The association between daytime napping and risk of type 2 diabetes is modulated by inflammation and adiposity: Evidence from 435 342 UK‐Biobank participants

Rui Zhou,Hao‐Wen Chen,Yi‐Ning Huang,Qi Zhong,Fu‐Rong Li,Rui‐Dian Huang,Hua‐Min Liu,Jia‐Zhen Zheng,Jia‐Wen Xu,Xian‐Bo Wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-0407.13387
IF: 4.53
2023-04-14
Journal of Diabetes
Abstract:Highlights Using a large‐scale prospective population‐based cohort study, we found that a higher frequency of daytime napping is associated with an increased risk of incident type 2 diabetes (T2D), and such relations are modified by body fat percentage (BFP) and C‐reactive protein (CRP) levels. The association between daytime napping and T2D risk is strongest among those with the lowest BFP and CRP levels, which provides implications for the development of T2D prevention strategies targeting the reduction in BFP and CRP levels among adults with napping habits. Background Existing evidence concerning the relationship between daytime napping and type 2 diabetes (T2D) is inconsistent, and whether the effects of napping differ by body fat percentage (BFP) and C‐reactive protein (CRP) is unclear. We aimed to investigate the association between daytime napping frequency and T2D risk and whether such an association was modified by BFP and CRP. Methods We included 435 342 participants free of diabetes from the UK Biobank. Participants were categorized as nonnappers, occasional nappers, and frequent nappers based on napping frequency, and BFP/CRP was divided into quartiles. Cox proportional hazards models were used. Results During a median follow‐up of 9.2 years, 17 592 T2D cases occurred. Higher frequency of daytime napping was significantly associated with an increased risk of T2D. Compared with nonnappers, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for occasional nappers and habitual nappers were 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.24–1.32) and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.41–1.57), respectively. There was a significant additive and multiplicative interaction (relative excess risk due to interaction [RERI] = 0.490, 95% CI 0.307–0.673; p for multiplicative interaction
endocrinology & metabolism
What problem does this paper attempt to address?