (~4years) of having prediabetes or diabetes was 38.5% and 1.8%, respectively. For those with prediabetes, the probability was 9.9% to improve to normal and 19.9% to progress to diabetes. Progression was associated with baseline BMI, diabetes status, triglycerides, family history of diabetes, and weight gain (OR 1.04 kg, 95% CI:1.03-1.06, P=<.0001). Remission was strongly associated with weight loss (OR .97 kg, 95%CI: .95-.98, P<.001).Conclusions: In AAs, glucometabolic transitions were frequent and most involved deterioration. From a public health perspective additional emphasis should be placed on weight control to preserve glucometabolic status and prevent progression to T2D.Ethn Dis. 2022;32(3):203-212; doi:10.18865/ed.32.3.203
Objective: There are currently five widely used definition of prediabetes. We compared the ability of these to predict 5-year conversion to diabetes and investigated whether there were other cut-points identifying risk of progression to diabetes that may be more useful. Research design and methods: We conducted an individual participant meta-analysis using longitudinal data included in the Obesity, Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Collaboration. Cox regression models were used to obtain study-specific HRs for incident diabetes associated with each prediabetes definition. Harrell's C-statistics were used to estimate how well each prediabetes definition discriminated 5-year risk of diabetes. Spline and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analyses were used to identify alternative cut-points. Results: Sixteen studies, with 76 513 participants and 8208 incident diabetes cases, were available. Compared with normoglycemia, current prediabetes definitions were associated with four to eight times higher diabetes risk (HRs (95% CIs): 3.78 (3.11 to 4.60) to 8.36 (4.88 to 14.33)) and all definitions discriminated 5-year diabetes risk with good accuracy (C-statistics 0.79-0.81). Cut-points identified through spline analysis were fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 5.1 mmol/L and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 5.0% (31 mmol/mol) and cut-points identified through ROC analysis were FPG 5.6 mmol/L, 2-hour postload glucose 7.0 mmol/L and HbA1c 5.6% (38 mmol/mol). Conclusions: In terms of identifying individuals at greatest risk of developing diabetes within 5 years, using prediabetes definitions that have lower values produced non-significant gain. Therefore, deciding which definition to use will ultimately depend on the goal for identifying individuals at risk of diabetes. ; This work was supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (grant number 1103242). The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study has been funded in whole or in part with Federal funds from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, under contract nos. HHSN268201700001I, HHSN268201700002I, HHSN268201700003I, HHSN268201700005I, HHSN268201700004I. ES was supported by NIH/NIDDK grant K24DK106414. The Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Study (CARDIA) is supported by contracts HHSN2682018000031, HHSN2682018000041, HHSN2682018000051, HHSN2682018000061 and HHSN2682018000071 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). The Jackson Heart Study (JHS) is supported and conducted in collaboration with Jackson State University (HHSN268201800013I), Tougaloo College (HHSN268201800014I), the Mississippi State Department of Health (HHSN268201800015I) and the University of Mississippi Medical Center (HHSN268201800010I, HHSN268201800011I and HHSN268201800012I) contracts from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and the National Institute for Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD). The Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS) recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. The MCCS was further augmented by Australian National Health and Medical Research Council grants 209057, 396414 and 1074383 and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. Cases and their vital status were ascertained through the Victorian Cancer Registry and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, including the National Death Index and the Australian Cancer Database. The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis was supported by contracts HHSN268201500003I, N01-HC-95159, N01-HC-95160, N01-HC-95161, N01-HC-95162, N01-HC-95163, N01-HC-95164, N01-HC-95165, N01-HC-95166, N01-HC-95167, N01-HC-95168 and N01-HC-95169 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and by grants UL1-TR-000040 and UL1-TR-001079 from NCRR. The Population Study of Women in Gothenburg (PSWG) was financed in part by grants from the Swedish state under the agreement between the Swedish government and the county councils, the ALF-agreement ALFGBG-720201. VIVA Study received grants 95/0029 and 06/90270 from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain. ; Sí
