Goodman Elizabeth, Daniels Stephen R, Meigs James B, Dolan Lawrence M
Floating Hospital for Children at Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, Mass, MA, USA.
Circulation. 2007 May 1;115(17):2316-22. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.669994. Epub 2007 Apr 9.
Factor analyses suggest that the structure underlying metabolic syndrome is similar in adolescents and adults. However, adolescence is a period of intense physiological change, and therefore stability of the underlying metabolic structure and clinical categorization based on metabolic risk is uncertain.
We analyzed data from 1098 participants in the Princeton School District Study, a school-based study begun in 2001-2002, who were followed up for 3 years. We performed factor analyses of 8 metabolic risks at baseline and follow-up to assess stability of factor patterns and clinical categorization of metabolic syndrome. Metabolic syndrome was defined using the current American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute definition for adults (AHA), a modified AHA definition used in prior pediatric metabolic syndrome studies (pediatric AHA), and the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) guidelines. We found that factor structures were essentially identical at both time points. However, clinical categorization was not stable. Approximately half of adolescents with baseline metabolic syndrome lost the diagnosis at follow-up regardless of the definitions used: pediatric AHA=56% (95% confidence interval [CI], 42% to 69%), AHA=49% (95% CI, 32% to 66%), IDF=53% (95% CI, 38% to 68%). In addition to loss of the diagnosis, new cases were identified. Cumulative incidence rates were as follows: pediatric AHA=3.8% (95% CI, 2.8% to 5.2%); AHA=4.4% (95% CI, 3.3% to 5.9%); IDF=5.2% (95% CI, 4.0% to 6.8%).
During adolescence, metabolic risk factor clustering is consistent. However, marked instability exists in the categorical diagnosis of metabolic syndrome. This instability, which includes both gain and loss of the diagnosis, suggests that the syndrome has reduced clinical utility in adolescence and that metabolic syndrome-specific pharmacotherapy for youth may be premature.
因子分析表明,青少年和成年人代谢综合征的潜在结构相似。然而,青春期是生理剧烈变化的时期,因此潜在代谢结构的稳定性以及基于代谢风险的临床分类尚不确定。
我们分析了普林斯顿学区研究中1098名参与者的数据,该研究于2001 - 2002年启动,是一项基于学校的研究,随访了3年。我们对基线和随访时的8种代谢风险进行因子分析,以评估因子模式的稳定性和代谢综合征的临床分类。代谢综合征采用美国心脏协会/美国国立心肺血液研究所当前针对成年人的定义(AHA)、先前儿科代谢综合征研究中使用的改良AHA定义(儿科AHA)以及国际糖尿病联盟(IDF)指南进行定义。我们发现两个时间点的因子结构基本相同。然而,临床分类并不稳定。无论使用何种定义,约一半基线时患有代谢综合征的青少年在随访时失去了该诊断:儿科AHA = 56%(95%置信区间[CI],42%至69%),AHA = 49%(95% CI,32%至66%),IDF = 53%(95% CI,38%至68%)。除了失去诊断外,还发现了新病例。累积发病率如下:儿科AHA = 3.8%(95% CI,2.8%至5.2%);AHA = 4.4%(95% CI,3.3%至5.9%);IDF = 5.2%(95% CI,4.0%至6.8%)。
在青春期,代谢风险因素聚集是一致的。然而,代谢综合征的分类诊断存在明显不稳定性。这种不稳定性,包括诊断的获得和丧失,表明该综合征在青春期的临床实用性降低,并且针对青少年的代谢综合征特异性药物治疗可能为时过早。