Glycemic Markers and Heart Failure Subtypes: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)

PGAM5 expression levels in heart failure and protection ROS-induced oxidative stress and ferroptosis by Keap1/Nrf2

OBJECTIVES

As a common and frequently occurring disease, heart failure has been paid more and more attention, but the mechanism of its occurrence and development is still unclear. This study investigated that PGAM5 expression levels in heart failure and its underlying mechanisms in vivo and in vitro.

METHODS

The inhibition of PGAM5 mRNA expression levels in patients with heart failure was compared with the normal group.

RESULTS

The serum of PGAM5 mRNA expression was negative correlation with collagen I and collagen III in patients with heart failure. PGAM5 mRNA and protein expression in the heart tissue of mice with heart failure were down-regulated at a time-dependent rate. The inhibition of PGAM5 presented heart failure in the model. PGAM5 reduced inflammation and inhibited ROS-induced oxidative stress in models of heart failure. PGAM5 reduced Ferroptosis in models of heart failure. PGAM5 regulated Keap1/Nrf2 signaling pathway. IP also showed that PGAM5 protein combined with the Keap1 protein. PGAM5 could increase Keap1 protein ubiquitination. Keap1 inhibition affected the effects of PGAM5 in model of heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the protection of PGAM5 reduced ROS-induced oxidative stress and ferroptosis by the Keap1/Nrf2 signaling pathway in heart failure, suggesting that targeting this mechanism of PGAM5 may be a feasible strategy to treat heart failure.

Prediabetes and insulin resistance in a population of patients with heart failure and reduced or preserved ejection fraction but without diabetes, overweight or hypertension

Background

The relationships between glucose abnormalities, insulin resistance (IR) and heart failure (HF) are unclear, especially regarding to the HF type, i.e., HF with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction. Overweight, diabetes and hypertension are potential contributors to IR in persons with HF. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of prediabetes and IR in a population of Vietnamese patients with HFrEF or HFpEF but no overweight, diabetes or hypertension, in comparison with healthy controls, and the relation between prediabetes or IR and HF severity.

Methods

We conducted a prospective cross-sectional observational study in 190 non-overweight normotensive HF patients (114 with HFrEF and 76 with HFpEF, 92.6% were ischemic HF, mean age was 70.1 years, mean BMI 19.7 kg/m²) without diabetes (neither known diabetes nor newly diagnosed by OGTT) and 95 healthy individuals (controls). Prediabetes was defined using 2006 WHO criteria. Glucose and insulin levels were measured fasting and 2 h after glucose challenge. IR was assessed using HOMA-IR and several other indexes.

Results

Compared to controls, HF patients had a higher prevalence of prediabetes (63.2% vs 22.1%) and IR (according to HOMA-IR, 55.3% vs 26.3%), higher HOMA-IR, insulin/glucose ratio after glucose and FIRI, and lower ISIT0 and ISIT120 (< 0.0001 for all comparisons), with no difference for body weight, waist circumference, blood pressure and lipid parameters. Prediabetes was more prevalent (69.3% vs 53.9%, p = 0.03) and HOMA-IR was higher (p < 0.0001) in patients with HFrEF than with HFpEF. Among both HFrEF and HFpEF patients, those with prediabetes or IR had a more severe HF (higher NYHA functional class and NT-proBNP levels, lower ejection fraction; p = 0.04–< 0.0001) than their normoglycemic or non-insulinresistant counterparts, with no difference for blood pressure and lipid parameters.

Conclusion

In non-diabetic non-overweight normotensive patients with HF, the prevalence of prediabetes is higher with some trend to more severe IR in those with HFrEF than in those with HFpEF. Both prediabetes and IR are associated with a more severe HF. The present data support HF as a culprit for IR. Intervention strategies should be proposed to HF patients with prediabetes aiming to reduce the risk of incident diabetes. Studies should be designed to test whether such strategies may translate into an improvement of further HF-related outcomes.

Causal Association of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Glycemic Traits With Cardiovascular Diseases and Lipid Traits: A Mendelian Randomization Study

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the causal effect of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and glycemic traits on the risk of a wide range of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and lipid traits using Mendelian randomization (MR).

Methods

Genetic variants associated with T2DM, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, and hemoglobin A1c were selected as instrumental variables to perform both univariable and multivariable MR analyses.

Results

In univariable MR, genetically predicted T2DM was associated with higher odds of peripheral artery disease (pooled odds ratio (OR) =1.207, 95% CI: 1.162-1.254), myocardial infarction (OR =1.132, 95% CI: 1.104-1.160), ischemic heart disease (OR =1.129, 95% CI: 1.105-1.154), heart failure (OR =1.050, 95% CI: 1.029-1.072), stroke (OR =1.087, 95% CI: 1.068-1.107), ischemic stroke (OR =1.080, 95% CI: 1.059-1.102), essential hypertension (OR =1.013, 95% CI: 1.010-1.015), coronary atherosclerosis (OR =1.005, 95% CI: 1.004-1.007), and major coronary heart disease event (OR =1.003, 95% CI: 1.002-1.004). Additionally, T2DM was causally related to lower levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (OR =0.965, 95% CI: 0.958-0.973) and apolipoprotein A (OR =0.982, 95% CI: 0.977-0.987) but a higher level of triglycerides (OR =1.060, 95% CI: 1.036-1.084). Moreover, causal effect of glycemic traits on CVDs and lipid traits were also observed. Finally, most results of univariable MR were supported by multivariable MR.

Conclusion

We provided evidence for the causal effects of T2DM and glycemic traits on the risk of CVDs and dyslipidemia. Further investigations to elucidate the underlying mechanisms are warranted.