Lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease in diabetic patients

Exploring the Interplay between Diabetes and Lp(a): Implications for Cardiovascular Risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this manuscript is to review and describe the relationship between Lp(a) and diabetes, exploring both their association and synergy as cardiovascular risk factors, while also describing the current evidence regarding the potential connection between low levels of Lp(a) and the presence of diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Epidemiological studies suggest a potential relationship between low to very low levels of Lp(a) and diabetes. Lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), is an intriguing lipoprotein of genetic origin, yet its biological function remains unknown. Elevated levels of Lp(a) are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular atherosclerosis, and coexisting diabetes status confers an even higher risk. On the other hand, epidemiological and genetic studies have paradoxically suggested a potential relationship between low to very low levels of Lp(a) and diabetes. While new pharmacological strategies are being developed to reduce Lp(a) levels, the dual aspects of this lipoprotein's behavior need to be elucidated in the near future.

Lipoprotein(a) and the Risk for Recurrent Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Events Among Adults With CKD: The Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study

Rationale & Objective

Many adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) have high lipoprotein(a) levels. It is unclear whether high lipoprotein(a) levels confer an increased risk for recurrent ASCVD events in this population. We estimated the risk for recurrent ASCVD events associated with lipoprotein(a) in adults with CKD and prevalent ASCVD.

Study Design

Observational cohort study.

Setting & Participants

We included 1,439 adults with CKD and prevalent ASCVD not on dialysis enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort study between 2003 and 2008.

Exposure

Baseline lipoprotein(a) mass concentration, measured using a latex-enhanced immunoturbidimetric assay.

Outcomes

Recurrent ASCVD events (primary outcome), kidney failure, and death (exploratory outcomes) through 2019.

Analytical Approach

We used Cox proportional-hazards regression models to estimate adjusted HR (aHRs) and 95% CIs.

Results

Among participants included in the current analysis (mean age 61.6 years, median lipoprotein(a) 29.4 mg/dL [25th-75th percentiles 9.9-70.9 mg/dL]), 641 had a recurrent ASCVD event, 510 developed kidney failure, and 845 died over a median follow-up of 6.6 years. The aHR for ASCVD events associated with 1 standard deviation (SD) higher log-transformed lipoprotein(a) was 1.04 (95% CI, 0.95-1.15). In subgroup analyses, 1 SD higher log-lipoprotein(a) was associated with an increased risk for ASCVD events in participants without diabetes (aHR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48), but there was no evidence of an association among those with diabetes (aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.88-1.10, P comparing aHRs = 0.031). The aHR associated with 1 SD higher log-lipoprotein(a) in the overall study population was 1.16 (95% CI, 1.04-1.28) for kidney failure and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.94-1.11) for death.

Limitations

Lipoprotein(a) was not available in molar concentration.

Conclusions

Lipoprotein(a) was not associated with the risk for recurrent ASCVD events in adults with CKD, although it was associated with a risk for kidney failure.

Lipoprotein(a) is associated with a larger systemic burden of arterial calcification

AIMS

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a genetically determined risk factor for cardiovascular disease. However, population-based evidence on the link between Lp(a) and subclinical arteriosclerosis is lacking. We assessed associations of Lp(a) concentrations with arteriosclerosis in multiple arteries.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From the population-based Rotterdam study, 2354 participants (mean age: 69.5 years, 52.3% women) underwent non-contrast computed tomography to assess arterial calcification as a hallmark of arteriosclerosis. We quantified the volume of coronary artery calcification (CAC), aortic arch calcification (AAC), extracranial (ECAC), and intracranial carotid artery calcification (ICAC). All participants underwent blood sampling, from which plasma Lp(a) concentrations were derived. The association of plasma Lp(a) levels was assessed with calcification volumes and with severe calcification (upper quartile of calcification volume) using sex-stratified multivariable linear and logistic regression models. Higher Lp(a) levels were associated with larger ln-transformed volumes of CAC [fully adjusted beta 95% confidence interval (CI) per 1 standard deviation (SD) in women: 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.14, men: 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.14], AAC (women: 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.11, men: 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.14), ECAC (women: 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.13, men: 0.08, 95% CI 0.03-0.14), and ICAC (women: 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.14, men: 0.05, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.11]. In the highest Lp(a) percentile, severe ICAC was most prevalent in women [fully adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.41, 95% CI 1.25-4.63] and severe AAC in men (fully adjusted OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.67-6.49).

CONCLUSION

Higher Lp(a) was consistently associated with a larger calcification burden in all major arteries. The findings of this study indicate that Lp(a) is a systemic risk factor for arteriosclerosis and thus potentially an effective target for treatment. Lp(a)-reducing therapies may reduce the burden from arteriosclerotic events throughout the arterial system.

TRANSLATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

In 2354 participants from the Rotterdam study, we assessed the link between Lp(a) concentrations and arterial calcifications, as proxy for arteriosclerosis, in major arteries. We found that higher Lp(a) levels were consistently associated with larger volumes of calcification in the coronary arteries, aortic arch, extracranial carotid arteries, and intracranial carotid arteries. The findings of our study indicate that Lp(a) is a systemic risk factor for arteriosclerosis, suggesting that the systemic burden of arteriosclerosis throughout the arterial system could be reduced by targeting Lp(a).

The relationship of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and all-cause or cardiovascular mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective study

Background

The optimal levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are not currently clear. In this study, we determined the relationship between various mean LDL-C and all-cause or cardiovascular mortality risks in patients with T2D, stratifying by albumin level, age, sex, and antilipid medication use. We also evaluated the association of LDL-C standard deviation (LDL-C-SD) and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality by type of antilipid medication use.

Methods

A total of 46,675 T2D patients with a prescription for antidiabetic agents >6 months from outpatient visits (2003-2018) were linked to Taiwan's National Death Registry to identify all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. The Poisson assumption was used to estimate mortality rates, and the Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to assess the relative hazards of respective mortality in relation to mean LDL-C in patient cohorts by albumin level, age, sex, and antilipid use adjusting for medications, comorbidities, and laboratory results. We also determined the overall, and anti-lipid-specific mortality rates and relative hazards of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality associated with LDL-C-SD using the Poisson assumption and Cox proportional hazard regression model, respectively.

Results

All-cause and cardiovascular mortality rates were the lowest in T2D patients with a mean LDL-C > 90-103.59 mg/dL in the normal albumin group (≥ 3.5 g/dL). Compared to T2D patients with a mean LDL-C > 90-103.59 mg/dL, those with a mean LDL-C ≤ 77 mg/dL had an elevated risk of all-cause mortality in both the normal and lower albumin groups. T2D patients with a mean LDL-C ≤ 90 and > 103.59-119 mg/dL had relatively higher risk of cardiovascular mortality in the normal albumin group, but in the lower albumin group (<3.5 g/dL), any level of mean LDL-C ≤ 119 mg/dL was not significantly associated with cardiovascular mortality. Increased risks of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were observed in patients with a mean LDL-C ≤ 77 mg/dL in both sexes and in all age groups except in those aged <50 years, a lower mean LDL-C was not associated with cardiovascular mortality. Similarly, patients with an LDL-C-SD <10^th and > 90^th percentiles were associated with significant risks of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. In statin users, but not fibrate users, lower and higher levels of mean LDL-C and LDL-C-SD were both associated with elevated risks of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality.

Conclusions

The optimal level of LDL-C was found to be >90-103.59 mg/dL in T2D patients. Lower and higher levels of mean LDL-C and LDL-C-SD were associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, revealing U-shaped associations. Further studies are necessary to validate the relationship between optimal LDL-C levels and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in patients with diabetes.

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Lp(a) and the Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Focus on the Lp(a) Paradox in Diabetes Mellitus

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is one of the strongest causal risk factors of atherosclerotic disease. It is rich in cholesteryl ester and composed of apolipoprotein B and apo(a). Plasma Lp(a) levels are determined by apo(a) transcriptional activity driven by a direct repeat (DR) response element in the apo(a) promoter under the control of (HNF)4α Farnesoid-X receptor (FXR) ligands play a key role in the downregulation of APOA expression. In vitro studies on the catabolism of Lp(a) have revealed that Lp(a) binds to several specific lipoprotein receptors; however, their in vivo role remains elusive. There are more than 1000 publications on the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in Lp(a) metabolism; however, the data is often inconsistent and confusing. In patients suffering from Type-I diabetes mellitus (T1DM), provided they are metabolically well-controlled, Lp(a) plasma concentrations are directly comparable to healthy individuals. In contrast, there exists a paradox in T2DM patients, as many of these patients have reduced Lp(a) levels; however, they are still at an increased cardiovascular risk. The Lp(a) lowering mechanism observed in T2DM patients is most probably caused by mutations in the mature-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) gene and possibly other polymorphisms in key transcription factors of the apolipoprotein (a) gene (APOA).

Lipoprotein(a) Concentrations Correlate With LDL-C in Children With Type 1 and 2 Diabetes

Context

Elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease especially in patients with diabetes. Adult levels of Lp(a) are thought to be is expressed by the second year of life.

Objective

We hypothesized that Lp(a) would be influenced by low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), race, and HbA1C.

Methods

Retrospective electronic medical record review of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) (n = 607) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) (n = 93).

Results

Total of 700 subjects, ages 12-19 years with T1D (n = 607) and T2D (n = 93), 49% were male, mean age was 13.2 ± 3.08 years, and the median Lp(a) was 8.00 mg/dL, IQR 5.00-12.00. The Black subjects had an increased relative risk (RR) of higher Lp(a) compared with White subjects (RR 1.25, P < .0001). Among patients with T1D, Black people had an increased relative risk of higher Lp(a) than White people (RR 1.23, P = .0002). In T2D, Black subjects have 43% higher risk of having elevated Lp(a) than White subjects (RR 1.43, P = .268). In T1D, a 5 mg/dL increase in LDL-C results in 2% increase in Lp(a) (P < .0001). In T2D, a 5 mg/dL increase of LDL-C results in an increase of Lp(a) by 3%. LDL-C and BMI are independently associated with Lp(a) (RR = 1.02, P < .001; RR = 0.98, P < .001).

Conclusion

Our data suggest that Lp(a) is associated with LDL-C in children with diabetes. Lp(a) is differentially increased at higher concentrations of LDL-C. Black children with diabetes have a significant burden of Lp(a) concentrations compared with White children.

The association between lipoprotein (a) and carotid atherosclerosis in patients with type 2 diabetes without pre-existing cardiovascular disease: A cross-sectional study

AIMS

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has been considered a determinant of residual cardiovascular risk. We aimed to investigate associations between serum Lp(a) levels and carotid atherosclerosis.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 662 type 2 diabetic patients without cardiovascular disease. The mean value of three right and left measurements was used to indentify increased carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT). A carotid plaque was defined as a focal wall thickening >50% of the surrounding IMT or its CIMT ≥1.5 mm. The presence of carotid atherosclerosis was defined as having CIMT ≥1.0 mm or carotid plaque.

RESULTS

A total of 34.3% of patients had carotid atherosclerosis. The median Lp(a) level was significantly higher in subjects with carotid atherosclerosis (14.6 vs. 10.2 mg/dL, P < 0.001). The log-transformed Lp(a) level per 1-standard deviation increase was significantly associated with higher risk of the presence of carotid atherosclerosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16 - 1.84, P = 0.001) after adjusting other parameters. The log Lp(a) level was still significantly associated with the risk of carotid atherosclerosis in subjects with optimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) <100 mg/dL (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.16 - 1.88, P = 0.001). Higher Lp(a) and LDL-C had an additive effect on the presence of carotid atherosclerosis.

CONCLUSION

Elevated Lp(a) was significantly associated with the presence of carotid atherosclerosis in patients with type 2 diabetes, independent of conventional cardiometabolic risk factors.

Lp(a) and Apo-lipoproteins as predictors for micro- and macrovascular complications of diabetes: A case-cohort study

AIMS

To investigate the associations between Lp(a), Apo A1, Apo B, and Apo B/Apo A1 ratio with micro- and macrovascular complications of diabetes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this case-cohort study, 1057 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) were followed in the diabetes clinic of Vali-Asr Hospital from 2014 to 2019. The association between serum Lp (a) and apolipoproteins with cardiovascular disease (CVD), neuropathy, and nephropathy were assessed by using binary regression analysis. The ROC curve analysis was used to evaluate the predictive properties of proteins. Youden index was used to calculate cutoff values. Among patients with T2DM, 242, 231, and 91 patients developed CVD, neuropathy, and nephropathy, respectively. The serum Lp (a) level was positively correlated with the development of all three. (P-values = 0.022, 0.042, and 0.038, respectively). The Apo A1 level was negatively correlated with nephropathy. Among the biomarkers, Lp(a) had the highest AUC for prediction of CVD, neuropathy, and nephropathy. Calculated cutoff values of Lp(a), and Apo A1 levels were higher than the standard cutoff values.

CONCLUSION

Serum level of Lp(a) is a predictor for CVD, neuropathy, and nephropathy. Based on the calculated cutoff values in patients with T2DM, we should consider diabetic complications at higher levels of Lp(a).

Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerosis: from pathophysiology to clinical relevance and treatment options

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) was discovered more than 50 years ago, and a decade later, it was recognized as a risk factor for coronary artery disease. However, it has gained importance only in the past 10 years, with emergence of drugs that can effectively decrease its levels. Lp(a) is a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) with an added apolipoprotein(a) attached to the apolipoprotein B component via a disulphide bond. Circulating levels of Lp(a) are mainly genetically determined. Lp(a) has many functions, which include proatherosclerotic, prothrombotic and pro-inflammatory roles. Here, we review recent data on the role of Lp(a) in the atherosclerotic process, and treatment options for patients with cardiovascular diseases. Currently 'Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9' (PCSK9) inhibitors that act through non-specific reduction of Lp(a) are the only drugs that have shown effectiveness in clinical trials, to provide reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The effects of PCSK9 inhibitors are not purely through Lp(a) reduction, but also through LDL cholesterol reduction. Finally, we discuss new drugs on the horizon, and gene-based therapies that affect transcription and translation of apolipoprotein(a) mRNA. Clinical trials in patients with high Lp(a) and low LDL cholesterol might tell us whether Lp(a) lowering per se decreases cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.KEY MESSAGESLipoprotein(a) is an important risk factor in patients with cardiovascular diseases.Lipoprotein(a) has many functions, which include proatherosclerotic, prothrombotic and pro-inflammatory roles.Treatment options to lower lipoprotein(a) levels are currently scarce, but new drugs are on the horizon.

Dyslipidemia in Type 1 Diabetes: AMaskedDanger

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) patients show lipid disorders which are likely to play a role in their increased cardiovascular (CV) disease risk. Quantitative abnormalities of lipoproteins are noted in T1D with poor glycemic control. In T1D with optimal glycemic control, triglycerides and LDL-cholesterol are normal or slightly decreased whereas HDL-cholesterol is normal or slightly increased. T1D patients, even with good glycemic control, show several qualitative and functional abnormalities of lipoproteins that are potentially atherogenic. An association between these abnormalities and CV disease risk has been reported in recent studies. Although the mechanisms underlying T1D dyslipidemia remain unclear, the subcutaneous route of insulin administration, that is responsible for peripheral hyperinsulinemia, is likely to be an important factor.

The mixed benefit of low lipoprotein(a) in type 2 diabetes

Background

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), a variant low-density lipoprotein (LDL), is a major genetic risk factor for cardiovascular disease. It is unknown whether an inverse relationship exists between Lp(a) and β-cell function (BCF), as for LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering by statins.

We therefore assessedthe cardiometabolic phenotype of 340 men with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in relation to Lp(a), focusing on BCF and hyperbolic product [BxS], which adjusts BCF to insulin sensitivity and secretion.

Methods

Two groups were analyzed according to Lp(a) quartiles (Q): a (very-)low Lp(a) (Q1;n = 85) vs a normal-to-high Lp(a) group (Q2-Q4;n = 255).

Results

In the overall cohort, mean Lp(a) was 52 nmol.L⁻¹. Median Lp(a) was 6 nmol.L⁻¹ (Q1) vs 38 nmol.L⁻¹ (Q2-Q4). There were no differences between groups regarding age; education; diabetes duration; body mass index; body composition and smoking. Q1 had significantly worse glycemic control, higher systolic blood pressure, more severe metabolic syndrome, and more frequent hepatic steatosis. Insulin sensitivity was significantly lower (− 37%) in Q1, who also had lesser hyperbolic product (− 27%), and higher [BxS] loss rate (+ 15%). Q1 also had higher frequency (+31%) and severity (+20%) of atherogenic dyslipidemia. Microangiopathy and neuropathy were higher in Q1 (+ 34% and + 48%, respectively), whereas Q2-Q4 patients had increased macroangiopathy (+ 51%) and coronary artery disease (CAD; + 94%).

Conclusions

Low Lp(a) appears both beneficial and unhealthy in T2DM. It is associated with unfavourable cardiometabolic phenotype, lesser BCF, poorer glycemic control, and increased microvascular damage despite being linked to markedly reduced CAD, suggesting that Lp(a)-related vascular risk) follows a J-shaped curve.

Vildagliptin reduces plasma stromal cell-derived factor-1α in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with glimepiride

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors might have pleiotropic protective effects on cardiovascular disease (CVD), in contrast to sulfonylureas. Therefore, we compared various CVD risk factors between vildagliptin and glimepiride.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a randomized, prospective and crossover trial. A total of 16 patients with type 2 diabetes whose glycated hemoglobin was >7% were randomized to add vildagliptin or glimepiride. After 12-week treatment, each drug was replaced with the other for another 12 weeks. Before and after each treatment, glucose homeostasis and CVD risk factors were assessed, and the continuous glucose monitoring system was applied to calculate glycemic variability.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 60 years, 31% were men, body mass index 25.5 kg/m² and HbA1c 8.41%. Both vildagliptin and glimepiride significantly decreased glycated hemoglobin and glycemic variability indices. Despite the improved glucose homeostasis, favorable change of CVD markers was not prominent in both the arms, along with significant weight gain. Only plasma stromal cell-derived factor (SDF)-1α decreased by 30% in the vildagliptin arm. According to regression analyses, the reduction of SDF-1α was independently associated with vildagliptin usage and serum interleukin-6 changes, but white blood cells were not related with the SDF-1α changes.

CONCLUSION

Compared with glimepiride, vildagliptin arrestingly decreased plasma SDF-1α, and its clinical implications should be further investigated.

Body mass index and glycemic control influence lipoproteins in children with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) have an extremely high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. It is well known that dyslipidemia is a subclinical manifestation of atherosclerosis.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze presence and predicting factors of lipoprotein abnormalities prevalent in children with T1DM and whether race-specific differences exist between non-Hispanic white (NHW) and non-Hispanic black (NHB) in the lipoprotein characteristics.

METHODS

A retrospective electronic chart review including 600 (123 NHB and 477 NHW) T1DM patients aged 7.85 ± 3.75 years who underwent lipoprotein analysis.

RESULTS

Relative to NHW counterparts, NHB T1DM subjects had a higher HbA1c, total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c), apoB 100, lipoprotein (a), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c), HDL-2, and HDL-3. Body mass index (BMI) was positively associated with TC, LDL-c, apoB 100, and non-HDL-c and inversely associated with HDL, HDL-2, and HDL-3. HbA1c was positively associated with TC, LDL-c, apoB 100, non-HDL-c, and HDL-3. Multilinear regression analysis demonstrated that HbA1c was positively associated with apoB 100 in both NHB and NHW, and BMI was a positive determinant of apoB 100 in NHW only.

CONCLUSION

Poor glycemic control and high BMI may contribute to abnormal lipoprotein profiles. Glycemic control (in NHB and NHW) and weight management (in NHW) may have significant implications in T1DM. ApoB 100 concentrations in subjects with T1DM were determined by modifiable risk factors, BMI, HbA1C, and blood pressure, indicating the importance of adequate weight, glycemic, and blood pressure control for better diabetes care and likely lower CVD risk.

Serum lipoprotein(a) levels and diabetic nephropathy among Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the association between serum lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels and diabetic nephropathy among Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

This study included 581 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Serum Lp(a) levels were divided into four groups; the cut-off points were at the 30th, 60th, and 90th percentile values on the basis of the distribution for all subjects. Diabetic nephropathy was defined as present when the urinary albumin-creatinine ratio was ≥33.9mg/mmol creatinine and/or the estimated glomerular filtration rate was <30ml/min/1.72m(2). Adjustment was made for age, sex, body mass index, hemoglobin A1c, duration of diabetes mellitus, current drinking, current smoking, hypertension, dyslipidemia, coronary heart disease, and stroke.

RESULTS

Higher serum Lp(a) levels were significantly associated with a higher prevalence of diabetic nephropathy: the adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for diabetic nephropathy in relation to serum Lp(a) levels of ≤6, 7-15, 16-38, and ≥39mg/dl were 1.00 (reference), 2.74 (1.08-7.00), 3.31 (1.28-8.54), and 4.80 (1.57-14.60), respectively (P for trend=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that serum Lp(a) levels may be positively associated with diabetic nephropathy among Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Overweight adolescents with type 2 diabetes have significantly higher lipoprotein abnormalities than those with type 1 diabetes

AIM

Diabetes-associated glucoregulatory derangements may precipitate atherogenesis in childhood and CVD risk, particularly with obesity. We aimed to delineate lipoprotein profile differences between children with type 1 and 2 diabetes who are overweight/obese.

METHODS

Data were obtained from electronic medical records of patients ≥85th BMI percentile with type 1 (n=159) and type 2 (n=77) diabetes, ages 12-19y. Group differences were evaluated by correlations and general linear modeling analysis, adjusting for BMI, HbA1c, and diabetes duration.

RESULTS

There were no group differences in TC, LDL, or non-HDL. Fewer subjects with type 1 diabetes had low HDL (17 vs. 30%; P<0.05). While no difference in HbA1c level was observed between groups, HbA1c was positively correlated with TC (P≤0.0001), LDL (P≤0.0001), non-HDL (P≤0.0001), ApoB100 (P≤0.0001), and LDL pattern B (P≤0.0001). In adjusted models, apoB100 (85.4 vs. 91.3mg/dl; P<0.05) and incidence of LDL pattern B (21 vs. 42%; P<0.01) were lower in subjects with type 1 diabetes. BMI was inversely correlated with HDL, HDL-2 and HDL-3 (all P≤0.0001). The correlation of BMI with HDL-2 and HDL-3 were attenuated when evaluating subjects by diabetes type.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite having no difference in absolute LDL levels, children with type 2 diabetes were more likely to have small, dense LDL particle pattern, higher apo B100 and lower total HDL, HDL-2, and HDL-3 fractions. Furthermore, poor glycemic control was associated with abnormal lipoprotein profiles in patients with both type 1 and 2 diabetes.

Relationship between lipoprotein (a) and micro/macro complications in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a forgotten target

OBJECTIVES

Increased lipoprotein (a) serum concentrations seems to be a cardiovascular risk factor; this has not been confirmed in extracoronary atherosclerosis complications. We therefore wished to gain a deeper insight into relationship between the plasma concentrations of lipoprotein (a) and the micro- and macro-vascular complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus and to identify possible differences in this association.

METHODS

This is a descriptive observational cross-sectional study. Two-hundred and seventeen elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were included from the internal medicine outclinic. Anthropometric data, analytical data (insulin reserve, basal and postprandial peptide C, glycosylated hemoglobin, renal parameters, lipid profile and clinical data as hypertension, obesity, micro- and macrovascular complications were collected.

RESULTS

Patients were grouped according to the type 2 diabetes mellitus time of evolution. The mean plasma concentration of lipoprotein (a) was 22.2 ± 17.3 mg/dL (22.1 ± 15.9 mg/dL for males, and 22.1 ± 18.4 mg/dL for females). Patients with hypertension, coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular accident, microalbuminuria and proteinuria presented a statistically significant increased level of lipoprotein (a). Similarly, the patients with hyperlipoprotein (a) (≥ 30 mg/dL) presented significantly increased levels of urea and total cholesterol. In the multivariate regression model, the level of lipoprotein (a) is positively correlated with coronary heart disease and diabetic nephropathy (P < 0.01 and P < 0.005, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The elevation of plasma levels of lipoprotein (a) are associated with the development of coronary heart disease and diabe tic nephropathy. Therefore, we consider that the determination of lipoprotein (a) may be a prognostic marker of vascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.