Sex differences in the predictive value of insulin resistance surrogate indicators for prediabetes among Chinese adults aged 18–45 years: a multicenter cohort study - Scorecard - MDSpire
Advertisement
Sex differences in the predictive value of insulin resistance surrogate indicators for prediabetes among Chinese adults aged 18–45 years: a multicenter cohort study
Clinical Scorecard: Gender-Based Variations in the Predictive Utility of Insulin Resistance Surrogates for Prediabetes in Chinese Adults Aged 18 to 45: Findings from a Multicenter Cohort Analysis
At a Glance
Category
Detail
Condition
Prediabetes
Key Mechanisms
Insulin resistance as a core pathophysiological driver
Target Population
Chinese adults aged 18 to 45
Care Setting
Multicenter retrospective cohort study
Key Highlights
8.31% of participants developed prediabetes during follow-up, with higher incidence in men (10.76%) than women (5.74%)
METS-IR showed the strongest association with incident prediabetes in women (HR: 7.82) compared to men (HR: 1.45)
TyG-BMI demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy in the overall population (AUC = 0.6497)
Women exhibited superior discriminative performance across all insulin resistance indices compared to men
The study emphasizes the need for sex-specific risk stratification in prediabetes screening
Guideline-Based Recommendations
Diagnosis
Utilize insulin resistance surrogate indices for screening prediabetes
Management
Implement sex-stratified screening protocols for prediabetes
Monitoring & Follow-up
Regular follow-up for individuals identified at risk using insulin resistance indices
Risks
Higher risk of progression to type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular complications in prediabetic individuals
Patient & Prescribing Data
Young Chinese adults aged 18 to 45 with normoglycemia at baseline
Focus on early identification of high-risk individuals to prevent metabolic deterioration
Clinical Best Practices
Incorporate routine insulin resistance surrogate indices in health check-ups
Conduct sex-specific analyses when evaluating risk for prediabetes