Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • Diabetes COVID-19 Article Collection
    • Diabetes Symposium 2020
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit Cover Art
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Complications

Prevalence and Prognostic Impact of Subclinical Cardiovascular Disease in Individuals With the Metabolic Syndrome and Diabetes

  1. Erik Ingelsson1,
  2. Lisa M. Sullivan2,
  3. Joanne M. Murabito13,
  4. Caroline S. Fox14,
  5. Emelia J. Benjamin156,
  6. Joseph F. Polak7,
  7. James B. Meigs8,
  8. Michelle J. Keyes19,
  9. Christopher J. O'Donnell11011,
  10. Thomas J. Wang110,
  11. Ralph B. D'Agostino, Sr.19,
  12. Philip A. Wolf112 and
  13. Ramachandran S. Vasan156
  1. 1National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Framingham Study, Framingham, Massachusetts
  2. 2Department of Biostatistics, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
  3. 3Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
  4. 4Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Hypertension, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  5. 5Department of Preventive Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
  6. 6Cardiology Section, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
  7. 7New England Medical Center, Tuft's University, Boston, Massachusetts
  8. 8General Medicine Division, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  9. 9Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts
  10. 10Cardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  11. 11National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Center for Population Studies, Bethesda, Maryland
  12. 12Departments of Neurology and Preventive Medicine and Epidemiology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
  1. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Ramachandran S. Vasan, MD, FACC, Framingham Heart Study, 73 Mount Wayte Ave., Suite 2, Framingham, MA 01702-5803. E-mail: vasan{at}bu.edu
Diabetes 2007 Jun; 56(6): 1718-1726. https://doi.org/10.2337/db07-0078
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Suppl Material
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Data are limited regarding prevalence and prognostic significance of subclinical cardiovascular disease (CVD) in individuals with metabolic syndrome (MetS). We investigated prevalence of subclinical CVD in 1,945 Framingham Offspring Study participants (mean age 58 years; 59% women) using electrocardiography, echocardiography, carotid ultrasound, ankle-brachial blood pressure, and urinary albumin excretion. We prospectively evaluated the incidence of CVD associated with MetS and diabetes according to presence versus absence of subclinical disease. Cross-sectionally, 51% of 581 participants with MetS had subclinical disease in at least one test, a frequency higher than individuals without MetS (multivariable-adjusted odds ratio 2.06 [95% CI 1.67–2.55]; P < 0.0001). On follow-up (mean 7.2 years), 139 individuals developed overt CVD, including 59 with MetS (10.2%). Overall, MetS was associated with increased CVD risk (multivariable-adjusted hazards ratio [HR] 1.61 [95% CI 1.12–2.33]). Participants with MetS and subclinical disease experienced increased risk of overt CVD (2.67 [1.62–4.41] compared with those without MetS, diabetes, or subclinical disease), whereas the association of MetS with CVD risk was attenuated in absence of subclinical disease (HR 1.59 [95% CI 0.87–2.90]). A similar attenuation of CVD risk in absence of subclinical disease was observed also for diabetes. Subclinical disease was a significant predictor of overt CVD in participants without MetS or diabetes (1.93 [1.15–3.24]). In our community-based sample, individuals with MetS have a high prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis that likely contributes to the increased risk of overt CVD associated with the condition.

  • CVD, cardiovascular disease
  • IMT, intima-media thickness
  • LVH, left ventricular hypertrophy
  • MetS, metabolic syndrome

Presence of subclinical disease in multiple vascular beds has been suggested as an indicator of overall atherosclerotic burden (1). Consistent with this concept, investigators have reported an increased risk of overt cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in individuals with subclinical disease (2–4) or target organ damage (as evidenced by left ventricular hypertrophy [LVH] [5,6] or microalbuminuria [7–9]). It is also widely acknowledged that established risk factors for overt CVD promote the development of subclinical CVD (10).

In this context, the metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a condition that is associated with the clustering of risk factors including high blood pressure, abdominal obesity, glucose intolerance, and dyslipidemia. Whereas the definition and clinical utility of MetS has been the subject of recent debate (11,12), it is accepted that MetS carries an increased risk of CVD (13,14). Given the clustering of risk factors that characterizes MetS, it is likely that individuals with MetS have a high burden of subclinical disease (a term used herein to refer to both subclinical atherosclerosis and target organ damage). It is also likely that subclinical disease would contribute to the increased risk of CVD associated with MetS. Yet, data examining this premise comprehensively are lacking in the published literature. Of note, whereas several studies (15–25) have documented the increased prevalence of subclinical disease in MetS, they have not investigated the potential role of such disease in mediating the vascular risk associated with the condition. Additionally, previous studies (15–25) assessing subclinical disease in MetS have typically focused on single measures of subclinical disease.

Accordingly, we characterized comprehensively the cross-sectional prevalence of subclinical disease in individuals with prevalent MetS in the community. Additionally, we tested the hypothesis that the presence of subclinical disease contributes to the increased risk of overt CVD associated with MetS prospectively.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The design and selection criteria of the Framingham Offspring Study have been described previously (26). Participants who attended the sixth examination cycle (1995–1998) were eligible for the present study (n = 3,532). The participants underwent routine medical history, physical examination including blood pressure measurement, anthropometry, laboratory assessment of CVD risk factors, and testing for the presence of subclinical CVD (see section below). The institutional review board at Boston Medical Center approved the study, and all participants gave written informed consent.

Participants were excluded from the present investigation for the following reasons: prevalent CVD at baseline (n = 415), unavailable electrocardiography data (n = 6), unavailable measurement of urinary albumin (n = 460), unavailable ankle-brachial blood pressure data (n = 49), unavailable or inadequate carotid ultrasonography data (n = 70), and unavailable or inadequate echocardiographic left ventricular mass data (n = 587). After these exclusions, 1,945 individuals (mean age 58 years; 59% women) were eligible and constituted the study sample.

Definition of risk factors and MetS.

Cigarette smoking was defined by self-report of cigarette use within the year preceding the heart study baseline examination. Diabetes was defined as a fasting plasma glucose ≥126 mg/dl or use of insulin or oral hypoglycemic agents (27). The MetS was defined according to the modified National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria (28) by the presence of three or more of the following: increased waist circumference (≥102 cm for men, ≥88 cm for women), elevated blood pressure (≥130 mmHg systolic or ≥85 mmHg diastolic or treatment for hypertension), hyperglycemia (fasting blood glucose ≥100 mg/dl or treatment for elevated glucose), hypertriglyceridemia (≥150 mg/dl or treatment with nicotinic acid or fibrates), or low HDL cholesterol (<40 mg/dl in men, <50 mg/dl in women).

Subclinical disease measures and score.

Measures of subclinical vascular disease and target organ damage were chosen based on a review of the published literature. The five tests used to characterize the prevalence of subclinical disease are detailed in Table 1 and described briefly below. A standard 12-lead computerized resting electrocardiogram was obtained with the participants in a supine position. The sex-specific Cornell voltage criteria were used to assess the presence of electrocardiographic LVH (29). All participants underwent routine transthoracic echocardiographic examination. M-mode measurements of left ventricular dimensions were obtained by the leading-edge-to-leading-edge technique (30). Left ventricular ejection fraction was estimated by experienced observers based on the visual assessment of left ventricular contractile performance and wall motion in multiple two-dimensional views. Carotid ultrasound readings were acquired and images analyzed according to a standard protocol (31). Imaging was conducted using a high-resolution 7.5-MHz transducer for the common carotid artery and a 5.0-MHz transducer for the carotid bulb and internal carotid artery (Toshiba Medical Systems), as described previously (32). Carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) measurements were made from gated diastolic images of the left and right carotid artery at the level of the distal common carotid artery, the carotid artery bulb, and the proximal 2 cm of the internal carotid artery. The maximal IMT at each site was defined as the mean of the maximal IMT measured at the near and far walls of the vessel. The internal carotid artery IMT was defined as the mean of the maximal IMT measurements for the carotid artery bulb and the internal carotid artery on both the right and left side. Ankle-brachial systolic blood pressure measurements were obtained by trained technicians according to a standard protocol, using an 8-MHz Doppler pen probe and an ultrasonic Doppler flow detector (Parks Medical Electronics, Aloha, OR), as previously described (33). Microalbuminuria was assessed by estimating the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio in a single urine sample. The urinary albumin concentration was determined by immunoturbidometry (Tina-Quant Albumin Assay; Roche Diagnostics), and the urinary creatinine concentration was measured with a modified Jaffe method. The urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio measured in a spot urine sample is highly correlated with 24-h urine albumin excretion (7).

Although several subclinical disease indicators have a continuous distribution of values, we dichotomized values using thresholds described in the literature that have been validated against outcome events in other studies. Such an approach permits characterization of the presence versus absence of subclinical disease (10). Thus, participants could have abnormalities signifying subclinical disease on any of the components of the five tests described in Table 1. For LVH and carotid ultrasound abnormalities, presence of any specific abnormality (of two to three eligible ones; see Table 1) was considered indicative of subclinical disease. Additionally, for each participant we constructed a subclinical disease score, ranging from 0 to 5, calculated from the number of tests (LVH by electrocardiogram or echocardiography, left ventricular systolic dysfunction by echocardiography, carotid ultrasound abnormality, peripheral arterial disease by ankle-brachial blood pressure index, and glomerular endothelial dysfunction by urinary albumin excretion rate) with evidence of subclinical disease. We weighted each of the five tests equally for the sake of simplicity, an approach paralleling that of the subclinical disease index formulated by Kuller et al. (10). This approach assumes that the hazards posed by abnormality of any of the five tests (or of subclinical disease measures defined by a test) are similar. We chose this analytical strategy to facilitate interpretation of results in a simple, yet meaningful, way.

Follow-up and outcome events.

All participants were under longitudinal surveillance for the occurrence of CVD events, through periodic examinations at the Framingham Heart Study and via biennial health history updates between examinations. Three experienced investigators obtained and reviewed hospitalization and physician office visit records for all suspected CVD events. A separate review committee that included a neurologist adjudicated cerebrovascular events, and a heart study neurologist independently examined most participants with suspected stroke.

The outcome in this study was the incidence of a first overt CVD event, defined as a composite of coronary heart disease (recognized or unrecognized myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, coronary insufficiency, or coronary heart disease death), cerebrovascular disease (stroke or transient ischemic attack), heart failure (by Framingham criteria), and intermittent claudication. Diagnosis criteria for these events have been described previously (34). Follow-up was from the sixth examination (baseline) up to 31 December 2005.

Statistical methods.

Participants were categorized into three mutually exclusive groups for analyses: those without either MetS or diabetes (the referent group), those with MetS but no diabetes, and those with diabetes. We evaluated individuals with diabetes as a comparison group because MetS is a risk factor for diabetes. Furthermore, prior research suggests that people with diabetes have a high prevalence of subclinical disease, which is a primary determinant of CVD risk in this group (35).

First, we characterized the prevalence of subclinical disease in each of the three groups. Because age is a major determinant of subclinical disease, we also assessed the sex-specific prevalence of subclinical disease in the three groups stratified by age (<60 vs. ≥60 years). Second, we performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the associations of MetS and diabetes with the prevalence of subclinical disease, adjusting for age and sex. Odds ratios (and their 95% CIs) for the presence of any subclinical disease (a score of one or more) and for the prevalence of each individual subclinical disease measure was estimated for participants with MetS and diabetes, with those who had neither condition serving as referent. Third, we evaluated the prognostic significance of subclinical disease in the three groups prospectively. Age- and sex-adjusted incidence rates of CVD were calculated for the three groups overall and stratifying each group by presence of subclinical disease.

We used Cox proportional hazards regression to assess the risk of CVD incidence in participants with MetS and in those with diabetes, with the group with neither condition serving as referent. We constructed two sets of models (age- and sex-adjusted and multivariable-adjusted [incorporating only age, sex, smoking, and LDL cholesterol to keep the models parsimonious]) and performed the following analyses hierarchically to investigate the role of subclinical disease in individuals with MetS or diabetes: A) without adjustment for subclinical vascular disease, B) with adjustment for subclinical disease score modeled as a dichotomous variable (subclinical disease present [score ≥1] versus absent [score = 0]), C) with adjustment for subclinical disease score as an ordinal variable, and D) stratified by presence versus absence of any subclinical vascular disease.

We also examined effect modification by testing the statistical significance of the following two-way interaction terms in the multivariable models: subclinical disease by age, subclinical disease by sex, subclinical disease by MetS, and subclinical disease by diabetes. To assess the incremental utility of subclinical disease for predicting CVD risk, we calculated the c-statistic for models A–C. Further, we created a subclinical disease score using “office-based” tests that included electrocardiography, ankle-brachial index, and microalbuminuria (rendering a score from 0 to 3) and defined presence versus absence of subclinical disease based on these tests. The association between this office-based measure of subclinical disease and overt CVD was examined in secondary analyses. Two-sided P values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed using SAS 9.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

RESULTS

The baseline clinical characteristics for the three groups of participants are shown in Table 2. The groups with diabetes or MetS at baseline were older, had a higher proportion of men, and had higher levels of blood pressure, fasting glucose, triglycerides, and BMI but lower HDL levels compared with the referent group without diabetes or MetS (Table 2).

Subclinical vascular disease in participants with prevalent MetS or diabetes.

The prevalence of subclinical disease in the three groups is shown in Table 2 (lower half). Individuals with MetS or diabetes had a higher prevalence of subclinical disease (Table 2). The prevalence of subclinical disease increased with age in both sexes in all three groups (Fig. 1). In age- and sex-adjusted logistic regression models, MetS and diabetes were both strongly and significantly associated with the presence of electrocardiographic and echocardiographic LVH, increased carotid IMT and stenosis, and microalbuminuria (Table 3). Diabetes was associated positively with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and higher prevalence of a low ankle-brachial index, whereas MetS was not significantly associated. Overall, MetS was associated with a twofold odds and diabetes with an over fourfold odds of having at least one subclinical disease abnormality compared with individuals without MetS or diabetes.

Prognostic significance of subclinical disease in participants with MetS or diabetes.

On follow-up (mean 7.2 years [range 0.1–9.0]), 139 of 1,945 individuals (7.1%; 46% women) developed a first overt CVD event, including 59 of 581 participants (10.2%) with MetS. The age- and sex-adjusted incidence of CVD rose across the three groups, with the highest rates in participants with diabetes (Table 4). Further, the presence of subclinical disease was consistently associated with an increased CVD event rate in all three groups (Table 4). Participants with MetS and subclinical disease had CVD incidence rates comparable with that for the group of individuals with diabetes (including both individuals with and without subclinical disease).

In both age- and sex-adjusted and in multivariable-adjusted analyses, MetS and diabetes were associated with an increased CVD risk in models without adjustment for subclinical disease (Table 5, model A). In multivariable models adjusting for presence of subclinical vascular disease, the association of MetS and diabetes with CVD risk was attenuated, becoming borderline statistically significant for MetS (Table 5, model B). The presence of subclinical disease was significantly associated with a twofold increased risk of CVD (compared with absence of subclinical disease) in these models (Table 5, model B). Each point increase in the subclinical disease score was associated with a 49% increased risk of CVD in multivariable-adjusted analyses (Table 5, model C). In these models, the associations of MetS and diabetes with CVD risk were further attenuated. Similarly, in models stratifying groups by presence versus absence of subclinical vascular disease (Table 5, model D), individuals with MetS and diabetes who had subclinical disease experienced a 2.7- and 4.0-fold increased CVD risk, respectively, compared with participants without subclinical disease, MetS, or diabetes (who served as referent). Further, presence of subclinical disease was a significant predictor of CVD in the group of participants without MetS or diabetes at baseline. In contrast, individuals with the presence of MetS or diabetes but without any subclinical vascular disease were not at a statistically significant increased risk of overt CVD compared with the referent group.

Additional analyses.

None of the interaction terms evaluated reached statistical significance (P > 0.60 for all), suggesting that the association of subclinical disease with incident overt CVD was not modified by age, sex, or the presence of MetS or diabetes.

In the whole study sample, the c-statistics for models that included MetS and diabetes as covariates, but not subclinical disease (model A), were 0.71 for the age- and sex-adjusted model and 0.73 for the multivariable model (adjusting also for LDL cholesterol and smoking). When subclinical disease was added as a dichotomous variable (model B), the c-statistic increased to 0.73 for the age- and sex-adjusted model and 0.74 for the multivariable model (P = 0.03 and 0.12, respectively, for comparisons with models without subclinical disease). When subclinical disease score was incorporated as an ordinal variable (model C), the c-statistic was 0.74 for both the age- and sex-adjusted and the multivariable models (P = 0.01 and 0.07, respectively, for comparisons with models without subclinical disease).

The c-statistics for models including subclinical disease score, but not MetS or diabetes as covariates, were 0.73 for the age- and sex-adjusted model and 0.74 for the multivariable model. When MetS and diabetes were added as covariates to the models, the c-statistic increased to 0.74 for the age- and sex-adjusted model and 0.75 for the multivariable model (P = 0.14 and 0.21, respectively, for comparisons with models without MetS and diabetes).

In secondary analyses, we assessed the associations between a subclinical disease score using office-based tests (electrocardiography, ankle-brachial index, and microalbuminuria) and overt CVD. The age- and sex-adjusted CVD rates by presence or absence of subclinical disease in individuals with or without MetS and diabetes (online appendix Table 1 [http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/db07-0078]), and the associations between subclinical disease and overt CVD (online appendix Table 2), were similar to those estimated using the more comprehensive subclinical disease definition. However, the associations between subclinical disease defined by office-based measures only and overt CVD were somewhat weaker than the associations using the original subclinical disease definition.

To examine a potential selection bias resulting from exclusion of participants with nonavailable data on subclinical disease measures, we compared the clinical features and risk of developing overt CVD in participants excluded from our investigation and those included in our sample. Participants who were excluded because of missing data on subclinical disease measures were older, more likely to be men, and had higher BMI and triglyceride levels (online appendix Table 3). However, the CVD incidence rates in those excluded due to missing data on subclinical disease (age- and sex-adjusted rate 8.0 [95% CI 6.4–9.6]) and in the “included” study sample (7.0 [5.8–8.2]) did not differ significantly (P = 0.28).

DISCUSSION

Principal findings.

Our principal findings are fourfold. First, in our community-based sample, over half of the individuals with MetS had subclinical disease upon comprehensive assessment using a panel of clinical tests that are routinely available. Prevalence increased markedly with age, with nearly two-thirds of people with MetS aged >60 years having evidence of subclinical disease. Second, individuals with MetS with evidence of subclinical disease experienced overt CVD incidence rates comparable with those with diabetes (considered a coronary heart disease risk equivalent) (36) and a risk nearly threefold that of participants without subclinical disease, MetS, or diabetes. Third, the presence of subclinical disease conferred approximately a twofold risk of overt CVD even in those without either MetS or diabetes (compared with their counterparts without subclinical disease). Fourth, adjustment for subclinical disease presence attenuated the association of MetS and diabetes with CVD risk. This observation suggests an important role of subclinical disease in mediating the vascular risks associated with MetS, extending prior work that established this premise for diabetes (35). The incorporation of subclinical disease measure in multivariable models resulted in a modest increase in the c-statistic.

Comparison with previous studies of subclinical disease in MetS.

As noted previously, several investigations have documented the greater burden of subclinical atherosclerosis in individuals with MetS (15–25,35). These prior studies were limited in their focus on specific measures or target organs, such as presence of increased left ventricular mass (24,25), left ventricular dysfunction (25), increased carotid IMT (15–20), or increased coronary artery calcium score (21–23). None used a panel of tests to comprehensively characterize the burden of subclinical disease associated with the condition. Data on the prognostic significance of subclinical disease in MetS are even more limited. One previous study (37) reported that presence of MetS predicts myocardial ischemia in subjects with a high coronary artery calcium score.

Investigators from the Cardiovascular Health Study have underscored the prognostic significance of subclinical disease in the elderly in a series of reports, although those reports did not focus on MetS (1–4,35). Indeed, Kuller et al. (10) formulated a subclinical disease index that combined measures of low ankle-brachial blood pressure index, carotid artery stenosis, increased carotid IMT, major electrocardiogram abnormalities, abnormal wall motion or ejection fraction on echocardiography, and positive responses to the Rose angina or claudication questionnaire without clinical evidence of angina or claudication. These investigators have established that the subclinical index is a powerful predictor of CVD in individuals without CVD (2,3) and in people with diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance (35). In the present study, we modified the subclinical disease index proposed by Kuller et al. (10) by adding two additional measures linked to CVD risk in numerous reports (i.e., echocardiographic LVH [5,6], which is more prevalent than its electrocardiographic counterpart, and microalbuminuria [7–9], an indicator of endothelial dysfunction and/or target organ damage). The cut points and definitions for the components of the subclinical disease score were developed a priori after careful review of the existing literature with the objective of formulating a score with high predictive utility. We also extend the observations reported by Kuller et al. (10) on the adverse prognostic implications of subclinical disease to the context of the MetS.

Strengths and limitations.

The strengths of this study are the moderate-to-large community-based sample, the continuous surveillance for CVD events blinded to subclinical disease status, and the routine assessment of a comprehensive set of tests of subclinical disease reflecting atherosclerotic burden and target organ damage across the cardiovascular system. Several limitations of our investigation should be noted. Our sample was middle-aged and predominantly white, limiting the generalizability of our findings to other ethnicities and age-groups. Moreover, we could not evaluate the role of coronary artery calcification as a marker of subclinical disease in MetS because such imaging was not performed at the sixth examination cycle. We have reported elsewhere the greater burden of coronary calcification in individuals with diabetes and pre-diabetes (38). Additionally, we evaluated a composite of CVD outcomes to maximize statistical power and did not analyze individual vascular outcomes. On a parallel note, we did not explore the relative prognostic significance of individual components of the subclinical disease score. We have noted earlier an inherent limitation of our statistical modeling that weighted the hazard associated with different subclinical disease measures equally for the sake of simplicity. Also, in the present study, we included microalbuminuria among the subclinical disease measures, even though it is part of the World Health Organization definition of the MetS (39). This was possible because we used the National Cholesterol Education Program definition of the MetS, the reason being that we consider microalbuminuria as a valuable marker of target organ damage (7–9). Further, to avoid overfitting of the multivariable models, we adjusted only for a smaller set of standard CVD risk factors, not including factors constituting the MetS, physical activity, medication like aspirin or β-blockers, or alcohol consumption. Last, exclusion of a substantial proportion of individuals due to nonavailable subclinical disease measures is an unavoidable limitation of large epidemiological studies, associated with the requirement for availability of data for all five tests of subclinical disease measures. However, this means that our results must be interpreted with caution and must be replicated in other samples.

Implications.

There has been considerable debate recently regarding the definition of the MetS and its clinical utility (11,12). Our data suggest that MetS (as defined by a cluster of risk factors) is associated with a high prevalence of subclinical disease. Our observations provide insights that the condition marks a group at high risk of overt CVD, possibly on the basis of a high burden of subclinical disease. In fact, individuals with MetS and subclinical disease experienced overt CVD incidence rates comparable with those with diabetes, which is considered a coronary heart disease risk equivalent (36). The finding of a high prevalence of subclinical disease even in younger individuals (aged <60 years) with MetS underscores the need for aggressive treatment of risk factors in young adulthood and the importance of primary prevention. This is important given that subclinical atherosclerosis is the primary underlying etiology of overt CVD. The higher CVD risk associated with the presence of subclinical disease even in individuals without MetS or diabetes suggests that lesser degrees of elevation of risk factors than that defined by MetS may be pathogenetically related to the development of subclinical atherosclerosis and its evolution to overt disease.

The presence of subclinical disease did not add substantially in terms of model discrimination. This shows that our findings are primarily interesting from a pathophysiological perspective. Our results do not imply that individuals with MetS or diabetes should undergo extensive screening for subclinical disease. The clinical utility of assessment of subclinical disease burden in these individuals still needs to be examined comprehensively in other settings before any changes to the current guidelines can be suggested (28). Also, it is important to assess other measures of test performance, such as model calibration or reclassification of CVD risk in additional studies.

Conclusions.

In our community-based cohort, individuals with MetS have a high prevalence of subclinical cardiovascular disease, which likely contributes to the increased risk of overt CVD associated with the condition.

FIG. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 1.

Prevalence of any subclinical atherosclerosis or target organ damage in individuals without diabetes or MetS, those with MetS (but no diabetes), and participants with diabetes, by age.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Definitions of subclinical vascular disease

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Baseline characteristics of the study sample

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3

Odds of subclinical vascular disease in participants with prevalent MetS and diabetes

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 4

Incidence of CVD during 8 years of follow-up

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 5

Presence of the MetS, diabetes, and subclinical vascular disease and risk of CVD

Acknowledgments

This work was supported through the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation and the Swedish Society of Medicine (to E.I.); the National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) (contract no. N01-HC-25195, 1R01HL080124, and 2K24HL04334 to R.S.V.); and a career development award from the American Diabetes Association (to J.B.M.).

The NHLBI had no role in the study design, analyses, or drafting of the manuscript. The NHLBI reviews all manuscripts submitted for publication, but it was not involved in the decision to publish.

The study was also supported by donation of microalbuminuria assay reagents from Roche Diagnostics.

Parts of this article was presented as an oral presentation at the American Heart Association's 47th Annual Conference on Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention in association with the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism in Orlando, Florida, 28 February to 3 March 2007. The abstract from the conference has been published in a supplement of Circulation.

Footnotes

  • Published ahead of print at http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org on 30 March 2007. DOI: 10.2337/db07-0078.

    Additional information for this article can be found in an online appendix at http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/db07-0078.

    The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

    • Accepted March 1, 2007.
    • Received January 17, 2007.
  • DIABETES

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    Sutton-Tyrrell K, Kuller LH, Matthews KA, Holubkov R, Patel A, Edmundowicz D, Newman A: Subclinical atherosclerosis in multiple vascular beds: an index of atherosclerotic burden evaluated in postmenopausal women. Atherosclerosis 160 : 407 –416,2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. ↵
    Kuller LH, Shemanski L, Psaty BM, Borhani NO, Gardin J, Haan MN, O'Leary DH, Savage PJ, Tell GS, Tracy R: Subclinical disease as an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Circulation 92 : 720 –726,1995
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Kuller LH, Arnold AM, Psaty BM, Robbins JA, O'Leary DH, Tracy RP, Burke GL, Manolio TA, Chaves PH: 10-year follow-up of subclinical cardiovascular disease and risk of coronary heart disease in the Cardiovascular Health Study. Arch Intern Med 166 : 71 –78,2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    Psaty BM, Furberg CD, Kuller LH, Bild DE, Rautaharju PM, Polak JF, Bovill E, Gottdiener JS: Traditional risk factors and subclinical disease measures as predictors of first myocardial infarction in older adults: the Cardiovascular Health Study. Arch Intern Med 159 : 1339 –1347,1999
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. ↵
    Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WP: Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med 322 : 1561 –1566,1990
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    Vakili BA, Okin PM, Devereux RB: Prognostic implications of left ventricular hypertrophy. Am Heart J 141 : 334 –341,2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    Karalliedde J, Viberti G: Microalbuminuria and cardiovascular risk. Am J Hypertens 17 : 986 –993,2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. Árnlov J, Evans JC, Meigs JB, Wang TJ, Fox CS, Levy D, Benjamin EJ, D'Agostino RB, Vasan RS: Low-grade albuminuria and incidence of cardiovascular disease events in nonhypertensive and nondiabetic individuals: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 112 : 969 –975,2005
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    Miettinen H, Haffner SM, Lehto S, Ronnemaa T, Pyorala K, Laakso M: Proteinuria predicts stroke and other atherosclerotic vascular disease events in nondiabetic and nonûInsulin-dependent diabetic subjects. Stroke 27 : 2033 –2039,1996
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Kuller L, Borhani N, Furberg C, Gardin J, Manolio T, O'Leary D, Psaty B, Robbins J: Prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease and association with risk factors in the Cardiovascular Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 139 : 1164 –1179,1994
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    Kahn R, Buse J, Ferrannini E, Stern M: The metabolic syndrome: time for a critical appraisal: joint statement from the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 28 : 2289 –2304,2005
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    Reaven GM: The metabolic syndrome: is this diagnosis necessary? Am J Clin Nutr 83 : 1237 –1247,2006
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    Eckel RH, Grundy SM, Zimmet PZ: The metabolic syndrome. Lancet 365 : 1415 –1428,2005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. ↵
    Grundy SM, Howard B, Smith S Jr, Eckel R, Redberg R, Bonow RO: Prevention Conference VI: Diabetes and cardiovascular disease: executive summary: conference proceeding for healthcare professionals from a special writing group of the American Heart Association. Circulation 105 : 2231 –2239,2002
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    Ahluwalia N, Drouet L, Ruidavets JB, Perret B, Amar J, Boccalon H, Hanaire-Broutin H, Ferrieres J: Metabolic syndrome is associated with markers of subclinical atherosclerosis in a French population-based sample. Atherosclerosis 186 : 345 –353,2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. Bonora E, Kiechl S, Willeit J, Oberhollenzer F, Egger G, Bonadonna RC, Muggeo M: Carotid atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease in the metabolic syndrome: prospective data from the Bruneck Study. Diabetes Care 26 : 1251 –1257,2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. Fan AZ: Metabolic syndrome and progression of atherosclerosis among middle-aged US adults. J Atheroscler Thromb 13 : 46 –54,2006
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. Hassinen M, Komulainen P, Lakka TA, Vaisanen SB, Haapala I, Gylling H, Alen M, Schmidt-Trucksass A, Nissinen A, Rauramaa R: Metabolic syndrome and the progression of carotid intima-media thickness in elderly women. Arch Intern Med 166 : 444 –449,2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. McNeill AM, Rosamond WD, Girman CJ, Heiss G, Golden SH, Duncan BB, East HE, Ballantyne C: Prevalence of coronary heart disease and carotid arterial thickening in patients with the metabolic syndrome (the ARIC study). Am J Cardiol 94 : 1249 –1254,2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  20. ↵
    Tzou WS, Douglas PS, Srinivasan SR, Bond MG, Tang R, Chen W, Berenson GS, Stein JH: Increased subclinical atherosclerosis in young adults with metabolic syndrome: the Bogalusa Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 46 : 457 –463,2005
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. ↵
    Hunt ME, O'Malley PG, Feuerstein I, Taylor AJ: The relationship between the “metabolic score ” and sub-clinical atherosclerosis detected with electron beam computed tomography. Coron Artery Dis 14 : 317 –322,2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. Kullo IJ, Cassidy AE, Peyser PA, Turner ST, Sheedy PF, Bielak LF: Association between metabolic syndrome and subclinical coronary atherosclerosis in asymptomatic adults. Am J Cardiol 94 : 1554 –1558,2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. ↵
    Wong ND, Sciammarella MG, Polk D, Gallagher A, Miranda-Peats L, Whitcomb B, Hachamovitch R, Friedman JD, Hayes S, Berman DS: The metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and subclinical atherosclerosis assessed by coronary calcium. J Am Coll Cardiol 41 : 1547 –1553,2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. ↵
    Burchfiel CM, Skelton TN, Andrew ME, Garrison RJ, Arnett DK, Jones DW, Taylor HA Jr: Metabolic syndrome and echocardiographic left ventricular mass in blacks: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Circulation 112 : 819 –827,2005
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    Chinali M, Devereux RB, Howard BV, Roman MJ, Bella JN, Liu JE, Resnick HE, Lee ET, Best LG, de Simone G: Comparison of cardiac structure and function in American Indians with and without the metabolic syndrome (the Strong Heart Study). Am J Cardiol 93 : 40 –44,2004
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    Kannel WB, Feinleib M, McNamara PM, Garrison RJ, Castelli WP: An investigation of coronary heart disease in families: the Framingham Offspring Study. Am J Epidemiol 110 : 281 –290,1979
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus: Report of the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care 26 (Suppl. 1) : S5 –S20,2003
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR, Donato KA, Eckel RH, Franklin BA, Gordon DJ, Krauss RM, Savage PJ, Smith SC Jr, Spertus JA, Costa F: Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute scientific statement. Circulation 112 : 2735 –2752,2005
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    Casale PN, Devereux RB, Alonso DR, Campo E, Kligfield P: Improved sex-specific criteria of left ventricular hypertrophy for clinical and computer interpretation of electrocardiograms: validation with autopsy findings. Circulation 75 : 565 –572,1987
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    Vasan RS, Benjamin EJ, Larson MG, Leip EP, Wang TJ, Wilson PW, Levy D: Plasma natriuretic peptides for community screening for left ventricular hypertrophy and systolic dysfunction: the Framingham Heart Study. JAMA 288 : 1252 –1259,2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. ↵
    O'Leary DH, Polak JF, Kronmal RA, Manolio TA, Burke GL, Wolfson SK Jr: Carotid-artery intima and media thickness as a risk factor for myocardial infarction and stroke in older adults: Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group. N Engl J Med 340 : 14 –22,1999
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. ↵
    Fox CS, Cupples LA, Chazaro I, Polak JF, Wolf PA, D'Agostino RB, Ordovas JM, O'Donnell CJ: Genomewide linkage analysis for internal carotid artery intimal medial thickness: evidence for linkage to chromosome 12. Am J Hum Genet 74 : 253 –261,2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    Murabito JM, Evans JC, Nieto K, Larson MG, Levy D, Wilson PW: Prevalence and clinical correlates of peripheral arterial disease in the Framingham Offspring Study. Am Heart J 143 : 961 –965,2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  34. ↵
    Some Risk Factors Related to the Annual Incidence of Cardiovascular Disease and Death in Pooled Repeated Bbiennial Mmeasurements: Framingham Heart Study: 30 Year Follow-Up. Bethesda, MD, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,1987
  35. ↵
    Kuller LH, Velentgas P, Barzilay J, Beauchamp NJ, O'Leary DH, Savage PJ: Diabetes mellitus: subclinical cardiovascular disease and risk of incident cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 20 : 823 –829,2000
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III): Executive summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA 285 : 2486 –2497,2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  37. ↵
    Wong ND, Rozanski A, Gransar H, Miranda-Peats R, Kang X, Hayes S, Shaw L, Friedman J, Polk D, Berman DS: Metabolic syndrome and diabetes are associated with an increased likelihood of inducible myocardial ischemia among patients with subclinical atherosclerosis. Diabetes Care 28 : 1445 –1450,2005
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    Meigs JB, Larson MG, D'Agostino RB, Levy D, Clouse ME, Nathan DM, Wilson PW, O'Donnell CJ: Coronary artery calcification in type 2 diabetes and insulin resistance: the Framingham Offspring Study. Diabetes Care 25 : 1313 –1319,2002
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    Alberti KG, Zimmet PZ: Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus provisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabet Med 15 : 539 –553,1998
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  40. ↵
    Lee DS, Pencina MJ, Benjamin EJ, Wang TJ, Levy D, O'Donnell CJ, Nam BH, Larson MG, D'Agostino RB, Vasan RS: Association of parental heart failure with risk of heart failure in offspring. N Engl J Med 355 : 138 –147,2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    Devereux RB, Alonso DR, Lutas EM, Gottlieb GJ, Campo E, Sachs I, Reichek N: Echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular hypertrophy: comparison to necropsy findings. Am J Cardiol 57 : 450 –458,1986
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  42. ↵
    Quinones MA, Pickering E, Alexander JK: Percentage of shortening of the echocardiographic left ventricular dimension: its use in determining ejection fraction and stroke volume. Chest 74 : 59 –65,1978
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  43. ↵
    Chambless LE, Heiss G, Folsom AR, Rosamond W, Szklo M, Sharrett AR, Clegg LX: Association of coronary heart disease incidence with carotid arterial wall thickness and major risk factors: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, 1987–1993. Am J Epidemiol 146 : 483 –494,1997
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this Issue

June 2007, 56(6)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by Author
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Prevalence and Prognostic Impact of Subclinical Cardiovascular Disease in Individuals With the Metabolic Syndrome and Diabetes
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Prevalence and Prognostic Impact of Subclinical Cardiovascular Disease in Individuals With the Metabolic Syndrome and Diabetes
Erik Ingelsson, Lisa M. Sullivan, Joanne M. Murabito, Caroline S. Fox, Emelia J. Benjamin, Joseph F. Polak, James B. Meigs, Michelle J. Keyes, Christopher J. O'Donnell, Thomas J. Wang, Ralph B. D'Agostino, Philip A. Wolf, Ramachandran S. Vasan
Diabetes Jun 2007, 56 (6) 1718-1726; DOI: 10.2337/db07-0078

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

Prevalence and Prognostic Impact of Subclinical Cardiovascular Disease in Individuals With the Metabolic Syndrome and Diabetes
Erik Ingelsson, Lisa M. Sullivan, Joanne M. Murabito, Caroline S. Fox, Emelia J. Benjamin, Joseph F. Polak, James B. Meigs, Michelle J. Keyes, Christopher J. O'Donnell, Thomas J. Wang, Ralph B. D'Agostino, Philip A. Wolf, Ramachandran S. Vasan
Diabetes Jun 2007, 56 (6) 1718-1726; DOI: 10.2337/db07-0078
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Tables
  • Suppl Material
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Interphotoreceptor Retinol-Binding Protein Ameliorates Diabetes-Induced Retinal Dysfunction and Neurodegeneration Through Rhodopsin
  • Lung and Kidney ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in Renin-Angiotensin System Blocker–Treated Comorbid Diabetic Mice Mimicking Host Factors That Have Been Linked to Severe COVID-19
  • Specific NLRP3 Inhibition Protects Against Diabetes-Associated Atherosclerosis
Show more Complications

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Online Ahead of Print
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Collections
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes Care
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Diabetes Spectrum
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Print ISSN: 0012-1797, Online ISSN: 1939-327X.