Participant characteristics by quartiles of 25(OH)D
Table 1 presents the characteristics of the T2D population included in our study (n = 4670). The quartile ranges of 25(OH)D were ≤ 30.79, 30.80-39.23, 39.24–48.92, and ≥ 48.92. The participants in the highest 25(OH)D quartile were younger and more likely to be men than those with lower 25(OH)D quartile(P < 0.001, Table 1). With increase in 25(OH)D level, BMI, SBP, FPG, HbA1c, glucagon, C-peptide, lipid profiles (TC, LDL, HDL, TG) and HOMA-IR were decreased in trend (all adjusted Pfor trend<0.05). There were no significant changes in DBP, FINS and HOMA-β among different 25(OH)D levels (Table 1). Moreover, the higher the 25(OH)D quartile, the prevalence of dyslipidemia and abdominal obesity were lower (adjusted Pfor trend<0.05, Table 1).
Table 1
Comparison of clinical indexes among quartiles of 25(OH)D in type 2 diabetes populations
|
25(OH)D
|
|
|
|
Q1(≤ 30.79)
|
Q2(30.80-39.23)
|
Q3(39.24–48.92)
|
Q4(≥ 48.92)
|
P for Trend
|
Adjusted P for Trend
|
Participants (male, %)
|
445(38.2)
|
502(43)
|
567(48.4)
|
650(55.4)
|
< 0.001
|
/
|
Age(y)
|
68.44 ± 9.10
|
67.50 ± 8.57
|
66.73 ± 8.45
|
66.59 ± 8.76
|
< 0.001
|
/
|
Duration of diabetes (y)
|
10.01 ± 8.00
|
9.92 ± 7.76
|
10.20 ± 8.11
|
10.27 ± 7.95
|
0.320
|
/
|
Smoke(%)
|
19.5
|
18.2
|
17.6
|
17.1
|
0.115
|
/
|
BMI (kg/m2)
|
24.96 ± 3.74
|
25.13 ± 3.62
|
25.09 ± 3.65
|
24.63 ± 3.36
|
0.055
|
0.011
|
SBP(mmHg)
|
147.10 ± 20.66
|
145.40 ± 19.31
|
144.42 ± 19.20
|
142.66 ± 19.54
|
< 0.001
|
< 0.001
|
DBP(mmHg)
|
78.33 ± 11.26
|
79.00 ± 10.74
|
79.34 ± 10.43
|
78.58 ± 10.77
|
0.443
|
0.127
|
FPG(mmol/L)
|
7.78 ± 2.52
|
7.92 ± 2.51
|
7.84 ± 2.42
|
7.56 ± 2.16
|
0.017
|
0.002
|
HbA1c(%)
|
7.53 ± 1.48
|
7.54 ± 1.42
|
7.52 ± 1.34
|
7.34 ± 1.25
|
0.001
|
< 0.001
|
TC (mmol/L)
|
5.39 ± 1.27
|
5.19 ± 1.21
|
5.09 ± 1.13
|
4.77 ± 1.09
|
< 0.001
|
< 0.001
|
LDL-C(mmol/L)
|
3.32 ± 0.87
|
3.20 ± 0.85
|
3.16 ± 0.82
|
2.95 ± 0.80
|
< 0.001
|
< 0.001
|
HDL-C(mmol/L)
|
1.23 ± 0.31
|
1.22 ± 0.29
|
1.19 ± 0.28
|
1.18 ± 0.28
|
< 0.001
|
0.013
|
TG (mmol/L)
|
2.16 ± 2.10
|
1.92 ± 1.61
|
1.90 ± 1.44
|
1.67 ± 1.05
|
< 0.001
|
< 0.001
|
Log(glucagon) (pg/ml)
|
5.12 ± 0.44
|
5.10 ± 0.46
|
4.99 ± 0.48
|
4.89 ± 0.53
|
< 0.001
|
< 0.001
|
Log(FINS)(pmol/L)
|
3.99 ± 0.73
|
4.03 ± 0.73
|
4.00 ± 0.71
|
3.94 ± 0.72
|
0.073
|
0.088
|
Log(FC-p)(ng/ml)
|
0.42 ± 0.51
|
0.39 ± 0.50
|
0.38 ± 0.55
|
0.34 ± 0.56
|
< 0.001
|
0.049
|
Log(HOMA-β)
|
3.73 ± 0.83
|
3.73 ± 0.84
|
3.71 ± 0.82
|
3.71 ± 0.83
|
0.947
|
0.929
|
Log(HOMA-IR)
|
0.95 ± 0.81
|
0.99 ± 0.82
|
0.96 ± 0.78
|
0.88 ± 0.79
|
0.014
|
0.009
|
Hypertension(%)
|
79.6
|
79.3
|
78.2
|
76.9
|
0.084
|
0.119
|
Dyslipidemia(%)
|
66.4
|
61.7
|
62.3
|
58.5
|
< 0.001
|
< 0.001
|
Abdominal obesity(%)
|
76.5
|
74.8
|
75.7
|
68.2
|
< 0.001
|
0.031
|
Date are expressed as mean ± SD for continuous variables and as percentages for categorical variables; P for trend by regression tests. BMI: body mass index; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; FPG: fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c: glycated hemoglobin; TC: total cholesterol; LDL-C: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C: high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG: triglyceride; FINS: fasting insulin; FC-p: fasting C-peptide; HOMA-β: homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function; HOMA-IR: homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance. Pfor trend by regression tests; adjusted P values adjusted for age, gender, current smoking, diabetes duration.
Association between 25(OH)D and glucose metabolism parameters
The relationship between 25(OH)D and glucose metabolism-related indexes in T2D population was presented in Table 2. The spearman analysis showed that 25(OH)D concentration was negatively related to HbA1c (r=-0.031, P = 0.031), glucagon (r=-0.17, P < 0.001), FC-p (r=-0.055, P < 0.001), FINS (r=-0.034, P = 0.021), HOMA-IR (r=-0.041, P = 0.005) and remained significant even after further adjustments for age, gender, duration of diabetes, current smoking, BMI, dyslipidemia, hypertension and use of any antidiabetic agents. In addition, there was no significant association between 25(OH)D and FPG or HOMA-β in T2D patients.
Table 2
Correlation between 25(OH)D and glucose metabolism indexes in type 2 diabetes patients
|
Spearman Corr.
|
Partial Corr.
|
|
r
|
P
|
r’
|
P’
|
Fasting plasma glucose (FPG)
|
-0.018
|
0.226
|
-0.029
|
0.094
|
Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c)
|
-0.031
|
0.031
|
-0.057
|
0.001
|
Glucagon
|
-0.170
|
< 0.001
|
-0.137
|
< 0.001
|
Fasting C-peptide (FC-p)
|
-0.055
|
< 0.001
|
-0.048
|
0.006
|
Fasting insulin (FINS)
|
-0.034
|
0.021
|
-0.035
|
0.044
|
HOMA-β
|
-0.023
|
0.106
|
-0.013
|
0.447
|
HOMA-IR
|
-0.041
|
0.005
|
-0.043
|
0.013
|
r′ and P′ values were adjusted for age, gender, duration of diabetes, current smoking, body mass index, dyslipidemia, hypertension and use of any antidiabetic agents. HOMA-β: homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function; HOMA-IR: homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance.
The relationship between 25(OH)D and glucose metabolism parameters in type 2 diabetes with or without abdominal obesity
Table 3 showed the relationship between 25(OH)D and glucose metabolism parameters in T2D population with or without abdominal obesity. In non-abdominal obesity group, 25(OH)D level was negatively associated with FPG (r=-0.112, P = 0.002), HbA1c (r=-0.101, P = 0.004), glucagon (r=-0.146, P < 0.001) and HOMA-β (r=-0.084, P = 0.017) after adjusting for age, gender, duration of diabetes, current smoking, dyslipidemia, hypertension and use of any antidiabetic agents. As for abdominal obesity group, the partial correlation analysis showed the significant association between 25(OH)D and HbA1c (r=-0.078, P < 0.001), glucagon (r=-0.125, P < 0.001), fasting insulin(r=-0.062, P = 0.003), fasting C-p (r=-0.061, P = 0.003) and HOMA-IR (r=-0.058, P = 0.011).
Table 3
The relationship between 25(OH)D and indexes of glucose metabolism in type 2 diabetes patients with or without abdominal obesity
|
Type 2 diabetes(n = 340)
|
|
Non-abdominal obesity
|
Abdominal obesity
|
|
Spearman
|
Partial
|
Spearman
|
Partial
|
|
r
|
P
|
r’
|
P’
|
r
|
P
|
r’
|
P’
|
FPG
|
-0.063
|
0.028
|
-0.112
|
0.002
|
0.002
|
0.928
|
-0.040
|
0.055
|
HbA1c(%)
|
-0.066
|
0.020
|
-0.101
|
0.004
|
-0.013
|
0.444
|
-0.078
|
< 0.001
|
Log(glucagon)
|
-0.203
|
< 0.001
|
-0.146
|
< 0.001
|
-0.150
|
< 0.001
|
-0.125
|
< 0.001
|
Log(FINS)
|
0.005
|
0.853
|
0.022
|
0.529
|
-0.019
|
0.275
|
-0.062
|
0.003
|
Log(FC-p)
|
-0.006
|
0.834
|
-0.032
|
0.367
|
-0.044
|
0.010
|
-0.061
|
0.003
|
Log(HOMA-β)
|
0.039
|
0.173
|
0.084
|
0.017
|
-0.021
|
0.217
|
-0.029
|
0.161
|
Log(HOMA-IR)
|
-0.031
|
0.172
|
-0.035
|
0.203
|
-0.030
|
0.118
|
-0.058
|
0.011
|
r′ and P′ values were adjusted for age, gender, duration of diabetes, current smoking, dyslipidemia, hypertension and use of any antidiabetic agents. FPG: fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c: glycated hemoglobin; FINS: fasting insulin; FC-p: fasting C-peptide; HOMA-β: homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function; HOMA-IR: homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance.
The association between 25(OH)D and islets function in type 2 diabetes with or without abdominal obesity
The ordinary least squares (OLS) and quantile regression analysis were used to explore the association of 25(OH)D with islets function parameters including glucagon, fasting insulin, fasting C-p and HOMA-β, as presented in Table 4. The OLS regression showed that 25(OH)D was associated with glucagon (β=-0.135, P < 0.001) and fasting C-p (β=-0.062, P = 0.002) levels in T2D patients with abdominal obesity, while the quantile regression further showed that 25(OH)D was associated with glucagon and fasting C-p levels in 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 95th percentile distribution of 25(OH)D (all P < 0.05). As for T2D patients without abdominal obesity, 25(OH)D was associated with glucagon (β=-0.174, P < 0.001), fasting insulin (β=-0.064, P < 0.001) and HOMA-β (β = 0.058, P < 0.001) after linear regression analysis, and the OLS regression showed that the regression coefficients were significant in 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 95th percentiles for glucagon (all P < 0.05), but not in 50th percentile for fasting insulin(β=-0.032, P = 0.209) and HOMA-β (β = 0.040, P = 0.055).
Table 4
The association between 25(OH)D and islets function in type 2 diabetes patients with or without abdominal obesity
Independent Variable
|
|
OLS Coefficient
|
Quantile regression Coefficient
|
10th
|
25th
|
50th
|
75th
|
90th
|
Log(Glucagon)
|
abdominal obesity
|
-0.135**
|
-0.074**
|
-0.091**
|
-0.119**
|
-0.103**
|
-0.090**
|
non-abdominal obesity
|
-0.174**
|
-0.215**
|
-0.189**
|
-0.183**
|
-0.158**
|
-0.130**
|
Log(FINS)
|
abdominal obesity
|
0.003
|
0.006
|
0.034*
|
-0.005
|
-0.009
|
-0.025
|
non-abdominal obesity
|
-0.064**
|
-0.045
|
-0.068*
|
-0.032
|
-0.060*
|
-0.066*
|
Log(FC-p)
|
abdominal obesity
|
-0.062**
|
-0.046*
|
-0.045*
|
-0.025*
|
-0.034*
|
-0.045*
|
non-abdominal obesity
|
0.004
|
0.040
|
-0.037
|
-0.012
|
0.023
|
0.009
|
Log(HOMA-β)
|
abdominal obesity
|
-0.012
|
-0.028
|
-0.038*
|
0.001
|
0.019
|
0.021
|
non-abdominal obesity
|
0.058**
|
0.018
|
0.052*
|
0.040
|
0.068*
|
0.069*
|
OLS = Ordinary Least Square; *: P < 0.05; **: P < 0.01; Gender, age and lipid indexes were included as covariates in the regression models. FINS: fasting insulin; FC-p: fasting C-peptide; HOMA-β: homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function.
The conditional indirect effect of 25(OH)D on C-peptide by glucagon and on islet function hemostasis at different duration of diabetes levels in type 2 diabetes with abdominal obesity
The conditional indirect effect of 25(OH)D on C-peptide by glucagon in T2D with abdominal obesity were further analyzed by the model of moderation effects. Gender, age, smoking status, exercising status and use of any antidiabetic agents were adjusted as confounders. As shown in Table 5, the moderate analyses revealed significantly interaction effect of 25(OH)D and glucagon on C-p in type 2 diabetes with abdominal obesity (P = 0.0124), which implied that the influence of 25(OH)D on C-p levels partly by affecting glucagon levels.
Considering C-peptide and glucagon are the biomarkers of islet β-cells and α-cells function respectively, the ratio of glucagon and C-peptide (glucagon/C-p) were used to evaluate islet function hemostasis. The conditional indirect effect of 25(OH)D on the ratio of glucagon and C-peptide (glucagon/C-p) at different duration of diabetes levels in type 2 diabetes with abdominal obesity were also analyzed after adjusting confounders (gender, age, smoking status, exercising status and use of any antidiabetic agents). Table 6 showed that there was interaction effect of 25(OH)D and duration of diabetes on glucagon/C-p in type 2 diabetes with abdominal obesity (P = 0.035). According to the range of the duration of diabetes, 25(OH)D had significantly conditional indirect effect on glucagon/C-p at 1 SD below the mean (P = 0.0002) and the mean of the duration of diabetes (P = 0.0007). At 1 SD below the mean and the mean of the duration of diabetes, 25(OH)D was associated with glucagon/C-p (Table 6). These results indicated that type 2 diabetes with abdominal obesity and short duration of diabetes having high 25(OH)D presented lower level of glucagon/C-p than those who had low 25(OH)D.
Table 5
The conditional indirect effect of 25(OH)D on C-peptide by glucagon levels in type 2 diabetes with abdominal obesity
|
Interaction effect
|
Lower 95% CI
|
Upper 95% CI
|
P for interaction
|
25(OH)D
|
-0.0745
|
-0.1291
|
-0.0198
|
0.0076**
|
glucagon
|
0.0372
|
0.0005
|
0.0749
|
0.0429*
|
25(OH)D×glucagon
|
-0.0753
|
-0.1344
|
-0.0163
|
0.0124**
|
Bold italic*: P < 0.05; Bold italic**: P < 0.01. Gender, age, smoking status, exercising status and use of any antidiabetic agents were adjusted as confounders in the model of moderation analyses.
Table 6
The conditional indirect effect of 25(OH)D on the ratio of glucagon and C-peptide (glucagon/C-p) at different duration of diabetes levels in type 2 diabetes with abdominal obesity
|
Interaction effect
|
Lower 95% CI
|
Upper 95% CI
|
P for interaction
|
25(OH)D
|
-0.2308
|
-0.3546
|
-0.1070
|
0.0003**
|
Diabetes during
|
-0.0177
|
-0.0503
|
-0.0148
|
0.2966
|
1 SD below the mean
|
-0.2076
|
-0.3152
|
-0.1000
|
0.0009**
|
Mean
|
-0.1317
|
-0.2078
|
-0.0556
|
0.0017**
|
1 SD above the mean
|
-0.0557
|
-0.1556
|
0.0441
|
0.2274
|
25(OH)D×Diabetes during
|
0.0096
|
0.0007
|
0.0185
|
0.0350*
|
Bold italic*: P < 0.05; Bold italic**: P < 0.01. Gender, age, smoking status, exercising status and use of any antidiabetic agents were adjusted as confounders in the model of moderation analyses.