Sarwar Nadeem, Sattar Naveed, Gudnason Vilmundur, Danesh John
Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Worts Causeway, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK.
Eur Heart J. 2007 Oct;28(20):2491-7. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm115. Epub 2007 May 17.
It is uncertain whether there are associations between circulating levels of insulin markers and coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. We report an updated meta-analysis of studies of circulating levels of three insulin markers (fasting insulin, non-fasting insulin, and pro-insulin) and CHD risk.
Prospective studies based in Western populations that reported on associations between levels of fasting insulin, non-fasting insulin, and pro-insulin and incident CHD [defined as non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary death] were identified by computer-based searches and by manual searches of the relevant literature. Nineteen relevant population-based studies were identified, of which 14 reported on fasting insulin levels involving 2649 CHD cases, eight reported on non-fasting insulin levels involving 1980 CHD cases and three reported on pro-insulin levels involving 413 CHD cases. In a comparison of individuals who had circulating levels of each of these markers in the top third with those in the bottom third of the population, the odds ratio for CHD was 1.12 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98-1.28] for raised fasting insulin, 1.35 (1.14-1.60) for raised non-fasting insulin, and 2.23 (1.65-3.00) for raised pro-insulin. There was no good evidence of heterogeneity in these estimates attributable to the several study characteristics recorded, including sex, assay methods used, or degree of adjustment of risk estimates, but the available data in many of these subgroups, particularly by sex, are sparse.
Associations between CHD risk and fasting or non-fasting insulin levels are likely to be more modest than previously suspected. Preliminary data suggest that pro-insulin levels may be more strongly associated with CHD risk than are insulin levels, and this possibility should be evaluated in larger and more rigorous studies.
循环胰岛素标志物水平与冠心病(CHD)风险之间是否存在关联尚不确定。我们报告了一项关于三种胰岛素标志物(空腹胰岛素、非空腹胰岛素和胰岛素原)循环水平与CHD风险研究的最新荟萃分析。
通过计算机检索和手动检索相关文献,确定了基于西方人群的前瞻性研究,这些研究报告了空腹胰岛素、非空腹胰岛素和胰岛素原水平与新发CHD(定义为非致命性心肌梗死或冠心病死亡)之间的关联。共确定了19项相关的基于人群的研究,其中14项报告了空腹胰岛素水平,涉及2649例CHD病例;8项报告了非空腹胰岛素水平,涉及1980例CHD病例;3项报告了胰岛素原水平,涉及413例CHD病例。在将这些标志物循环水平处于人群前三分位的个体与后三分位的个体进行比较时,空腹胰岛素升高时CHD的比值比为1.12[95%置信区间(CI):0.98 - 1.28],非空腹胰岛素升高时为1.35(1.14 - 1.60),胰岛素原升高时为2.23(1.65 - 3.00)。没有充分证据表明这些估计值的异质性可归因于记录的几个研究特征,包括性别、所用检测方法或风险估计的调整程度,但这些亚组中的许多可用数据,特别是按性别划分的数据很稀少。
CHD风险与空腹或非空腹胰岛素水平之间的关联可能比先前怀疑的更为适度。初步数据表明,胰岛素原水平可能比胰岛素水平与CHD风险的关联更强,这种可能性应在更大规模和更严谨的研究中进行评估。