Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2024 Apr 25;23(1):141.
doi: 10.1186/s12933-024-02229-8.

Prediction of various insulin resistance indices for the risk of hypertension among military young adults: the CHIEF cohort study, 2014-2020

Kun-Zhe Tsai  1   2   3 , Chen-Chih Chu  4 , Wei-Chun Huang  5   6 , Xuemei Sui  7 , Carl J Lavie  8 , Gen-Min Lin  9   10
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Prediction of various insulin resistance indices for the risk of hypertension among military young adults: the CHIEF cohort study, 2014-2020

Kun-Zhe Tsai et al. Cardiovasc Diabetol. .

Abstract

Background: Non-insulin-based insulin resistance (NI-IR) indices have been reported to have an association with prevalent hypertension, however, no cohort studies to date have compared their prediction of hypertension among young adults.

Methods: A total of 2,448 military men and women, aged 18-39 years, without baseline hypertension in Taiwan were followed for incident hypertension events from 2014 until the end of 2020. All subjects underwent annual health examinations including measurements of blood pressure (BP) in mmHg. Systolic BP (SBP) 130-139/diastolic BP (DBP) < 80, SBP < 130/DBP 80-89, and SBP 130-139/DBP 80-89 were respectively defined as stage I isolated systolic hypertension (ISH), isolated diastolic hypertension (IDH) and combined hypertension (CH). The cut-off levels of stage II hypertension for SBP and DBP were 140-159 and 90-99, respectively. Four NI-IR indices included the ratio of serum triglycerides (TG) to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), TyG index defined as ln[TG* fasting glucose (FG)/2], Metabolic Score for IR (METS-IR) defined as ln[(2* FG) + TG)* body mass index (BMI)/(ln(HDL-C))], and ZJU index defined as BMI + FG + TG + 3* alanine transaminase/aspartate transaminase (+ 2 if female). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed with adjustments for baseline age, sex, body mass index, BP, substance use, family history for early onset cardiovascular diseases or hypertension, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, kidney function, serum uric acid and physical activity to determine the associations.

Results: During a median follow-up of 6.0 years, there were 920 hypertension events (37.6%). Greater TyG, TG/HDL-C and METS-IR indices were associated with a higher risk of stage I IDH (hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals: 1.376 (1.123-1.687), 1.082 (1.039-1.127) and 3.455 (1.921-6.214), respectively), whereas only greater ZJU index was associated with a higher risk of stage II IDH [HRs: 1.011 (1.001-1.021)]. In addition, greater ZJU index was associated with a higher risk of stage II ISH [HR: 1.013 (1.003-1.023)], and greater TyG index was associated with a higher risk of stage II CH [HR: 2.821 (1.244-6.395)].

Conclusion: Insulin resistance assessed by various NI-IR indices was associated with a higher risk of hypertension in young adults, while the assessment ability for specific hypertension category may differ by NI-IR indices.

Keywords: Cohort study; Hypertension; Insulin resistance indices; Young adults.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The area under the curves of receiver operating characteristic (AUC- ROC) for the four non-insulin based insulin resistance (NI-IR) indices to predict incident overall hypertension defined by blood pressure ≥ 130/80 mmHg
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The AUC-ROC for the four non-insulin based insulin resistance (NI-IR) indices to predict incident stage II hypertension defined by blood pressure 140–159/90–99 mmHg
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Iadecola C, Yaffe K, Biller J, Bratzke LC, Faraci FM, Gorelick PB, et al. Impact of hypertension on cognitive function: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension. 2016;68:e67–94. doi: 10.1161/HYP.0000000000000053. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. GBD 2015 Risk Factors Collaborators Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388:1659–724. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31679-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kearney PM, Whelton M, Reynolds K, Muntner P, Whelton PK, He J. Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data. Lancet. 2005;365:217–23. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17741-1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arima H, Barzi F, Chalmers J. Mortality patterns in hypertension. J Hypertens. 2011;29:S3–7. doi: 10.1097/01.hjh.0000410246.59221.b1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fanelli E, Ravetto Enri L, Pappaccogli M, Fasano C, Di Monaco S, Pignata I, et al. Knowledge on arterial hypertension in general population: results from a community pharmacy screening program. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2021;31:1081–6. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2021.01.004. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms