ABSTRACT
Inflammatory markers are elevated in type 2 diabetic patients (DP) and may predict the development of type 2 diabetes. Our aims were to analyze differences in the expression of inflammatory and immunological molecules between DP and healthy subjects and to investigate whether glycemic control might prevent the overexpression of inflammatory markers in DP. Twenty-two DP with advanced atherosclerosis and eight healthy blood donors were included. DP were classified as well (HbA1c ≤ 6.5) or poorly controlled (HbA1c > 6.5). In "in vitro" studies, monocytes were exposed to low (5.5 mM) or high glucose (26 mM) concentrations in the absence or presence of insulin. Expression profiling of 14 inflammatory genes was analyzed using TLDA analysis. "In vivo" results show that monocytes from DP had increased levels of monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP-1) and interleukin 6 (IL6) and lower levels of Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) mRNA than healthy subjects. Well-controlled DP had lower levels of IL-6 than poorly controlled DP, suggesting that glycemic control may prevent IL6 mRNA alterations associated with diabetes. "In vitro" results demonstrate that glucose directly and significantly induced MCP-1 and IL6 and reduced TLR2 mRNA expression. Insulin at high dose (100 IU/ml) dramatically enhanced the upregulatory effects of glucose on MCP-1 and IL-6 and reduced per se TLR2 mRNA expression. MCP-1, IL-6 and TLR2 are key inflammatory players altered in monocytes from type 2 DP. Both hyperinsulinemia and hyperglycemia contribute to alter the expression of these genes. The glycemic control only significantly prevented IL6 overexpression in this group of patients.
Subject(s)
Atherosclerosis/genetics , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetic Cardiomyopathies/genetics , Inflammation Mediators/metabolism , Monocytes/metabolism , Aged , Atherosclerosis/etiology , Atherosclerosis/metabolism , Biomarkers/blood , Biomarkers/metabolism , Case-Control Studies , Cells, Cultured , Chemokine CCL2/genetics , Chemokine CCL2/metabolism , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/genetics , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/metabolism , Diabetic Cardiomyopathies/etiology , Diabetic Cardiomyopathies/metabolism , Female , Humans , Interleukin-6/genetics , Interleukin-6/metabolism , Male , Middle Aged , Toll-Like Receptor 2/genetics , Toll-Like Receptor 2/metabolismABSTRACT
AIMS: To evaluate adherence to guideline-recommended drug therapies for primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention in a general Mediterranean population. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in a random sample of 2270 individuals (18-80 years) assigned to a health centre in Malaga (Spain). The appropriate use was analysed of statins, antithrombotics, beta-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARB), based on the criteria of the European Guidelines on Cardiovascular Prevention and the European Society of Hypertension-European Society of Cardiology. RESULTS: The prescription rate of statins, antithrombotics, beta-blockers, and ACEI/ARB was 7.8%, 5.1%, 3.3%, and 11%, respectively. The prescription of these drugs was inappropriate in 36.2%, 22.4%, 64.5%, and 0%, respectively. Overtreatment was more frequent in subjects with greater comorbidity or ≥ 2 vascular risk factors (p < 0.001). The percentage of individuals with prescription criteria but who did not receive the treatment was 19.5%, 4.7%, 2%, and 9.3%, respectively, increasing significantly with age, Charlson index, and the presence of ≥ 2 risk factors (p < 0.001). Only 11% of patients in secondary prevention received combination therapy with statins, antithrombotics, and ACEI/ARB. Patients with ischaemic heart disease, as compared to non-coronary vascular patients, more frequently received statins (56.1% vs. 25.6%; p = 0.0001) and antithrombotic drugs (66.7% vs. 56.4%; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: We detected a low adherence to existing pharmacological guidelines for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. A priority is to establish appropriate training and dissemination of cardiovascular prevention guidelines in the field of primary care.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Agents/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Guideline Adherence , Medication Adherence , Population Surveillance , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Prevention/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Morbidity/trends , Risk Factors , Spain/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
AIMS: To analyse the differences in the prevalence of diabetes and dysglycaemia using fasting plasma glucose and HbA(1c) criteria. METHODS: Analytical cross-sectional study undertaken in a random sample of 2144 individuals (age 18-80 years) without known diabetes from the primary care setting in Malaga (Spain). Dysglycaemia was defined as fasting plasma glucose 5.6-6.9 mmol/l or HbA(1c) 39-46 mmol/mol (5.7-6.4%) and diabetes as fasting plasma glucose ≥ 7.0 mmol/l or HbA(1c)≥ 48 mmol/mol (≥ 6.5%). RESULTS: The proportion of subjects who were normoglycaemic was significantly higher using fasting plasma glucose than HbA(1c) (83.5 vs. 65%) (P < 0.0001). Compared with fasting plasma glucose, HbA(1c) detects more cases of dysglycaemia (32 vs. 14.8%) (P < 0.0001) and diabetes (3 vs. 1.7%) (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In our environment, using HbA(1c) for the diagnosis of pre-diabetes and diabetes could increase the target population for preventive and therapeutic measures. Further cost-effectiveness studies are needed before the widespread diagnostic use of HbA(1c) can be recommended.
