Skip to main content
. 2015 Sep 22;6(29):26782–26788. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.5792

Table 2. Logistic regression analysis for the presence of MetS in relation with liver enzymes.

Overall
MetS subjects Healthy controls ORa 95% CI P value
ALT
Q1 (<15) 455 1,398 referent
Q2 (15–20) 823 1,697 1.50 1.31–1.72
Q3 (20–27) 1,352 1,520 3.00 2.63–3.43
Q4 (>27) 3,638 1,715 8.03 7.06–9.12
Continuous (Per 5 unit increase) 1.41 1.38–1.43 P < 0.001
AST
Q1 (<22) 782 1,423 referent
Q2 (22–25) 873 1,352 1.15 1.02–1.31
Q3 (25–30) 1,774 1,917 1.63 1.46–1.82
Q4 (>30) 2,839 1,638 3.06 2.75–3.41
Continuous (Per 5 unit) 1.33 1.29–1.36 P < 0.001
GGT
Q1 (<16) 376 1,701 referent
Q2 (16–20) 495 1,398 1.90 1.62–2.22
Q3 (20–28) 1,151 1,627 4.32 3.74–5.00
Q4 (>28) 4,246 1,604 18.15 15.7–20.9
Continuous (Per 5 unit) 1.27 1.25–1.29 P < 0.001
ALP
Q1 (<66) 920 1,674 referent
Q2 (66–78) 1,177 1,489 1.43 1.28–1.60
Q3 (78–93) 1,692 1,622 1.87 1.68–2.08
Q4 (>93) 2,479 1,545 2.80 2.52–3.10
Continuous (Per 5 unit) 1.09 1.08–1.10 P < 0.001
a

adjusted for age, gender, and education level