Table 3.
Association of Uric Acid with Metabolic Syndrome Components After Adjustment for Covariates
| |
|
Predicted variables |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Percent body fat (%) (n=245) | Insulin action (n=245)a | SBP (mmHg) (n=245) | DBP (mmHg) (n=245) | Triglycerides (mg/dL) (n=245) | Cholesterol (mg/dL) (n=245) | HDL (mg/dL) (n=185) | T2DM (HRR) (n=245; 36 events) | |
| Uric acid | β=−1.5; P<0.001 | β=−4.5%; P<0.01 | β=2.9; P<0.001 | β=2.2; P<0.001 | β=13.7; P<0.0001 | β=5.5; P<0.01 | β=−1.8; P=0.03 | NS |
| Model 1: UA, age, sex, degree of Pima Heritage | β=−1.3; P<0.0001 | β=−9.8%; P<0.0001 | β=2.3; P<0.01 | β=1.9; P<0.01 | β=19.2; P<0.0001 | β=8.3; P<0.0001 | β=−2.5; P<0.01 | HRR=1.4; P=0.03 |
| Model 2: model 1+% body fat2, creatinine, AST | β=−1.5; P<0.0001 | β=−7.6%; P<0.0001 | β=1.9; P=0.02 | β=1.5; P=0.03 | β=17.7; P<0.0001 | β=8.0; P<0.001 | β=−2.3; P=0.02 | HRR=1.5; P=0.02 |
| Model 3: model 2+other risk factorsb | β=−1.4; P<0.001 | β=−7.0%; P<0.0001 | β=1.9; P=0.03 | β=1.8; P=0.02 | β=14.3; P<0.001 | β=5.4; P=0.01 | β=−2.5; P=0.01 | HRR=1.5; P=0.03 |
Insulin action was log transformed to conform to the assumptions of linear regression, therefore, results are expressed as percent change in insulin action with each 1 mg/dl increase in uric acid.
Other risk factors included systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, triglycerides, and cholesterol. Models where one of these risk factors was the predicted variable did not include that variable as an explanatory variable.
SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; HRR, hazard risk ratio for T2DM determined by proportional hazards analyses; β, parameter estimates for the change in the predicted variable for each 1 mg/dL increase in uric acid as predicted by linear regression models; UA, uric acid; AST, aspartate aminotransferase.