Obesity Science & Practice (Feb 2025)

Associations Between Body Mass Index (BMI) and Dyslipidemia: Results From the PERSIAN Guilan Cohort Study (PGCS)

  • Jahangir Shahraz,
  • Farahnaz Joukar,
  • Fateme Sheida,
  • Sara Yeganeh,
  • Saman Maroufizadeh,
  • Massood Baghaee,
  • Mohammadreza Naghipour,
  • Fariborz Mansour‐Ghanaei

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/osp4.70055
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 1
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

ABSTRACT Background Obesity and dyslipidemia are interconnected complex conditions and their prevalence differs across different geographical regions. As a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, dyslipidemia is often misdiagnosed and inadequately treated, highlighting the need for region‐specific public health policies. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the associations between BMI and dyslipidemia in the Prospective Epidemiological Research Studies in Iran (PERSIAN) Guilan Cohort study (PGCS) population. Methods This cross‐sectional study analyzed the demographic and biochemical data from 10,519 participants of the PGCS population. Participants were divided into two groups with and without dyslipidemia and were compared based on BMI. Data analysis was performed in SPSS v16 with a significance level of < 0.05. Results The average age of the participants was 51.52 ± 8.90 years. The prevalence of dyslipidemia in all participants was equal to 75.83%. Among those with dyslipidemia, 41.18% and 35.39% had overweight and obesity, respectively. There was a positive association between BMI and the prevalence of dyslipidemia (unadjusted OR = 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08–1.10) (p < 0.01), indicating that for a one‐unit increase in participants' BMI, the probability of having dyslipidemia increased by 9%, which remained statistically significant even after adjusting. Analysis of dyslipidemia components and BMI revealed a significant association between elevated TG and cholesterol, as well as low HDL levels and higher BMI (unadjusted OR = 1.04, 1.01, and 1.09, respectively) (p < 0.01). However, this was not statistically significant for high LDL levels (unadjusted OR = 1.01) (p = 0.05). Conclusion Given the high prevalence of dyslipidemia in our studied region and its strong association with obesity, prioritizing obesity management in public health decision‐making is vital. Greater focus should be given on accessing and modifying the components of dyslipidemia, particularly LDL particles, as a potentially significant research target to prevent the mismanagement of dyslipidemia in individuals with obesity.

Keywords