Cardiovascular diabetology · 2018
Low cholesterol efflux capacity and abnormal lipoprotein particles in youth with type 1 diabetes: a case control study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаResearch Support, N.I.H., IntramuralПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gourgari Evgenia, Playford Martin P, Campia Umberto, Dey Amit K, Cogen Fran, Gubb-Weiser Stephanie, Mete Mihriye, Desale Sameer, Sampson Maureen, Taylor Allen, Rother Kristina I, Remaley Alan T, Mehta Nehal N
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) have increased mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Risk factors for CVD include an elevation of LDL (LDLp) and small HDL (sHDLp) particles, and a decrease in reverse cholesterol transport i.e. HDL-cholesterol efflux capacity (CEC). Our objective was to compare lipoprotein particles and CEC between T1DM and healthy controls (HC) and to explore the associations between NMR lipid particles and cholesterol efflux.
METHODS: 78 patients with T1DM and 59 HC underwent fasting lipoprotein profile testing by NMR and measurements of CEC by cell-based method. The associations between NMR lipid particles with CEC were analyzed using multivariable linear regression models.
RESULTS: Youth with T1DM had higher total LDLp 724 [(563-985) vs 622 (476-794) nmol/L (P = 0.011)] (Maahs et al. in Circulation 130(17):1532-58, 2014; Shah et al. in Pediatr Diabetes 16(5):367-74, 2015), sHDLp [11.20 (5.7-15.3) vs 7.0 (3.2-13.1) μmol/L (P = 0.021)], and lower medium HDLp [11.20 (8.5-14.5) vs 12.3 (9-19.4), (P = 0.049)] and lower CEC (0.98 ± 0.11% vs 1.05 ± 0.15%, P = 0.003) compared to HC. Moreover, CEC correlated with sHDLp (β = - 0.28, P = 0.045) and large HDLp (β = 0.46, P < 0.001) independent of age, sex, ethnicity, BMIz, HbA1c, hsCRP and total HDLp in the diabetic cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: Youth with T1DM demonstrated a more atherogenic profile including higher sHDL and LDLp and lower CEC. Future efforts should focus on considering adding lipoprotein particles and CEC in CVD risk stratification of youth with T1DM. Trial registration Clinical Trials Registration Number NCT02275091.
METHODS: 78 patients with T1DM and 59 HC underwent fasting lipoprotein profile testing by NMR and measurements of CEC by cell-based method. The associations between NMR lipid particles with CEC were analyzed using multivariable linear regression models.
RESULTS: Youth with T1DM had higher total LDLp 724 [(563-985) vs 622 (476-794) nmol/L (P = 0.011)] (Maahs et al. in Circulation 130(17):1532-58, 2014; Shah et al. in Pediatr Diabetes 16(5):367-74, 2015), sHDLp [11.20 (5.7-15.3) vs 7.0 (3.2-13.1) μmol/L (P = 0.021)], and lower medium HDLp [11.20 (8.5-14.5) vs 12.3 (9-19.4), (P = 0.049)] and lower CEC (0.98 ± 0.11% vs 1.05 ± 0.15%, P = 0.003) compared to HC. Moreover, CEC correlated with sHDLp (β = - 0.28, P = 0.045) and large HDLp (β = 0.46, P < 0.001) independent of age, sex, ethnicity, BMIz, HbA1c, hsCRP and total HDLp in the diabetic cohort.
CONCLUSIONS: Youth with T1DM demonstrated a more atherogenic profile including higher sHDL and LDLp and lower CEC. Future efforts should focus on considering adding lipoprotein particles and CEC in CVD risk stratification of youth with T1DM. Trial registration Clinical Trials Registration Number NCT02275091.