Skip to main content

Table 2 Association of mean Telomere Length with lipoproteins

From: Association between lipoproteins and telomere length in US adults: data from the NHANES 1999–2002

Exposure

Model1

β (95% CI)

Model 2

βa (95% CI)

Model 3

βa (95% CI)

GAM model

βa (95% CI)

LDL-cholesterol (mg/dL) (n = 3042)

 Telomere length (per 0.1 change)

−1.18 (−1.62, − 0.75)

− 0.01 (− 0.48, 0.45)

0.18 (−0.26, 0.68)

0.07 (− 0.35, 0.59)

  Telomere length (per 0.1 change)(quartile)

   Q1

ref

ref

ref

ref

   Q2

−3.19 (−6.63, 0.25)

0.32 (−3.07, 3.71)

0.02 (−3.32, 3.36)

−0.96 (−4.26, 2.34)

   Q3

−7.85 (−11.29, −4.40)

− 1.36 (−4.85, 2.14)

−0.87 (− 4.31, 2.58)

−1.28 (− 4.66, 2.11)

   Q4

−8.52 (− 11.93, −5.12)

−0.16 (− 3.74, 3.41)

0.81 (−2.72, 4.33)

−0.09 (− 3.59, 3.40)

   P for trend

< 0.0001

0.930

0.622

0.873

Triglycerides (mg/dL) (n = 6461)

 Telomere length (per 0.1 change)

− 3.52 (− 4.59, − 2.46)

− 1.56 (− 2.68,-0.44)

− 0.98 (− 2.06, 0.10)

− 0.81 (− 1.74, 0.29)

  Telomere length (per 0.1 change)(quartile)

   Q1

ref

ref

ref

ref

   Q2

− 13.27 (− 22.02, − 4.52)

− 5.12 (− 13.87, 3.63)

−2.64 (− 11.05, 5.77)

−4.78 (− 12.98, 3.42)

   Q3

−12.97 (− 21.64, − 4.30)

− 0.46 (− 9.36, 8.43)

1.46 (−7.10, 10.02)

− 0.12 (− 8.48, 8.23)

   Q4

−29.28 (− 37.80, − 20.76)

−13.06 (− 22.11, − 4.01)

−8.95 (− 17.66, − 0.23)

−8.19 (− 16.69, 0.31

   P for trend

< 0.0001

0.013

0.117

0.082

HDL-Cholesterol (mg/dL) (n = 6461)

 Telomere length (per 0.1 change)

0.16 (0.03, 0.29)

0.33 (0.20, 0.46)

0.19 (0.03, 0.37)

0.13 (0.01, 0.33)

  Telomere length (per 0.1 change)(quartile)

   Q1

ref

ref

ref

ref

   Q2

0.41 (− 0.66, 1.47)

0.93 (− 0.07, 1.94)

0.50 (− 0.42, 1.42)

0.24 (− 0.65, 1.13)

   Q3

0.68 (− 0.37, 1.74)

1.49 (0.47, 2.51)

0.95 (0.01, 1.89)

0.79 (− 0.11, 1.70)

   Q4

1.15 (0.11, 2.19)

2.60 (1.56, 3.64)

1.48 (0.53, 2.44)

1.15 (0.23, 2.08

   P for trend

0.0245

< 0.001

0.001

0.023

  1. 95% CI: 95% Confidence interval a:Indicated effect sizes (β) were combined by Rubin’s rule
  2. Model 1: no covariates were adjusted
  3. Model 2: only sociodemographic variables were adjusted (age, poverty to income ratio, sex, race/ethnicity, education level, marital status)
  4. Model 3: all covariates presented in Table 1 were adjusted
  5. Model 4: all continuous variables in the covariates were adjusted as smooth