Prevalence of overweight/obesity, abdominal obesity and metabolic syndrome and atypical cardiometabolic phenotypes in the adult Romanian population: PREDATORR study
- 342 Downloads
The objectives were to assess the prevalence of overweight/obesity, abdominal obesity and metabolic syndrome (MetS), and to evaluate the characteristics of the metabolically unhealthy lean (MUHL) and metabolically healthy overweight/obese (MHO) phenotypes in a Romanian population-based sample from the PREDATORR study.
PREDATORR was an epidemiological study with a stratified, cross-sectional, cluster random sampling design. Participants were classified into four cardiometabolic phenotypes based on the BMI, the cut-off value being 25 kg/m2, and the presence of MetS (defined according to the Harmonization definition 2009): MUHL, MHO, metabolically healthy lean (MHL) and metabolically unhealthy overweight/obese (MUHO).
Overall, 2681 subjects aged 20–79 years were included in the analysis. The overall age and sex-adjusted prevalence of obesity was 31.90 %, overweight was 34.7 %, abdominal obesity was 73.90 % and MetS was 38.50 %. The age- and sex-adjusted prevalence of MHO phenotype was 31.60 %, while MUHL phenotype prevalence was 3.90 %. MUHL and MHO participants had a cardiometabolic profile, kidney function and CVD risk intermediary between MHL and MUHO. MUHL had higher odds of being associated with CVD risk (OR 5.8; p < 0.001), abdominal obesity, prediabetes, diabetes, hypertriglyceridemia and hypo-HDL cholesterolemia than MHL, while MHO phenotype was associated with hypo-HDL cholesterolemia (OR 3.1; p = 0.002), prediabetes (OR 2.9; p < 0.001) and abdominal obesity.
PREDATORR study showed a high prevalence of obesity/overweight, abdominal obesity and MetS in the adult Romanian population, and their association with kidney function and several cardiometabolic factors.
KeywordsPREDATORR study Obesity/overweight Metabolic syndrome Metabolically unhealthy lean phenotype Metabolically healthy overweight/obesity phenotype Romania
The authors would like to thank the 101 general practitioners (enrolled the participants and filled in the study questionnaires), CEBIS International (study feasibility, project management and statistical analysis), Prof. Dr. Cristian Băicuș (validation of the statistical analyses), Adriana Rusu and Iudit-Hajnal Filip (XPE Pharma&Science) for writing support.
Compliance with ethical standards
This work was supported by the Romanian Society of Diabetes, Nutrition and Metabolic Diseases, IHS Sofmedica, Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Novo Nordisk, MSD, Servier, Novartis, Worwag Pharma.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The sponsors had no role in the design of the study, in the execution, interpretation of the data or the decision to submit the results.
All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Romanian National Ethics Committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.World Health Organization (2014) Global status report on noncommunicable diseases Attaining the nine global noncommunicable diseases targets; a shared responsibility. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/148114/1/9789241564854_eng.pdf. Accessed 05 Jan 2016
- 2.World Health Organization (2002) The world health report 2002: Reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva http://www.who.int/whr/2002/en/whr02_en.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 05 Jan 2016
- 3.World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (2009) Policy and action for cancer prevention. Food, nutrition, and physical activity: a global perspective. AICR.Washington DC http://www.dietandcancerreport.org/cancer_resource_center/downloads/chapters/pr/Introductory%20pages.pdf. Accessed 05 Jan 2016
- 4.World Health Organization.(2010) Global Status Report on noncommunicable diseases Chapter 1. Burden: mortality, morbidity and risk factors. http://www.who.int/nmh/publications/ncd_report_chapter1.pdf. Accessed 20 Dec 2015
- 5.OECD (2014) Health at a Glance: Europe 2014 completed with Eurostat Statistics Database. OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/health_glance_eur-2014-en. Accessed 20 Dec 2015
- 6.Cinteza M, Pana B, Cochino E et al (2007) Prevalence and control of cardiovascular risk factors in Romania cardio-zone national study. Mædica J Clin Med 2(4):277–282Google Scholar
- 8.Motamed N, Razmjou S, Hemmasi G, et al (2015) Lipid accumulation product and metabolic syndrome: a population-based study in northern Iran, Amol. J Endocrinol Invest [Epub ahead of print] Google Scholar
- 10.de Luis DA, Aller R, Izaola O et al (2014) Cardiovascular risk factors and adipocytokines levels after two hypocaloric diets with different fat distribution in obese subjects and rs6923761 gene variant of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor. J Endocrinol Invest 37(9):853–859. doi: 10.1007/s40618-014-0116-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Wildman RP, Muntner P, Reynolds K et al (2008) The obese without cardiometabolic risk factor clustering and the normal weight with cardiometabolic risk factor clustering: prevalence and correlates of 2 phenotypes among the US population (NHANES 1999–2004). Arch Intern Med 168(15):1617–1624. doi: 10.1001/archinte.168.15.1617 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Alberti KG, Eckel RH, Grundy SM et al (2009) Harmonizing the metabolic syndrome: a joint interim statement of the International Diabetes Federation Task Force on Epidemiology and Prevention; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; American Heart Association; World Heart Federation; International Atherosclerosis Society; and International Association for the Study of Obesity. Circulation 120(16):1640–1645. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.192644 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Kit BK, et al (2013) Prevalence of Obesity among Adults: United States, 2011-2012. NCHS data brief. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db131.pdf. Accessed 20 Dec 2015
- 28.Balkau B, Deanfield JE, Després JP et al (2007) International Day for the Evaluation of Abdominal Obesity (IDEA): a study of waist circumference, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes mellitus in 168,000 primary care patients in 63 countries. Circulation 116(17):1942–1951CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 31.Roberson LL, Aneni EC, Maziak W et al (2014) Beyond BMI: The “Metabolically healthy obese” phenotype & its association with clinical/subclinical cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality – a systematic review. BMC Public Health 14:14. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-14 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 33.Kramer H, Shoham D, McClure LA et al (2011) Association of waist circumference and body mass index with all-cause mortality in CKD: The REGARDS (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke) Study. Am J Kidney Dis 58(2):177–185. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2011.02.390 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar