Mathisen Jimmi, Jensen Aksel K G, Andersen Ingelise, Andersen Gregers S, Hvidtfeldt Ulla A, Rod Naja H
Section of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Oester Farimagsgade 5, 1353, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Section of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Diabetologia. 2020 Sep;63(9):1764-1774. doi: 10.1007/s00125-020-05150-3. Epub 2020 May 3.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Educational inequality in type 2 diabetes incidence is evident in many high-income countries. Previous studies have shown that differential exposure to being overweight/obese across educational groups may partly explain this inequality. Whether differential susceptibility to being overweight/obese across educational groups contributes to this inequality has been investigated less frequently, even though it is a plausible mechanism. The two mechanisms may even be highly intertwined. In this longitudinal cohort study, we investigated the simultaneous contribution of differential exposure and differential susceptibility to being overweight/obese to educational inequality in type 2 diabetes incidence.
The study population comprised 53,159 Danish men and women aged 50-64 years at baseline who were followed for a mean of 14.7 years. We estimated rate differences of type 2 diabetes by education level per 100,000 person-years. Using counterfactual mediation analysis, these rate differences were decomposed into proportions attributable to differential exposure, differential susceptibility and all other pathways, respectively. We compared this approach with conventional approaches to mediation and interaction analysis.
Compared with a high level of education, a low education level was associated with 454 (95% CI 398, 510) additional cases of type 2 diabetes, and a medium education level with 316 (CI 268, 363) additional cases. Differential exposure to being overweight/obese accounted for 37% (CI 31%, 45%) of the additional cases among those with a low education level and 29% (CI 24%, 36%) of the additional cases among those with a medium education level. Differential susceptibility accounted for 9% (CI 4%, 14%) and 6% (CI 3%, 10%) of the additional cases among those with a low and medium education level, respectively. Compared with the counterfactual approach, the conventional approaches suggested stronger effects of both mechanisms.
CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Differential exposure and susceptibility to being overweight/obese are both important mechanisms in the association between education and type 2 diabetes incidence.
目的/假设:2型糖尿病发病率方面的教育不平等现象在许多高收入国家都很明显。以往研究表明,不同教育程度人群超重/肥胖暴露情况的差异可能部分解释了这种不平等现象。尽管不同教育程度人群对超重/肥胖的易感性差异是一种合理的机制,但对其是否导致这种不平等的研究较少。这两种机制甚至可能高度交织。在这项纵向队列研究中,我们调查了超重/肥胖暴露差异和易感性差异对2型糖尿病发病率教育不平等的共同影响。
研究人群包括53159名丹麦男性和女性,基线年龄为50 - 64岁,平均随访14.7年。我们按每10万人年的教育程度估计2型糖尿病的发病率差异。使用反事实中介分析,将这些发病率差异分别分解为归因于暴露差异、易感性差异和所有其他途径的比例。我们将这种方法与传统的中介和交互分析方法进行了比较。
与高教育水平相比,低教育水平与额外454例(95%CI 398, 510)2型糖尿病病例相关,中等教育水平与额外316例(CI 268, 363)病例相关。低教育水平人群中,超重/肥胖暴露差异占额外病例的37%(CI 31%, 45%),中等教育水平人群中占29%(CI 24%, 36%)。易感性差异在低教育水平和中等教育水平人群的额外病例中分别占9%(CI 4%, 14%)和6%(CI 3%, 10%)。与反事实方法相比,传统方法显示两种机制的影响更强。
结论/解读:超重/肥胖暴露差异和易感性差异都是教育与2型糖尿病发病率之间关联的重要机制。