Study participants
We included participants from the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) Offspring cohort, a prospective, observational, community-based cohort including 3799 attendees, age 40–65 years, at the fifth quadrennial examination cycle 1991–1995 (baseline examination) [19]. Participants at the fifth and subsequent quadrennial examination cycles underwent a physician-administered physical examination and medical history and routine laboratory tests. For the current analyses, we excluded individuals without profiling of metabolites (n = 1326) and those with prevalent diabetes or cardiovascular events (n = 346), fasting plasma glucose ≥5.6 mmol/l (n = 967) or 2 h glucose ≥11 mmol/l (n = 10). The final study population included 1150 individuals with NFG and no diabetes. All participants provided written informed consent and the study protocol was approved by the Boston University Medical Center Institutional Review Board.
Metabolite profiling
At baseline, after participants had fasted overnight, plasma samples were collected in EDTA, processed immediately and stored at −80°C until assayed. Plasma samples were collected at the fifth quadrennial examination, which took place between 1991 and 1995, and were processed in 2008. A previous study has documented concordance in several metabolite measures between archived samples from the Framingham Offspring Study and freshly obtained samples [20]. Targeted metabolite profiling was performed using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) as previously described [11, 12]. Additional details, including accuracy of the methodology used in analyses, calibration and annotation, are provided in the ESM Methods. Metabolites at high missing rate (>20%) were excluded from this analysis, which includes 220 metabolites.
Ascertainment of incident type 2 diabetes
The primary endpoint of this study was incident type 2 diabetes. Incident type 2 diabetes was ascertained during the follow-up at every quadrennial examination and was defined as follows: fasting glucose ≥7 mmol/l, non-fasting blood glucose ≥11 mmol/l or the use of glucose-lowering medications, including insulin. Time to type 2 diabetes incidence was derived from the time of the baseline examination. Chart review was conducted to identify and exclude two participants with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
Clinical covariates
Demographic, lifestyle and clinical characteristics were assessed at baseline. BMI was calculated as weight divided by height squared (kg/m2). The HOMA-IR was calculated [21] and was log-transformed due to a skewed distribution. Total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol (HDLc) and triacylglycerols (TAGs) were measured, in individuals who had fasted overnight, using standard methods. LDL-cholesterol (LDLc) was indirectly calculated using the Friedewald formula when TAG concentrations were lower than 4.52 mmol/l [22]. We used conventional type 2 diabetes risk factors to estimate risk of new onset of type 2 diabetes for each participant, including sex and parental history of diabetes as categorical variables and age, fasting glucose, BMI, HDLc, TAG and blood pressure as continuous variables. We also considered HOMA-IR and 2 h glucose as continuous variables.
Statistical analysis
Differences in clinical characteristics between participants with and without incident type 2 diabetes were analysed in generalised estimating equations models accounting for familial correlation among participants.
The analytical plan flow-chart for metabolite selection, prediction performance and complementary analyses is summarised in Fig. 1. First, plasma metabolite concentrations were log-transformed and standardised. Next, a random binomial variable was used to split the sample into a testing dataset and a training dataset (4:6) and to serve as an internal validation and avoid inflation of the discrimination estimates. For the retained training dataset (60% of the sample), we conducted least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-penalised regressions (LASSO) with tenfold cross validation to select metabolites predictive of type 2 diabetes incidence based on the criteria giving minimum mean cross-validated error [23]. We then assessed the predictive capability of type 2 diabetes risk factors alone (including age, sex, parental history of diabetes, fasting glucose, BMI, HDLc, TAG and blood pressure) and the predictive capability of type 2 diabetes risk factors plus selected metabolites in the testing set (40% of the sample) by generating the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve. We used a nonparametric approach (DeLong’s test) to compare the discriminatory capability of the two highly correlated ROC curves [24]. We repeated this process 100 times and accumulated the selection frequency across 100 iterations for each metabolite separately and used a cut-off of ten selections to prioritise the top predictors of incident type 2 diabetes. Next, we evaluated the capability of the metabolites selected ten or more times in 100 iterations to improve prediction of type 2 diabetes over conventional type 2 diabetes risk factors in the entire cohort. As a sensitivity analysis, we included HOMA-IR and 2 h glucose in the model for type 2 diabetes risk factors and repeated the same methodological approach. These analyses were performed using glmnet (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/glmnet/index.html) and pROC (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pROC/index.html) packages implemented in R v3.2.0 program (https://www.r-project.org/). We took two-sided p < 0.05 to denote evidence against the null hypothesis of no type 2 diabetes risk prediction improvement when adding metabolites to the prediction model.
Finally, Cox proportional hazard models were used to investigate the association between prioritised metabolites and type 2 diabetes risk after adjusting for age, sex, BMI, fasting glucose and fasting TAG at baseline. SAS v9.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) was used for the association analyses. We took Bonferroni-corrected threshold for significance at two-sided p < 2.63 × 10−3 (0.05/19 metabolites) to denote evidence against the null hypothesis of no association between prioritised metabolites and type 2 diabetes risk.
Bioinformatics methods
Pathway analysis
We applied pathway enrichment analysis and metabolite set enrichment analysis to identify enriched metabolic pathways using MetaboAnalyst 3.0 [25] for the set of 19 prioritised metabolites. Pathway enrichment analysis at the false discovery rate of 5% was set for significance.
Mendelian randomisation
Mendelian randomisation was conducted for causal inference analyses between components of the nitrogen metabolism pathway and type 2 diabetes risk. Genetic determinants of plasma metabolites were extracted from the MAGNETIC Consortium (n = 24,925) [26]. In the MAGNETIC Consortium, we identified genetic variants associated with glycine and phenylalanine at genome-wide significance (p < 5 × 10−8) (taurine was not available, but all metabolite meta-analysis results are available through www.computationalmedicine.fi/data/NMR_GWAS/), For each independent variant, we gathered summary-level association results for type 2 diabetes from the GoT2D diabetes dataset (www.type2diabetesgenetics.org/projects/got2d; n = 11,645 cases and 32,769 controls) since these variants were not available in other type 2 diabetes genetics consortia [27]. The Mendelian randomisation overall instrumental estimated effect size of the exposure on the outcome, referred to as the inverse-variance weighted (IVW) estimator [28], was calculated using the Genetics ToolboX package (GTX; available at http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gtx) (detailed in the ESM Methods). Instrumental heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and reported as a heterogeneity p value. The presence of unbalanced horizontal pleiotropy was assessed by using Mendelian randomisation–Egger when the set of variants in the genetic instrument allowed us to conduct the analysis [29]. We used individual-level data from FHS participants to estimate the variance explained in metabolite levels by the genetic variants. We used genotyped variants with genotyping success rate ≥0.95 and variants in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (p > 1 × 10−4). When not directly genotyped, we included variants at high-quality imputation ratio (r2 value threshold of 0.85, representing an approximate correlation with the true genotype higher than 0.9). A linear mixed-effect model with covariates age, sex and random effects to account for familial correlation, including five variants for glycine and three variants for phenylalanine fit individually in an additive genetic model, was used to estimate the variance in plasma metabolite concentrations explained by genetic variants.