METHODS: Patients with confirmed CRC based on colonoscopy findings and cancer free controls from five local hospitals were assessed for MetS according to the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) definition. Each index case was matched for age, gender and ethnicity with two controls (140: 280).
RESULTS: MetS among cases was highly prevalent (70.7%), especially among women (68.7%). MetS as an entity increased CRC risk by almost three fold independently (OR=2.61, 95%CI=1.53-4.47). In men MetS increased the risk of CRC by two fold (OR=2.01, 95%CI, 1.43-4.56), demonstrating an increasing trend in risk with the number of Mets components observed.
CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence for a positive association between the metabolic syndrome and colorectal cancer. A prospective study on the Malaysian population is a high priority to confirm these findings.
CONCLUSION: In this review, we will discuss the possible mechanisms which may relate the association between MetS and cognitive decline which include vascular damages, elevation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), insulin resistance and low-grade inflammation.
METHODS: We assessed sCD26/DPP-IV levels, active GLP-1 levels, body mass index (BMI), glucose, insulin, A1c, glucose homeostasis indices, and lipid profiles in 549 Malaysian subjects (including 257 T2DM patients with MetS, 57 T2DM patients without MetS, 71 non-diabetics with MetS, and 164 control subjects without diabetes or metabolic syndrome).
RESULTS: Fasting serum levels of sCD26/DPP-IV were significantly higher in T2DM patients with and without MetS than in normal subjects. Likewise, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were significantly higher in patients with T2DM and MetS than in non-diabetic patients with MetS. However, active GLP-1 levels were significantly lower in T2DM patients both with and without MetS than in normal subjects. In T2DM subjects, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with significantly higher A1c levels, but were significantly lower in patients using monotherapy with metformin. In addition, no significant differences in sCD26/DPP-IV levels were found between diabetic subjects with and without MetS. Furthermore, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were negatively correlated with active GLP-1 levels in T2DM patients both with and without MetS. In normal subjects, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with increased BMI, cholesterol, and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-c) levels.
CONCLUSION: Serum sCD26/DPP-IV levels increased in T2DM subjects with and without MetS. Active GLP-1 levels decreased in T2DM patients both with and without MetS. In addition, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with Alc levels and negatively correlated with active GLP-1 levels. Moreover, metformin monotherapy was associated with reduced sCD26/DPP-IV levels. In normal subjects, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with increased BMI, cholesterol, and LDL-c.
METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis used decision tree and Markov models to estimate lifetime costs and health benefits from societal perspective, based on a cohort of 509 metabolic syndrome patients in Thailand. Data were obtained from published literatures and Thai database. Results were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2014 US dollars (USD) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with discount rate of 3%. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the influence of parameter uncertainty on the results.
RESULTS: The ICER of ultrasonography screening of 50-year-old metabolic syndrome patients with intensive weight reduction program was 958 USD/QALY gained when compared with no screening. The probability of being cost-effective was 67% using willingness-to-pay threshold in Thailand (4848 USD/QALY gained). Screening before 45 years was cost saving while screening at 45 to 64 years was cost-effective.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with metabolic syndromes, ultrasonography screening for NAFLD with intensive weight reduction program is a cost-effective program in Thailand. Study can be used as part of evidence-informed decision making.
TRANSLATIONAL IMPACTS: Findings could contribute to changes of NAFLD diagnosis practice in settings where economic evidence is used as part of decision-making process. Furthermore, study design, model structure, and input parameters could also be used for future research addressing similar questions.
METHODS: A total of 509 patients with MetS were recruited. All were diagnosed by clinicians with ultrasonography-confirmed whether they were patients with NAFLD. Patients were randomly divided into derivation (n=400) and validation (n=109) cohort. To develop the risk score, clinical risk indicators measured at the time of recruitment were built by logistic regression. Regression coefficients were transformed into item scores and added up to a total score. A risk scoring scheme was developed from clinical predictors: BMI ≥25, AST/ALT ≥1, ALT ≥40, type 2 diabetes mellitus and central obesity. The scoring scheme was applied in validation cohort to test the performance.
RESULTS: The scheme explained, by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC), 76.8% of being NAFLD with good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow χ2 =4.35; P=.629). The positive likelihood ratio of NAFLD in patients with low risk (scores below 3) and high risk (scores 5 and over) were 2.32 (95% CI: 1.90-2.82) and 7.77 (95% CI: 2.47-24.47) respectively. When applied in validation cohort, the score showed good performance with AuROC 76.7%, and illustrated 84%, and 100% certainty in low- and high-risk groups respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: A simple and non-invasive scoring scheme of five predictors provides good prediction indices for NAFLD in MetS patients. This scheme may help clinicians in order to take further appropriate action.