Objective-To investigate a reported association between dental disease and risk of coronary heart disease.

BackgroundBody mass index (BMI, kg/m2) may not be the best marker for estimating the risk of obesity-related disease. Consistent with physiologic observations, an alternative index uses waist circumference (WC) and fasting triglycerides (TG) concentration to describe lipid overaccumulation.MethodsThe WC (estimated population minimum 65 cm for men and 58 cm for women) and TG concentration from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (N = 9,180, statistically weighted to represent 100.05 million US adults) were used to compute a "lipid accumulation product" [LAP = (WC-65) × TG for men and (WC-58) × TG for women] and to describe the population distribution of LAP. LAP and BMI were compared as categorical variables and as log-transformed continuous variables for their ability to identify adverse levels of 11 cardiovascular risk factors.ResultsNearly half of the represented population was discordant for their quartile assignments to LAP and BMI. When 23.54 million with ordinal LAP quartile > BMI quartile were compared with 25.36 million with ordinal BMI quartile > LAP quartile (regression models adjusted for race-ethnicity and sex) the former had more adverse risk levels than the latter (p < 0.002) for seven lipid variables, uric acid concentration, heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Further adjustment for age did not materially alter these comparisons except for blood pressures (p > 0.1). As continuous variables, LAP provided a consistently more adverse beta coefficient (slope) than BMI for nine cardiovascular risk variables (p < 0.01), but not for blood pressures (p > 0.2).ConclusionLAP (describing lipid overaccumulation) performed better than BMI (describing weight overaccumulation) for identifying US adults at cardiovascular risk. Compared to BMI, LAP might better predict the incidence of cardiovascular disease, but this hypothesis needs prospective testing.

II-2

The prevalence of diabetes among Hispanic and Asian American subpopulations in the United States is unknown. OBJECTIVE To estimate racial/ethnic differences in the prevalence of diabetes among US adults 20 years or older by major race/ethnicity groups and selected Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian subpopulations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 2011-2016, cross-sectional samples representing the noninstitutionalized, civilian, US population. The sample included adults 20 years or older who had self-reported diagnosed diabetes during the interview or measurements of hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and 2-hour plasma glucose (2hPG). EXPOSURES Race/ethnicity groups: non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic and Hispanic subgroups (Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban/Dominican, Central American, and South American), non-Hispanic Asian and non-Hispanic Asian subgroups (East, South, and Southeast Asian), and non-Hispanic other. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Diagnosed diabetes was based on self-reported prior diagnosis. Undiagnosed diabetes was defined as HbA 1c 6.5% or greater, FPG 126 mg/dL or greater, or 2hPG 200 mg/dL or greater in participants without diagnosed diabetes. Total diabetes was defined as diagnosed or undiagnosed diabetes. RESULTS The study sample included 7575 US adults (mean age, 47.5 years; 52% women; 2866 [65%] non-Hispanic white, 1636 [11%] non-Hispanic black, 1952 [15%] Hispanic, 909 [6%] non-Hispanic Asian, and 212 [3%] non-Hispanic other). A total of 2266 individuals had diagnosed diabetes; 377 had undiagnosed diabetes. Weighted age-and sex-adjusted prevalence of total diabetes was 12.1% (95% CI, 11.0%-13.4%) for non-Hispanic white, 20.4% (95% CI, 18.8%-22.1%) for non-Hispanic black, 22.1% (95% CI, 19.6%-24.7%) for Hispanic, and 19.1% (95% CI, 16.0%-22.1%) for non-Hispanic Asian adults (overall P < .001). Among Hispanic adults, the prevalence of total diabetes was 24.6% (95% CI, 21.6%-27.6%) for Mexican, 21.7% (95% CI, 14.6%-28.8%) for Puerto Rican, 20.5% (95% CI, 13.7%-27.3%) for Cuban/Dominican, 19.3% (95% CI, 12.4%-26.1%) for Central American, and 12.3% (95% CI, 8.5%-16.2%) for South American subgroups (overall P < .001). Among non-Hispanic Asian adults, the prevalence of total diabetes was 14.0% (95% CI, 9.5%-18.4%) for East Asian, 23.3% (95% CI, 15.6%-30.9%) for South Asian, and 22.4% (95% CI, 15.9%-28.9%) for Southeast Asian subgroups (overall P = .02). The prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes was 3.9% (95% CI, 3.0%-4.8%) for non-Hispanic white, 5.2% (95% CI, 3.9%-6.4%) for non-Hispanic black, 7.5% (95% CI, 5.9%-9.1%) for Hispanic, and 7.5% (95% CI, 4.9%-10.0%) for non-Hispanic Asian adults (overall P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this nationally representative survey of US adults from 2011 to 2016, the prevalence of diabetes and undiagnosed diabetes varied by race/ethnicity and among subgroups identified within the Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian populations.

As expected, most of the youth with T2DM were obese. Youth with T1DM had a higher prevalence of overweight, but not of obesity, than nondiabetic youth. Future studies of obesity among youth with diabetes of all types will further our understanding of the impact of obesity on diabetes both as a risk factor and a comorbidity.