Clinical significance of urinary liver-type fatty acid-binding protein in diabetic nephropathy of type 2 diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE: Urinary liver-type fatty acid-binding protein (L-FABP) is a promising indicator of tubular but not glomerular damage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of urinary L-FABP as a prognostic biomarker in impaired diabetic nephropathy in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This investigation involved a cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of the relationship between urinary L-FABP levels and progressive nephropathy. Urinary L-FABP was measured with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. In the cross-sectional analysis, the association of urinary L-FABP, with the severity of diabetic nephropathy, was investigated in 140 patients with type 2 diabetes and in 412 healthy control subjects. Of the patients in the former study, 104 have been followed for 4 years. The progression of diabetic nephropathy was defined as progressive albuminuria, end-stage renal disease, or induction of hemodialysis. RESULTS: Urinary L-FABP levels were progressively increased in subjects with normo-, micro-, or macroalbuminuria and further increased in patients with end-stage renal disease. In the longitudinal analysis, high urinary L-FABP levels were associated with the increase in albuminuria, progression to end-stage renal disease, or induction of hemodialysis. This was particularly demonstrated in the subgroup of patients without renal dysfunction (n = 59), where high urinary L-FABP levels were associated with the progression of diabetic nephropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary L-FABP accurately reflected the severity of diabetic nephropathy in type 2 diabetes, and its level was high in the patients with normoalbuminuria. Moreover, higher urinary L-FABP was a risk factor for progression of diabetic nephropathy.

U-shaped effect of drinking and linear effect of smoking on risk for stomach cancer in Japan.

A case-control study was conducted to evaluate the relationship between smoking or drinking doses and risk for stomach cancer, and to clarify whether the relationship is dose-dependent or U-shaped. Smoking dose was categorized as 0, 1 - 399, 400 - 799, or 800 + cigarette-years, and drinking dose as 0, occasional/0.1 - 134.9, 135 - 1349.9, or 1350 + alcohol-years (ml of pure alcohol intake per day multiplied by years of drinking). Helicobacter pylori status was determined by serology for adjustment. Using logistic regression, the adjusted effects of smoking and drinking doses on risk for stomach cancer were calculated for both genders. Among male subjects, the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals (CIs)) were 1.29 (0.76, 2.18) for 1 - 399, 1.71 (1.05, 2.80) for 400 - 799 and 2.46 (1.49, 4.07) for 800 + cigarette-years compared with never-smokers, and 1.89 (0.97, 3.69) for never-drinkers, 2.82 (1.63, 4.86) for 135 - 1349.9 and 2.84 (1.97, 4.83) for 1350.0 +, compared with occasional/0.1 - 134.9 alcohol-years. Among female subjects, they were 0.44 (0.20, 1.00) for 1 - 399 and 2.471 (0.91, 6.68) for 400 + cigarette-years compared with never-smokers, and 1.54 (0.90, 2.63) for never-drinkers and 1.39 (0.66, 2.93) for 135.0 + alcohol-years. Smoking seems to exert a linear effect and drinking, a J- or U-shaped effect on risk for stomach cancer, although there might be a dip of risk in light smokers among female subjects.