Correction to: Randomized trial of an increased dose of calcium channel blocker or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker as an add-on intensive depressor therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension: the ACADEMIE Study.

In the Original publication of the article, the legend appearing inside the flow chart has been incorrectly published.

Randomized trial of an increased dose of calcium channel blocker or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker as an add-on intensive depressor therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension: the ACADEMIE Study.

There is a lack of data on how to treat hypertensive patients with diabetes when treatment with medium doses of calcium channel blocker and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) is insufficient to achieve the target blood pressure (BP). A total of 121 participants with type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled essential hypertension, who were receiving medium doses of amlodipine (5 mg/day) and ARB, were enrolled. Participants were randomized to receive either a high dose of amlodipine (10 mg/day) plus a medium dose of ARB (high-AML) or a medium dose of amlodipine (5 mg/day) plus a high dose of ARB (high-ARB). The depressor effects of these two regimens were monitored using a telemonitoring home BP-measuring system. Fifty-four patients were excluded after an observation period, and the remaining 67 eligible participants were randomized into the two groups; 42 which had a record of their home BP for analysis. The change in morning home systolic and diastolic BP was greater in the high-AML than in the high-ARB (systolic BP; - 7.9 mmHg vs. + 2.7 mmHg; p = 0.0002, diastolic BP; - 3.9 mmHg vs. + 0.6 mmHg; p = 0.0007). In addition, the home systolic and diastolic BP before going to bed and office systolic BP were significantly reduced from week 0 only in the high-AML. An increased dose of amlodipine, but not ARB, reduced home morning BP in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes who were already receiving combination therapy with medium doses of amlodipine and ARB.

Cholesterol metabolism in patients with hemodialysis in the presence or absence of coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the interrelationship between the lipid profile, cholesterol metabolism, and coronary risk factors in patients with hemodialysis (HD) in the presence or absence of coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-five patients with HD were selected (HD group). Fifty-eight age-, gender-, and body mass index (BMI)-matched patients who had at least 1 cardiovascular risk factor were selected as a non-HD group. Total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-HDL-C, and the ratio of LDL-C to HDL-C (L/H) in the HD group were significantly lower than those in the non-HD group. All markers of cholesterol absorption (campesterol/TC, sitosterol/TC, and cholestanol/TC) and the ratio of campesterol to lathosterol in the HD group were significantly higher. In addition, in the HD group, L/H was negatively correlated with lathosterol/TC, campesterol/TC, sitosterol/TC, and cholestanol/TC. Finally, CAD was significantly associated with lathosterol/TC (P=0.028), which was positively associated with BMI in the HD group, whereas CAD was significantly associated only with hypertension (P=0.020) in the non-HD group. CONCLUSIONS: HD patients showed lower cholesterol concentrations than non-HD patients, and, as compensation, their cholesterol absorption might be accelerated. However, higher cholesterol synthesis, which was correlated with higher BMI, might be an independent predictor for the presence of CAD in HD patients.

Randomized, double-blind, controlled, comparative trial of formula food containing soy protein vs. milk protein in visceral fat obesity. -FLAVO study-.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to clarify the efficacy of soy at reducing visceral fat. A randomized, double-blind, controlled, comparative trial was carried out to compare formula food containing soy protein (SP) to the same food in which soy was replaced with milk protein (MP). METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-eight participants were enrolled for the treatment of visceral fat obesity (visceral fat area >100 cm² on computed tomography). The SP formula contained 12 g of SP, 9 g of MP, and other nutrients, and was given for 20 weeks in the morning, while in the MP formula SP was replaced with MP. During the 20 weeks of the trial period, visceral fat area and subcutaneous fat area in the MP group were significantly reduced, while those in the SP group did not change as assessed on analysis of covariance. Although waist circumference was reduced in both the SP and MP groups, body weight and body mass index were significantly reduced only in the MP group. Based on a mixed-effects model, the difference in log-transformed visceral fat profiles between the 2 groups was statistically significant (P<0.05), while a negative relationship was observed between the changes in visceral fat and adiponectin in the MP group (P<0.001), but not in the SP group. CONCLUSIONS: Formula food containing MP is superior to that containing SP for reducing visceral and subcutaneous fat.