Type of diabetes and waist-hip ratio are important determinants of serum lipoprotein (a) levels in diabetic patients

Long-term Effect of Glimepiride and Rosiglitazone on Non-conventional Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Metformin-treated Patients Affected by Metabolic Syndrome: A Randomized, Double-blind Clinical Trial

We evaluated the effect of glimepiride plus metformin and rosiglitazone plus metformin on glucose, and on cardiovascular risk parameters such as lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) and homocysteine (HCT) in patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Ninety-nine patients in the multicentre, randomized, double-blind study took metformin (1500 mg/day) plus glimepiride (2 mg/day) or rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) for 12 months. Changes in body mass index, glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c), Lp(a) and HCT were primary efficacy variables. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), post-prandial plasma glucose (PPG) and homeostasis model assessment index were also used to assess efficacy. On average, HbA1c decreased by 9.1% and 8.1%, FPG decreased by 7.3% and 10.9%, and PPG decreased by 7.6% and 10.5%, respectively, in the glimepiride and rosiglitazone groups after 12 months. Patients receiving rosiglitazone experienced more rapid improvement in glycaemic control than those on glimepiride, and showed a significant improvement in insulin resistance-related parameters. There was a statistically significant decrease in basal homocysteinaemia in glimepiride-treated patients (−27.3%), but not in rosiglitazone-treated patients. Rosiglitazone plus metformin significantly improved long-term control of insulin resistance-related parameters compared with glimepiride plus metformin, although glimepiride treatment was associated with a slight improvement in cholesterolaemia, not observed in the rosiglitazone-treated patients, and with significant improvements in non-traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease, such as basal homocysteinaemia and plasma Lp(a) levels.

Lipoprotein (a) and cardiovascular risk factors in children and adolescents

OBJECTIVE:

To review the relationship between lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and other risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in children and adolescents.

DATA SOURCES:

This systematic review included studies from 2001 to 2011, a ten-year time period. Epidemiological studies with children and/or adolescents published in English, Portuguese or Spanish and fully available online were included. The searches were performed in Science Direct, PubMed/Medline, BVS (Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde) and Cochrane Library databases, using the following combination of key-words: "lipoprotein a" and "cardiovascular diseases" and "obesity".

DATA SYNTHESIS:

Overall, 672 studies were obtained but only seven were included. Some studies assessed the family history for CVD. In all of them, Lp(a) levels were increased in patients with family history for CVD. There was also a positive correlation between Lp(a) and LDL-cholesterol, total cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B levels, suggesting an association between Lp(a) levels and the lipid profile.

CONCLUSIONS:

The evidence that CVD may originate in childhood and adolescence leads to the need for investigating the risk factors during this period in order to propose earlier and possibly more effective interventions to reduce morbidity and mortality rates.

Vascular disease in paediatric type 2 diabetes: the state of the art

Type 2 diabetes is an emerging problem in the paediatric population. Paediatricians and paediatric endocrinologists are struggling with how to best assess, predict and treat cardiovascular risk factors in these patients. There is a notable lack of consensus in how to proceed, even among experts in the field. There are very limited data from quality trials in established paediatric type 2 diabetes. We address the available information regarding traditional and non-traditional indices of cardiovascular risk, including examination findings, biochemical markers and non-invasive imaging modalities. We discuss the utility and pitfalls of applying knowledge gained in adult medicine to the paediatric population. Potential treatment strategies are reviewed, including the currently available pharmaceutical options, with the acknowledgement that there are few drugs formally approved in the paediatric population.

Lipoprotein(a): an independent risk factor for ischemic heart disease that is dependent on triglycerides in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) is an independent risk factor for Ischaemic Heart Disease (IHD) in the general population. There are conflicting reports in the extent of its association with IHD among subjects with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

The aim was to determine the concentration of Lp(a) and its relationship with other lipids parameters among Omani T2DM subjects with and without IHD. An over-night fasting blood sample from 221 T2DM subjects (86 females and 135 males) and 156 non-diabetics (69 females and 87 males) aged 30–70 years (as control) was taken for lipid profile studies.

Lp(a) was significantly lower (p = 0.012) among T2DM subjects 0.123(1.12) g/L compared to non-diabetics 0.246 (1.18)g/L, irrespective of gender.

A significant correlation (Spearman correlation, P = 0.047) was revealed between Lp(a) and IHD among Omani T2DM subjects. The proportions of T2DM subjects with IHD and an Lp(a) >0.3 g/L was higher compared to T2DM without IHD irrespective of gender, for women 42% vs. 27% and for men 17.5 vs. 8%, respectively.

A significant negative correlation existed between Lp(a) and triglycerides (r = 0.41, P = 0.002) among T2DM subjects. In contrast, a significant positive correlation existed between Lp(a) and LDL-chol among the non-diabetic subjects.

Women had significantly higher Lp(a) concentration compared to men ( 0.30 Vs. 0.16 g/L, P < 0.0001) irrespective of the diabetic status.

Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for IHD among Omani T2DM subjects. Lp(a) concentration was significantly lower and negatively correlated with triglycerides among Omani diabetic compared to non-diabetic subjects.

Metformin–pioglitazone and metformin–rosiglitazone effects on non-conventional cardiovascular risk factors plasma level in type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Metformin is considered the gold standard for type 2 diabetes treatment as monotherapy and in combination with sulphonylureas and insulin. The combination of metformin with thiazolidinediones is less well studied. The aim of the present study was to assess the differential effect, and tolerability, of metformin combined with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone on glucose, coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome.

METHODS

This 12-month, multicentre, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial was conducted at three study sites in Italy. We assessed patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (duration >or=6 months) and with metabolic syndrome. All patients were required to have poor glycaemic control with diet, or experienced adverse effects with diet and metformin, administered up to the maximum tolerated dose. Patients were randomized to receive either pioglitazone or rosiglitazone self-administered for 12 months. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycaemic control [glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)), fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin levels (FPG, PPG, FPI, and PPI respectively), homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index], lipid profile [total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglycerides (TG)], lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] and homocysteine (HCT) at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of treatment.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

No BMI change was observed at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months in either group. Significant HbA(1c) decreases were observed at 9 and 12 months in both groups. After 9 and 12 months, mean FPG and PPG levels decreased in both groups. Decreases in FPI and PPI were observed at 9 and 12 months compared with the baseline in both groups. Furthermore, in both groups, the HOMA index improved but only at 12 months. Significant TC, LDL-C, HDL-C, TG improvement was present in the pioglitazone group at 12 months compared with the baseline values, and these variations were significantly different between groups. No TC, LDL-C, TG improvement was present in the rosiglitazone group after 12 months. Significant Lp(a) and HCT improvement was present in the pioglitazone group at 12 months compared with the baseline values, and Lp(a) change was significant compared with the rosiglitazone group. Significant HCT decrease was observed in the rosiglitazone group at the end of the study. In our type 2 diabetic patients, both drugs were safe and effective for glycaemic control and improving HCT plasma levels. However, long-term treatment with metformin plus pioglitazone significantly reduced Lp(a) plasma levels, whereas metformin + rosiglitazone did not.

CONCLUSION

For patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome, combined treatment with metformin and rosiglitazone or pioglitazone is safe and effective, However, the pioglitazone combination also reduced the plasma Lp(a) levels whereas the rosiglitazone combination did not.

Anthropometric evaluation in diabetic patients with ischemic stroke

Strokes are one of the most common causes of mortality and long term severe disability. Risk factors for stroke include: age, gender, diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, and many others.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate obesity and hypertension in patients affected by acute ischemic stroke.

METHOD

We compared the anthropometric variables between type II diabetic patients and non-diabetic patients. We evaluated a total of 60 patients, divided into two groups: 34 non-diabetic patients and a group of 26 type II diabetic subjects.

RESULTS

The predominance of obesity, as well as hypertension, was very high among the studied groups, presenting no differences among the waist-hip ratio (WHR) values of the study group compared to the ones of the control group.

CONCLUSION

The predominance of obesity was very high among the studied groups and there was prevalence the android type obesity. There was no significative difference in the anthropometric evaluation by the measurement of WHR and the waist in the groups.

Plasma lipoprotein(a) levels: a comparison between diabetic and non-diabetic patients with acute ischemic stroke

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), very low density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL ), triglycerides , apolipoprotein A (apo A) and B100 (apo B100), uric acid, glycaemic and insulin plasmatic concentrations in patients affected by acute stroke. In this group of patients, we have compared the variables between type 2 diabetic patients and non-diabetic patients. METHOD: We evaluate a total of 34 non-diabetic patients (22 males and 12 females; mean age 66.71 ± 10.83 years) and a group of 26 type 2 diabetic patients (15 males and 11 females; mean age 66.35 ± 9.92 years) in a cross-sectional study. RESULTS: Mean Lp(a) concentration did not significantly differ between type 2 diabetic patients and non-diabetic subjects (29.49 ± 23.09 vs 44.81 ± 44.34 mg/dl). The distribution of Lp(a)levels was highly skewed towards the higher levels in both groups, being over 30 mg/dl in 50%. Lp(a) concentration was positively correlated with abdominal adiposity, using waist-hip ratio(WHR)(p< 0.05). No association was found between Lp(a) and others risk factors like sex, age, other lipidic parameters and the presence of stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that there were no significant differences between diabetic and non-diabetic patients' serum Lp(a) levels, which indicates that elevated Lp(a) levels were associated with ischemic stroke, irrespective of the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (type 2 DM).

The effect of L-carnitine on plasma lipoprotein(a) levels in hypercholesterolemic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

A previous study has demonstrated that L-carnitine reduces plasma lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels in patients with hypercholesterolemia.

OBJECTIVE

To test a tolerable Lp(a)-reducing agent in diabetic patients, we assessed the effect of a dietary supplementation of L-carnitine on plasma lipid levels, particularly Lp(a), of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

In this 6-month, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial, patients were enrolled, assessed, and followed up at the Diabetic and Metabolic Diseases Center of the Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics at the University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. All study patients had newly diagnosed type 2 DM that was managed through dietary restriction alone throughout the study, as well as hypercholesterolemia. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 groups. One group received L-carnitine, one 1-g tablet BID. The other group received a corresponding placebo. We assessed body mass index, fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma insulin, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, apolipoprotein (apo) A-I, apo B, and Lp(a) at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months of treatment.

RESULTS

This study included 94 patients. The treatment group included 24 men and 22 women (mean [SD] age, 52 [6] years). The placebo group included 23 men and 25 women (mean [SD] age, 50 [7] years). The baseline characteristics of the groups did not differ significantly. The mean (SD) body weight, height, and body mass index were 78.2 (5.8) kg, 1.70 (0.04) m, and 27.3 (2.5) kg/m(2), respectively, in the L-carnitine group and 77.6 (6.4) kg, 1.71 (0.05) m, and 26.8 (2.2) kg/m(2), respectively, in the placebo group. In the treatment group, Lp(a) was significantly reduced at 3 and 6 months compared with baseline (P < 0.05) and P < 0.01, respectively). We observed a significant improvement after 6 months (P < 0.05) in the Lp(a) value in patients taking L-carnitine compared with those taking placebo. Between-group differences in other variables did not reach a level of significance at months 3 and 6. No drug-related adverse events were reported or observed.

CONCLUSION

In this preliminary study, after 3 and 6 months, L-carnitine significantly lowered the plasma Lp(a) level compared with placebo in selected hypercholesterolemic patients with newly diagnosed type 2 DM.