IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0325949.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of systemic immunoinflammatory biomarkers for assessing severe abdominal aortic calcification among US adults aged≥40 years: A cross-sectional analysis from NHANES

Author

Listed:
  • Quankai Cheng
  • Chang Liu
  • Haicheng Zhong
  • Ziming Wang
  • Sheng Zhou
  • Jingjing Sun
  • Sihai Zhao
  • Jie Deng

Abstract

Objective: Several novel biomarkers, including the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), systemic inflammation response index (SIRI), aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and monocyte-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), are linked to the systemic immunity inflammation response and the odds and severity of abdominal aortic calcification (AAC). However, still no previous research has systematically compared their association with severe AAC. Methods: This study utilized a cross-sectional approach, examining a cohort of 3,047 adults from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Weighted logistic regression was utilized to investigate the associations between a range of immunoinflammatory biomarkers and the likelihood of severe AAC. Segmented regression and limited cubic spline models were used in the investigation to characterize the threshold effects and non-linear correlations. Additionally, subgroup and interaction tests, Spearman correlation, least absolute shrinkage, and selection operator regression studies were conducted. Results: The 3047 participants included in this study had a mean age of 58.63 years and 51.79% were female. After fully adjusting for all covariates, the ln-SIRI (OR 1.39 [CI 1.10–1.74], P = 0.005), ln-AISI (OR 1.26 [1.03–1.53], P = 0.024), and ln-MLR (OR 1.62 [1.15–2.30], P = 0.006) were significantly correlated with the odds of severe AAC. A non-linear dose-response relationship was observed between ln-SII and severe AAC. Additional subgroup analyses revealed that this relationship was more evident in the diabetic population. Additionally, MLR (AUC = 0.644) predicted the prevalence of severe AAC better than other biomarkers, and the prediction model constructed in conjunction with screened clinical indicators showed good predictive value (AUC = 0.853). Conclusions: In this study, we comprehensively evaluated and compared the associations between six biomarkers and severe AAC, and developed a clinical prediction model using the MLR with the best predictive effect. However, cohort studies and model validation are still needed in the future to further confirm their relationship.

Suggested Citation

  • Quankai Cheng & Chang Liu & Haicheng Zhong & Ziming Wang & Sheng Zhou & Jingjing Sun & Sihai Zhao & Jie Deng, 2025. "Comparison of systemic immunoinflammatory biomarkers for assessing severe abdominal aortic calcification among US adults aged≥40 years: A cross-sectional analysis from NHANES," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(6), pages 1-20, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0325949
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325949
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0325949
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0325949&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0325949?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0325949. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.