Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Cardiol. 2011 Feb 1;107(3):406–411. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.09.035

Table 4.

Relative value of metabolic syndrome, HOMA IR & Apolipoprotein B in predicting calcium scores

Diabetes Mellitus
Variable Yes (N=611) No (N=803)
Chi square (p value) Chi square (p value)
MetSyn added to model * 7.44 (p<0.001) 13.39 (p<0.001)
ApoB added to model * 10.80 (p<0.001) 25.45 (p<0.001)
HOMAIR added to model * 9.29 (p<0.001) 18.96 (p<0.001)
HOMAIR added to MetSyn in model * 6.45 (p=0.011) 11.76 (p<0.001)
MetSyn added to HOMAIR in model * 1.51 (p=0.2198) 5.32 (p=0.021)
ApoB added to MetSyn in model * 7.98 (p<0.001) 18.99 (p<0.001)
MetSyn added to ApoB in model * 4.62 (p=0.0298) 6.93 (p<0.001)
ApoB added to HOMAIR in model * 8.55 (p<0.001) 19.83 (p<0.001)
HOMAIR added to ApoB in model * 7.03 (p<0.001) 13.25 (p<0.001)

Likelihood ratio testing was applied in nested Tobit models to assess the incremental value of metabolic syndrome, HOMA IR and ApoB, and vice versa, in predicting CAC scores.

HOMA-IR = homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance. MetSyn = metabolic syndrome. For models including HOMA-IR in type 2 diabetic subjects, N=513; subjects on insulin excluded.

*

All models included age, gender, niacin, statin, metformin, thiazolidinediones, insulin, hypertension, hyperlipidemia (based on NCEP criteria), alcohol use, tobacco use, exercise and C reactive protein