ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Higher Prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes in Men Than

in Women Is Associated With Differences in
Visceral Fat Mass

Anna Nordström*, Jenny Hadrévi, Tommy Olsson, Paul W. Franks,

and Peter Nordström
Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Occupational and Environmental Medicine (A.N.),
Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Sports Medicine (J.H.), Department of Public
Health and Clinical Medicine, Medicine (T.O.), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Clinical
Sciences (P.W.F.), Genetic and Molecular Epidemiology Unit (P.F.W.), Lund University Diabetes Centre,
Malmö, Sweden; Department of Nutrition (P.W.F.), Harvard School of Public Health, Boston,
Massachusetts 02115; Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine (P.W.F.); and Department of
Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Geriatrics (P.N.), Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden

Context: We have previously found that visceral fat is a stronger predictor for cardiovascular risk
factors than body mass index (BMI).

Objective: This study sought to investigate the prevalence of diabetes in elderly men and women
in relation to objectively assessed visceral fat volume.

Design and Setting: The cohort consisted of a population-based sample of 705 men and 688
women, all age 70 y at the time of examination.

Main Outcome Measures: Associations between body fat estimates, plasma glucose level, and
diabetes prevalence were investigated using multivariable-adjusted statistical models.

Results: The prevalence of type 2 diabetes was 14.6% in men and 9.1% in women (P ⬍ .001). Mean
BMI was slightly higher in men than in women (27.3 vs 26.6 kg/m2; P ⫽ .01), with a greater difference
in mean visceral fat mass (1987 vs 1077 g; P ⬍ .001). After adjustment for physical activity and
smoking, men had about/approximately twice the odds of having type 2 diabetes compared with
women (odds ratio [OR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38 –2.76). The inclusion of BMI in this
model did not change the risk associated with male sex (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.34 –2.77). However,
when visceral fat was included as a covariate, male sex was not associated with increased risk of type
2 diabetes (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.51–1.18).

Conclusions: The higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes in older men than in older women was
associated with larger amount of visceral fat in men. In contrast, differences in BMI was not
associated with this difference. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 101: 3740 –3746, 2016)

he prevalence of type 2 diabetes is growing world-
T wide; approximately 382 million people (8.3% of
the global population) had the disease in 2013, and this
number is estimated to exceed 592 million in less than
25 years (1, 2). The prevalence of obesity is increasing
concomitantly, and today more than half of the world’s
population is considered to be overweight (3). The in-
terplay between these two diseases, however, is not fully
understood (4).
In recent years, male sex has been regarded as a risk
factor for the development of type 2 diabetes (5–10). The
reason that men are more prone than women to the de-

ISSN Print 0021-972X ISSN Online 1945-7197 Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; HAI, Healthy Aging Initiative;
Printed in USA HDL, high-density lipoprotein; OR, odds ratio.
Copyright © 2016 by the Endocrine Society
Received April 18, 2016. Accepted July 27, 2016.
First Published Online August 4, 2016

3740 press.endocrine.org/journal/jcem J Clin Endocrinol Metab, October 2016, 101(10):3740 –3746 doi: 10.1210/jc.2016-1915

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/101/10/3740/2764924

by guest
on 21 May 2018
 doi: 10.1210/jc.2016-1915
velopment of this disease is not known. The increasing
prevalence of obesity in general may be a contributing
factor. However, the prevalence of obesity seems to be
higher in women than in men (11, 12), and men seem to
be at greater risk of type 2 diabetes development than
are women with similar BMIs (13, 14). Some of these
inconsistencies may be explained by the surrogate na-
ture of body mass index (BMI) as an estimate of adi-
posity (15, 16).
A growing body of evidence suggests that central obesity,
or visceral adiposity, is a stronger risk factor for diabetes type
2 than BMI (17, 18). Central obesity has also been found to
be a stronger risk factor glucose intolerance, insulin resis-
tance, metabolic perturbations, and hyperinsulinemia than
BMI (19 –21). Hypothetically, central obesity could be as-
sociated with the higher risk of diabetes type 2 prevalence in
men, given that men are more prone to android adiposity
with greater abdominal adiposity, compared with women
who are more likely to exhibit gynoid adiposity (22).
The aim of the present study was to assess the associ-
ation of visceral and other estimates of adiposity with the
prevalence of diabetes type 2 and evaluate whether the
association differs in men and women.
Materials and Methods
Subjects
All participants in the present study were part of the Healthy
Aging Initiative (HAI) project, a population-based prospective
study with the overall aim of identifying risk factors for cardiovas-
cular disease, diabetes, and fractures among 70-year-old men and
women. The study had two inclusion criteria; residence in the city
of Umeå, public area of Västerbotten County, northern Sweden;
and age of 70 years at the time of investigation (for more informa-
tion, see www.healthyageinginitiative.com). Participants were se-
lected through population registers and initially received written
information about the study by mail, which was followed up by
telephone contact approximately 2 weeks later. Participants who
agreed to attend were scheduled to do so on a date of their choosing.
The present study involved the first 1393 participants who com-
pleted testing. Approximately 70% of those who received written
information about the study agreed to participate.
Ethical considerations
All participants received written and oral information about
the study, and gave written consent to participate. The ethics
committee of Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden, provided ethical
approval.
Clinical examination
Participants arrived at the test facility at 0830 1230 hours.
After verifying their identities and obtaining written consent,
testing was initiated. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures were
measured using a mercury-gauge sphygmomanometer, with the
patient seated in an upright position after at least 5 minutes’ rest.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/101/10/3740/2764924
by guest
on 21 May 2018
press.endocrine.org/journal/jcem 3741
Waist circumference was measured at the umbilical level, and hip
circumference was measured at the widest part of the buttocks.
Both circumferences were measured with a tape and expressed in
centimeters. The measurements were taken at the end of normal
expiration, while the subject was standing relaxed with his/her
weight distributed evenly on both feet. BMI was calculated as
body weight (in kilograms) divided by the square of height (in
meters). To measure visceral fat mass, and thus distinguish vis-
ceral fat from sc fat in the abdominal region, dual-energy x-ray
absorptiometry was performed with a Lunar iDXA and the Co-
reScan application (GE Healthcare). The results were derived in
grams and cubic centimeters. In addition, total fat mass was
derived from total-body scans, and the amount of gynoid fat was
estimated automatically using the region of interest program.
Subjects were instructed to wear light clothing with no metal
objects. Quality assurance testing of the iDXA device was per-
formed daily using standard procedures. For the different esti-
mates of fat mass, coefficients of variation (SD/mean) were
1–3%, depending on the application. Participants were also
asked to complete an extensive questionnaire with items regard-
ing lifestyle, medical history, and injuries.
After the initial clinical investigation, participants were asked
to wear a triaxial accelerometer (GT3X⫹; Actigraph) for 7 days
on their nondominant hip and to remove it only when showering,
swimming, or going to bed at night. For the present analysis,
accelerometer data were converted to metabolic equivalents–
minutes (23, 24).
Participants made return visits 1 week later to receive feed-
back regarding their test results.
Blood samples were collected after at least 4 hours of fasting
for the assessment of total, low-density lipoprotein, and high-
density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (venous samples) and trig-
lycerides and plasma (p-)glucose (capillary samples). Trained
personnel collected samples according to established sterile pro-
tocols. Plasma and serum were separated by centrifugation 30
minutes after sample collection, at 3000 rpm and 20°C for 15
minutes. Serum lipids were then analyzed using standard meth-
ods at the Department of Clinical Chemistry, Umeå University
Hospital. p-glucose was analyzed with a HemoCue Glucose 201
RT (HemoCue AB, Ängelholm, Sweden) according to the user’s
manual; the machine was calibrated twice a week.
The diagnosis of type 2 diabetes was based on questionnaire
responses or fasting p-glucose level of at least 7 mmol/L.
Statistical analysis
Data are presented as means and SDs, unless indicated oth-
erwise. To test for nonlinear associations, Wald’s test was used.
Associations of different estimates of adiposity with glucose lev-
els and the prevalence of type 2 diabetes were investigated using
linear and logistic regression, respectively. The outcomes of the
models were p-glucose and type 2 diabetes, respectively. The first
of these models included only the different estimates of adiposity
as the exposures, and the second model additionally included
data on physical activity and smoking. In the final models, we
additionally included previous myocardial infarction (MI) and
stroke, cholesterol, HDL, triglycerides, systolic and diastolic
blood pressures, given that many of these covariates likely me-
diate the association between the main exposure of adiposity and
the outcomes of p-glucose and type 2 diabetes. To further illus-
trate the relationship between visceral fat and type 2 diabetes in
men and women separately, a three-knot logistic regression
 3742 Nordström et al Visceral Fat and Diabetes J Clin Endocrinol Metab, October 2016, 101(10):3740 –3746

Table 1. Baseline Characteristics of the Study Cohort Presented as Mean and SD

Men (n ⴝ 705) Women (n ⴝ 688) P
Age, y 70 70 1.00
Weight, kg 84.4 ⫾ 12.7 71.2 ⫾ 13.2 ⬍.001
Height, cm 176 ⫾ 8 164 ⫾ 6 ⬍.001
Current smoking 4.4% 7.2% .02
Physical activity, METS 1.20 ⫾ 0.15 1.15 ⫾ 0.10 ⬍.001
Fasting plasma glucose, mmol/L 5.8 ⫾ 1.1 5.5 ⫾ 1.2 ⬍.001
Cholesterol, mmol/L 5.0 ⫾ 1.1 5.8 ⫾ 1.1 ⬍.001
HDL cholesterol, mmol/L 1.30 ⫾ 0.37 1.59 ⫾ 0.42 ⬍.001
Triglycerides, mmol/L 1.42 ⫾ 0.81 1.35 ⫾ 0.62 .07
Systolic blood pressure, mm/Hg 138 ⫾ 16 143 ⫾ 17 ⬍.001
Diastolic blood pressure, mm/Hg 80 ⫾ 9 80 ⫾ 9 .57
Diagnoses at baseline, n (%)
Diabetes 104 (14.6%) 63 (9.1%) .001
MI 81 (11.4%) 19 (2.7%) ⬍.001
Stroke 40 (5.6%) 15 (2.2%) .001
Variables associated with obesity
BMI, kg/m2 27.3 ⫾ 5.4 26.6 ⫾ 4.8 .01
Waist circumference, cm 100 ⫾ 12 90 ⫾ 13 ⬍.001
Hip circumference, cm 103 ⫾ 7 103 ⫾ 9 .12
Total fat mass, kg 26.4 ⫾ 8.4 28.8 ⫾ 9.2 ⬍.001
Gynoid fat mass, g 3414 ⫾ 1098 4570 ⫾ 1389 ⬍.001
Gynoid fat mass/body weight 39.5 ⫾ 7.6 63.2 ⫾ 10.3 ⬍.001
Visceral fat mass, g 1987 ⫾ 1043 1077 ⫾ 682 ⬍.001
Visceral fat mass/body weight 22.5 ⫾ 9.6 14.4 ⫾ 7.5 ⬍.001
METS, metabolic equivalents.

model was constructed using the mkspline command in Stata tics, lifestyle factors, and different estimates of body adi-
software (version 12.1; StataCorp LP). For all analyses, P ⬍ .05 posity are presented in Table 1. Less men than women
was considered to be significant. Stata and SPSS (version 21;
smoked, and men had higher p-glucose levels and more
IBM) software was used to fit the statistical models and graph-
ically illustrate the results. previous MIs, strokes, and type 2 diabetes compared with
women. Men also had slightly higher BMI (P ⫽ .01),
whereas the differences in amounts of visceral fat and vis-
Results ceral fat per kilogram body weight were greater than in
women (both P ⬍ .001). In contrast, women were found
The study population comprised 1393 participants (705 to have higher total fat mass, gynoid fat mass, and gynoid
men and 688 women, all age 70 y). Physical characteris- fat mass per kilogram body weight
(all P ⬍ .001). Of 167 cases of type 2
diabetes in the study cohort, 41 were
detected for the first time during the
HAI investigation. These 41 patients
did not differ from those with known
type 2 diabetes at baseline (n ⫽ 126) in
BMI (30.1 vs 30.2 kg/m2), total fat
mass (31.9 vs 33.1 kg), gynoid fat
mass (4156 vs 4528 g), or amount of
visceral fat (2551 vs 2322 g; all
P ⬎ .05).
Figure 1 illustrates the associa-
tions between p-glucose and visceral
fat per kilogram body weight. Before
and after adjustment for physical ac-
tivity and smoking, visceral fat was
the strongest predictor of p-glucose
Figure 1. Associations between visceral fat per kilogram body weight and plasma glucose in in men (adjusted B ⫽ 0.42 per SD
men and women, showing the absence of a sex difference. increase; P ⬍ .001) and women (ad-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/101/10/3740/2764924

by guest
on 21 May 2018
 doi: 10.1210/jc.2016-1915 press.endocrine.org/journal/jcem 3743

Table 2. Associations Between Different Estimates of Obesity and Plasma-glucose and Diabetes Presented as OR
Unadjusted Analyses

Men (n ⴝ 705) Women (n ⴝ 688)

B 95% CI B 95% CI P Interaction
a
Exposure Outcome: plasma glucose level
BMI 0.33 0.24 – 0.42 0.17 0.09 – 0.25 .007
Waist circumference 0.37 0.28 – 0.47 0.22 0.14 – 0.31 .02
Hip circumference 0.23 0.13–32 0.15 0.07– 0.23 .21
Total fat mass 0.3 0.22– 0.38 0.19 0.10 – 0.27 .06
Gynoid fat mass 0.25 0.16 – 0.34 0.14 0.04 – 0.24 .11
Gynoid fat mass/body weight 0.12 0.04 – 0.21 0.03 0.05 .12
Visceral fat mass 0.41 0.32– 0.50 0.24 0.14 – 0.34 .02
Visceral fat mass/body weight 0.38 0.29 – 0.47 0.21 0.11– 0.41 .01
Analyses adjusted for physical activity and smoking
BMI 0.34 0.25– 0.43 0.17 0.09 – 0.25 .005
Waist circumference 0.37 0.27– 0.47 0.22 0.14 – 0.31 .02
Hip circumference 0.23 0.13– 0.33 0.16 0.09 – 0.24 .28
Total fat mass 0.31 0.22– 0.39 0.2 0.11– 0.29 .07
Gynoid fat mass 0.25 0.16 – 0.34 0.17 0.07– 0.27 .25
Gynoid fat mass/body weight 0.12 0.03– 0.21 0.05 0.1 .28
Visceral fat mass 0.42 0.33– 0.51 0.23 0.13– 0.34 .009
Visceral fat mass/body weight 0.39 0.30 – 0.48 0.19 0.09 – 0.29 .004
Fully adjusted analysesb
BMI 0.32 0.21– 0.44 0.08 0.16 ⬍.001
Waist circumference 0.35 0.22– 0.47 0.12 0.02– 0.23 .001
Hip circumference 0.18 0.07– 0.30 0.09 0.00 – 0.18 .04
Total fat mass 0.27 0.16 – 0.38 0.1 0.00 – 0.21 .06
Gynoid fat mass 0.2 0.08 – 0.31 0.05 0.09 .03
Gynoid fat mass/body weight 0.07 0.15 0.01 ⫺0.03 .16
Visceral fat mass 0.42 0.30 – 0.54 0.15 0.02– 0.27 ⬍.001
Visceral fat mass/body weight 0.4 0.29 – 0.52 0.13 0.01– 0.25 ⬍.001
Outcome: diabetes
BMI 2.62 1.99 –3.44 1.89 1.46 –2.45 .09
Waist circumference 3.1 2.31– 4.16 2.05 1.59 –2.65 .04
Hip circumference 1.98 1.52–2.58 1.51 1.19 –1.92 .13
Total fat mass 2.38 1.86 –3.05 1.7 1.30 –2.23 .07
Gynoid fat mass 2.02 1.59 –2.57 1.54 1.14 –2.08 .17
Gynoid fat mass/body weight 1.48 1.19 –1.84 1.08 0.83–1.42 .08
Visceral fat mass 3.4 2.54 – 4.54 2.04 1.47–2.84 .02
Visceral fat mass/body weight 3 2.28 –3.94 1.82 1.31–2.53 .02
Analyses adjusted for physical activity and smoking
BMI 2.52 1.91–3.33 1.79 1.37–2.34 .08
Waist circumference 2.92 2.17–3.94 1.98 1.52–2.60 .06
Hip circumference 1.91 1.46 –2.49 1.49 1.17–1.91 .2
Total fat mass 2.26 1.76 –2.91 1.63 1.22–2.16 .1
Gynoid fat mass 1.91 1.49 –2.45 1.53 1.11–2.09 .32
Gynoid fat mass/body weight 1.4 1.12–1.75 1.08 0.82–1.43 .19
Visceral fat mass 3.24 2.41– 4.36 1.86 1.32–2.62 .02
Visceral fat mass/body weight 2.88 2.17–3.82 1.64 1.17–2.29 .01
Fully adjusted analysesb
BMI 2.26 1.61–3.17 1.42 1.00 –2.03 .04
Waist circumference 2.85 1.93– 4.19 1.44 1.01–2.05 .02
Hip circumference 1.78 1.27–2.50 1.15 0.84 –1.56 .08
Total fat mass 2.07 1.50 –2.87 1.14 0.78 –1.65 .03
Gynoid fat mass 1.64 1.20 –2.25 1.07 0.71–1.60 .13
Gynoid fat mass/body weight 1.23 0.93–1.62 0.93 0.64 –1.37 .19
Visceral fat mass 3.45 2.31–5.15 1.22 0.77–1.95 .001
Visceral fat mass/body weight 3.64 2.53–5.25 1.41 0.93–2.13 .001
a
Per SD increase.
b
Adjusted for smoking, physical activity, blood pressure, cholesterol, HDL, triglycerides, previous MI, and stroke.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/101/10/3740/2764924

by guest
on 21 May 2018
 3744 Nordström et al Visceral Fat and Diabetes J Clin Endocrinol Metab, October 2016, 101(10):3740 –3746

95% CI, 1.34 –1.77). In contrast, no

significant association between male
sex and type 2 diabetes prevalence
was observed in analyses including
visceral fat (OR, 0.77; 95% CI,
0.51–1.18) and visceral fat per kilo-
gram body weight (OR, 0.93; 95%
CI, 0.62–1.40).

Discussion
In the present population-based co-
hort of 70-year-olds, p-glucose levels
and type 2 diabetes prevalence were
higher in men than in women. Fur-
thermore, visceral fat was generally
Figure 2. Associations between visceral fat per kilogram body weight and diabetes prevalence,
the strongest predictor of p-glucose
showing the absence of a sex difference. level and type 2 diabetes compared
with other estimates of obesity, such
justed B ⫽ 0.23 per SD increase; P ⬍ .001; Table 2). Anal- as BMI, and the associations were stronger in men than in
yses of interaction suggested that most associations be- women. Importantly, after adjusting for the larger amount
tween p-glucose and the different estimates of obesity were of visceral fat in men, the risk of type 2 diabetes was similar
stronger in men than in women. In unadjusted analyses, in men and women.
the amount of visceral fat was the strongest predictor of Recent studies have found a higher prevalence of type
type 2 diabetes prevalence in men (odds ratio [OR], 3.00; 2 diabetes in men than in women (6, 25, 26), but the reason
95% confidence interval [CI], 2.28 –3.94) whereas vis- for this difference has been unclear. In the present cohort
ceral fat (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.47–2.84) and waist cir- of elderly individuals, the mean amounts of visceral fat
cumference were the best predictors of this outcome in were approximately 2 kg in men and 1 kg in women. In
women (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.59 –2.65; Table 2). The contrast, women had more total fat and gynoid fat. After
associations between visceral fat per kilogram, total body controlling for the influence of visceral fat on the sex-
weight and type 2 diabetes prevalence are presented in specific prevalence, men and women were found to have
Figure 2; the association was significantly stronger in men similar risks of type 2 diabetes. Our data are supported by
than in women (P ⫽ .02). Although the figure suggests a a recent study reporting a prevalence of type 2 diabetes in
nonlinear relationship in women, this was not significant 4% of women and 8% of men, in a sample of individuals
(Wald’s test, P ⫽ .11). After adjusting for physical activity with a large age variation (19 – 81 y) (27). This difference
and smoking, the amount of visceral fat remained the best
predictor of type 2 diabetes prevalence in men (OR, 3.24;
95% CI, 2.41– 4.36), and waist circumference was the best Table 3. Associations Between Sex and Diabetes
predictor of this outcome in women (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, Prevalence, Adjusted for Confounders Presented as OR
1.52–2.60). In analyses including all covariates, other pre-
Outcome: Diabetes
dictors of type 2 diabetes prevalence included serum cho-
lesterol and triglyceride levels (both P ⬍ .05), and the Main exposure OR 95% CI
objective amount of physical activity, which was lower in Male sex 1.72 1.23–2.39
women with than in those without type 2 diabetes (P ⫽ Adjusted for:
.01). Physical activity and smoking 1.95 1.38 –2.76
And:
At baseline, type 2 diabetes was more prevalent in men BMI 1.93 1.34 –2.77
than in women (14.6 vs 9.1%; OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.23– Waist circumference 1.13 0.77–1.64
2.39; Table 3). Adjustment for smoking and physical ac- Hip circumference 2.21 1.54 –3.17
Total fat mass 2.39 1.66 –3.44
tivity increased the risk associated with male sex slightly Gynoid fat mass 3.12 2.10 – 4.63
(OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.38 –2.76). The additional inclusion Gynoid fat mass/body weight 3.56 1.98 – 6.41
of BMI in the analysis did not change the association be- Visceral fat mass 0.77 0.51–1.18
Visceral fat mass/body weight 0.93 0.62–1.40
tween male sex and type 2 diabetes prevalence (OR, 1.93;
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/101/10/3740/2764924
by guest
on 21 May 2018
 doi: 10.1210/jc.2016-1915
in diabetes prevalence was associated with a mean of 1.6
kg visceral fat in men compared with 0.8 kg in women.
Notably, this sex difference in visceral fat mass was found
early in life, which may contribute to an increased risk of
later type 2 diabetes development in men. With respect to
the observed sex differences in type 2 diabetes, recent find-
ings suggesting that the prevalence of obesity is increasing
more in men than in women are of interest (28, 29).
The potential mechanisms linking obesity in general
and visceral obesity in particular to p-glucose levels and
type 2 diabetes are not clear. The association between
visceral fat with insulin resistance in particular has been
linked to increased low-grade inflammation (30), exces-
sive release of TNF-␣ (31, 32), and increased expression of
suppressor of cytokine signaling-3 (33). In addition, Fon-
tana et al (34) showed that the concentration of IL-6 was
50% higher in the portal vein, which is in close conjunc-
tion to the visceral fat reserve, than in the peripheral radial
artery in 25 extreme obese subjects. The portal vein IL-6
concentration was also correlated with systemic C-reac-
tive protein concentration, used as a measure of inflam-
mation. Furthermore, in a previous epidemiological study,
C-reactive protein levels were associated independently
with insulin resistance (35).
Several limitations of the present study should be con-
sidered. The study subjects were predominantly of north-
ern European ancestry and all were 70 years of age, which
may make the results difficult to generalize to other ethnic
and age groups, in which visceral fat mass quantities differ
(36, 37). It should also be clear that the results of the
present study do not infer causality, and we lacked infor-
mation of important potential confounders/mediators
such as food intake. Thus, visceral fat may mediate the
effects of a high macronutrient intake, especially a high-fat
high-carbohydrate diet, that has been shown to be proin-
flammatory and to induce endotoxemia (38). Given that
the present study design was cross sectional, subjects who
had diabetes at baseline had been given information about
diet and other lifestyle measures with the aim of decreasing
general obesity, including visceral fat mass. However,
such bias did not likely influence fat distribution or vis-
ceral fat mass differentially in men and women. In support
of this suggestion, individuals in whom diabetes was de-
tected during baseline testing had similar amounts of fat
and fat distribution as those with known diabetes before
testing. Strengths of the present study include the large
population-based cohort, all of whom were 70 years of
age, the objective measurement of visceral fat, and the rich
set of covariates.
In summary, visceral fat mass showed strong correla-
tions with fasting plasma glucose level and type 2 diabetes
prevalence in 70-year-old men and women. The results of
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/101/10/3740/2764924
by guest
on 21 May 2018
press.endocrine.org/journal/jcem 3745
the present study also suggest that the higher type 2 dia-
betes prevalence in older men vs women is associated with
differences in visceral fat accumulation, although it cannot
be concluded from the present study that the association
is causal.
Acknowledgments
Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Anna
Nordström, PhD, Department of Public Health and Clinical
Medicine, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Umeå
University, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden. E-mail: Anna.h.nordstrom@
umu.se.
This work was supported by the Swedish research council.
Disclosure Summary: The authors have nothing to disclose.
References
1. Guariguata L, Whiting DR, Hambleton I, Beagley J, Linnenkamp U,
Shaw JE. Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2013 and pro-
jections for 2035. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014;103:137–149.
2. Federation ID. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 6th ed. Brussels, Belgium: Inter-
national Diabetes Federation, 2013.
3. Field AE, Coakley EH, Must A, et al. Impact of overweight on the
risk of developing common chronic diseases during a 10-year period.
Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:1581–1586.
4. Golay A, Ybarra J. Link between obesity and type 2 diabetes. Best
Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005;19:649 – 663.
5. Chen L, Magliano DJ, Zimmet PZ. The worldwide epidemiology of
type 2 diabetes mellitus—Present and future perspectives. Nat Rev
Endocrinol. 2012;8:228 –236.
6. Yang W, Lu J, Weng J, et al. Prevalence of diabetes among men and
women in China. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1090 –1101.
7. Tracey ML, McHugh SM, Buckley CM, Canavan RJ, Fitzgerald AP,
Kearney PM. The prevalence of Type 2 diabetes and related com-
plications in a nationally representative sample of adults aged 50 and
over in the Republic of Ireland. Diabet Med. 2016;33(4):441– 445.
8. Wändell PE, Carlsson AC. Gender differences and time trends in
incidence and prevalence of type 2 diabetes in Sweden–a model ex-
plaining the diabetes epidemic worldwide today? Diabetes Res Clin
Pract. 2014;106:e90 –92.
9. Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of
diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Di-
abetes Care. 2004;27:1047–1053.
10. Sattar N. Gender aspects in type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardio-
metabolic risk. Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;27:501–507.
11. World Health Organization. 2015 Obesity: Situation and trends. In:
Global Health Observatory (GHO) data.
12. Finucane MM, Stevens GA, Cowan MJ, et al. National, regional,
and global trends in body-mass index since 1980: systematic analysis
of health examination surveys and epidemiological studies with 960
country-years and 9.1 million participants. Lancet. 2011;377:557–
567.
13. Wang W, Luo Y, Liu Y, et al. Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and
optimal waist circumference cut-off points for adults in Beijing. Di-
abetes Res Clin Pract. 2010;88:209 –216.
14. Logue J, Walker JJ, Colhoun HM, et al. Do men develop type 2
diabetes at lower body mass indices than women? Diabetologia.
2011;54:3003–3006.
15. Flegal KM, Kit BK, Orpana H, Graubard BI. Association of all-
cause mortality with overweight and obesity using standard body
 3746 Nordström et al Visceral Fat and Diabetes
mass index categories: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
JAMA. 2013;309:71– 82.
16. Phillips CM, Tierney AC, Perez-Martinez P, et al. Obesity and body
fat classification in the metabolic syndrome: impact on cardiometa-
bolic risk metabotype. Obesity. 2013;21:E154 –E161.
17. Ohlson LO, Larsson B, Svärdsudd K, et al. The influence of body fat
distribution on the incidence of diabetes mellitus. 13.5 years of fol-
low-up of the participants in the study of men born in 1913. Dia-
betes. 1985;34:1055–1058.
18. Wei M, Gaskill SP, Haffner SM, Stern MP. Waist circumference as
the best predictor of noninsulin dependent diabetes mellitus (NI-
DDM) compared to body mass index, waist/hip ratio and other
anthropometric measurements in Mexican Americans—A 7-year
prospective study. Obes Res. 1997;5:16 –23.
19. von Eyben FE, Mouritsen E, Holm J, et al. Intra-abdominal obesity
and metabolic risk factors: a study of young adults. Int J Obes Relat
Metab Disord. 2003;27:941–949.
20. Chandra A, Neeland IJ, Berry JD, et al. The relationship of body
mass and fat distribution with incident hypertension: observations
from the Dallas Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:997–
1002.
21. Wiklund P, Toss F, Weinehall L, et al. Abdominal and gynoid fat
mass are associated with cardiovascular risk factors in men and
women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93:4360 – 4366.
22. Haslam D, Sattar N, Lean M. ABC of obesity. Obesity—Time to
wake up. Bmj. 2006;333:640 – 642.
23. Freedson PS, Melanson E, Sirard J. Calibration of the Computer
Science and Applications, Inc. accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc.
1998;30:777–781.
24. United States Department of Health and Human Services. 2008
physical activity guidelines for Americans: Be active, healthy, and
happy! Washington, DC: U.S. Deptartment of Health and Human
Services.
25. Soriguer F, Goday A, Bosch-Comas A, et al. Prevalence of diabetes
mellitus and impaired glucose regulation in Spain: the Di@bet.es
Study. Diabetologia. 2012;55:88 –93.
26. Anjana RM, Pradeepa R, Deepa M, et al. Prevalence of diabetes and
prediabetes (impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tol-
erance) in urban and rural India: Phase I results of the Indian Council
of Medical Research-INdia DIABetes (ICMR-INDIAB) study. Dia-
betologia. 2011;54:3022–3027.
27. Rothney MP, Catapano AL, Xia J, et al. Abdominal visceral fat
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article-abstract/101/10/3740/2764924
by guest
on 21 May 2018
J Clin Endocrinol Metab, October 2016, 101(10):3740 –3746
measurement using dual-energy X-ray: Association with cardio-
metabolic risk factors. Obesity. 2013;21:1798 –1802.
28. May AL, Freedman D, Sherry S, Blanck HM. 2013 Obesity—United
States, 1999 –2010. In: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report:
Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity, National Cen-
ter for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC;
120 –128.
29. Midthjell K, Lee CM, Langhammer A, et al. Trends in overweight
and obesity over 22 years in a large adult population: The HUNT
Study, Norway. Clin Obes. 2013;3:12–20.
30. Xu H, Barnes GT, Yang Q, et al. Chronic inflammation in fat plays
a crucial role in the development of obesity-related insulin resis-
tance. J Clin Invest. 2003;112:1821–1830.
31. Dandona P, Weinstock R, Thusu K, Abdel-Rahman E, Aljada A,
Wadden T. Tumor necrosis factor-alpha in sera of obese patients:
Fall with weight loss. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1998;83:2907–
2910.
32. Hotamisligil GS, Spiegelman BM. Tumor necrosis factor alpha: A
key component of the obesity-diabetes link. Diabetes. 1994;43:
1271–1278.
33. Ghanim H, Aljada A, Daoud N, Deopurkar R, Chaudhuri A, Dan-
dona P. Role of inflammatory mediators in the suppression of insulin
receptor phosphorylation in circulating mononuclear cells of obese
subjects. Diabetologia. 2007;50:278 –285.
34. Fontana L, Eagon JC, Trujillo ME, Scherer PE, Klein S. Visceral fat
adipokine secretion is associated with systemic inflammation in
obese humans. Diabetes. 2007;56:1010 –1013.
35. Festa A, D’Agostino R Jr, Howard G, Mykkänen L, Tracy RP,
Haffner SM. Chronic subclinical inflammation as part of the insulin
resistance syndrome: The Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study
(IRAS). Circulation. 2000;102:42– 47.
36. Nakagami T, Qiao Q, Carstensen B, et al. Age, body mass index and
Type 2 diabetes-associations modified by ethnicity. Diabetologia.
2003;46:1063–1070.
37. Shai I, Jiang R, Manson JE, et al. Ethnicity, obesity, and risk of type
2 diabetes in women: a 20-year follow-up study. Diabetes Care.
2006;29:1585–1590.
38. Ghanim H, Abuaysheh S, Sia CL, et al. Increase in plasma endotoxin
concentrations and the expression of toll-like receptors and sup-
pressor of cytokine signaling-3 in mononuclear cells after a high-fat,
high-carbohydrate meal: implications for insulin resistance. Diabe-
tes Care. 2009;32:2281–2287.