ArticleInternational journal of endocrinology and metabolism2025
The Optimal Cut-Points of Alanine Aminotransferase for Screening Metabolic Syndrome in Iranian Adults.
Article in International journal of endocrinology and metabolism, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Studies have reported that the activity of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) is a key biomarker for screening liver cell damage, such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Objectives: Since individuals with metabolic syndrome (MetS) are at high risk for NAFLD, we aimed to determine gender-specific ALT thresholds for screening MetS in the Tehranian population. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study from 2018 to 2022, involving 4,968 adults aged 20 - 70 years (2,732 females). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between ALT levels and the prevalence of MetS, as well as its individual components. Additionally, gender-specific ALT cut-off points were determined using the maximum Youden's Index. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated to derive thresholds and compare them with the previously introduced cut-off points for liver-related mortality in the U.S. population (US-LRM) (ALT > 19 U/L for females, > 29 U/L for males). We also examined the diagnostic performance of the derived cut-off points in 11 147 individuals (7,154 women) from the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study as an external validation. Results: The odds ratio (OR) from the logistic regression analysis showed that each 5 U/L increase in ALT level was associated with an increased prevalence of MetS [19% for females and 8% for males] and its components (ranging from 7 - 19% in females and 3-10% in males; all P-values < 0.05). The suggested cut-off point for ALT in males was 21 U/L, with a sensitivity of 72.1% and specificity of 47.1%. For females, with a threshold of 18 U/L, the corresponding values were 57.9% sensitivity and 66.5% specificity. Compared to the US-LRM suggested cut-off points in the US population, the AUC of our suggested threshold increased in males (60% vs. 56%, respectively), while for females, it remained the same as in the pretest (≈ 62%). Using ARIC data, our suggested threshold showed nearly identical AUC values to the US-LRM threshold in females (58% vs. 57%, respectively), whereas for males, the highest AUC was observed for our suggested cut-off points (56%), followed by the mortality-related threshold (53%). Conclusions: The cut-off point for screening MetS among Iranian women was almost identical to the lower suggested threshold in American guidelines but was notably lower for defining abnormal ALT levels in males.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.