Alva Maria L, Hoerger Thomas J, Zhang Ping, Gregg Edward W
D Phil Public Health Economics Program, RTI International, Washington, DC, USA.
RTI International, Research Triangle Park, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2017 Oct 27;5(1):e000447. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2017-000447. eCollection 2017.
To estimate age-specific risk equations for type 2 diabetes onset in young, middle-aged, and older US adults, and to compare the performance of simple equations based on readily available demographic information alone, against enhanced equations that require both demographic and clinical information (fasting plasma glucose, high-density lipoprotein, and triglyceride levels).
We estimated the probability of developing diabetes by age group using data from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (for ages 18-40 years), Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (for ages 45-64 years), and the Cardiovascular Health Study (for ages 65 years and older). Simple and enhanced equations were estimated using logistic regression models, and performance was compared by age group. Thresholds based on these risk equations were evaluated using split-sample bootstraps and calibrating the constant of one age cohort to others.
Simple risk equations had an area under the receiver-operating curve (AUROC) of 0.72, 0.79, 0.75, and 0.69 for age groups 18-30, 28-40, 45-64, and 65 and older, respectively. The corresponding AUROCs for enhanced equations were 0.75, 0.85, 0.85, and 0.81. Risk equations based on younger populations, when applied to older cohorts, underpredict diabetes incidence and risk. Conversely, risk equations based on older populations overpredict the likelihood of diabetes in younger cohorts.
In general, risk equations are more successful in middle-aged adults than in young and old populations. The results demonstrate the importance of applying age-specific risk equations to identify target populations for intervention. While the predictive capacity of equations that include biomarkers is better than of those based solely on self-reported variables, biomarkers are more important in older populations than in younger ones.
估算美国年轻、中年和老年成年人患2型糖尿病的年龄特异性风险方程,并比较仅基于易于获得的人口统计学信息的简单方程与需要人口统计学和临床信息(空腹血糖、高密度脂蛋白和甘油三酯水平)的增强方程的性能。
我们使用来自青年成人冠状动脉风险发展研究(针对18 - 40岁年龄段)、社区动脉粥样硬化风险研究(针对45 - 64岁年龄段)和心血管健康研究(针对65岁及以上年龄段)的数据,按年龄组估算患糖尿病的概率。使用逻辑回归模型估算简单方程和增强方程,并按年龄组比较性能。基于这些风险方程的阈值通过拆分样本自举法进行评估,并将一个年龄队列的常数校准到其他队列。
简单风险方程在18 - 30岁、28 - 40岁、45 - 64岁和65岁及以上年龄组的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)分别为0.72、0.79、0.75和0.69。增强方程的相应AUROC分别为0.75、0.85、0.85和0.81。基于较年轻人群的风险方程应用于较老年队列时,会低估糖尿病发病率和风险。相反,基于较老年人群的风险方程会高估较年轻队列患糖尿病的可能性。
一般来说,风险方程在中年成年人中比在年轻和老年人群中更成功。结果表明应用年龄特异性风险方程来识别干预目标人群的重要性。虽然包含生物标志物的方程的预测能力优于仅基于自我报告变量的方程,但生物标志物在老年人群中比在年轻人群中更重要。