Hofit Cohen

Pancreatic and duodenal homeobox gene 1 induces expression of insulin genes in liver and ameliorates streptozotocin-induced hyperglycemia.

Insulin gene expression is restricted to islet β cells of the mammalian pancreas through specific control mechanisms mediated in part by specific transcription factors. The protein encoded by the pancreatic and duodenal homeobox gene 1 (PDX-1) is central in regulating pancreatic development and islet cell function. PDX-1 regulates insulin gene expression and is involved in islet cell-specific expression of various genes. Involvement of PDX-1 in islet-cell differentiation and function has been demonstrated mainly by ‘loss-of-function’ studies. We used a ‘gain-of-function’ approach to test whether PDX-1 could endow a non-islet tissue with pancreatic β-cell characteristics in vivo. Recombinant-adenovirus-mediated gene transfer of PDX-1 to the livers of BALB/C and C57BL/6 mice activated expression of the endogenous, otherwise silent, genes for mouse insulin 1 and 2 and prohormone convertase 1/3 (PC 1/3). Expression of PDX-1 resulted in a substantial increase in hepatic immunoreactive insulin content and an increase of 300% in plasma immunoreactive insulin levels, compared with that in mice treated with control adenovirus. Hepatic immunoreactive insulin induced by PDX-1 was processed to mature mouse insulin 1 and 2 and was biologically active; it ameliorated hyperglycemia in diabetic mice treated with streptozotocin. These data indicate the capacity of PDX-1 to reprogram extrapancreatic tissue towards a β-cell phenotype, may provide a valuable approach for generating ‘self’ surrogate β cells, suitable for replacing impaired islet-cell function in diabetics.

Triglycerides and HDL cholesterol: stars or second leads in diabetes?

Diabetes carries a high risk of atherosclerosis, and cardiovascular disease, especially coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, is by far the leading cause of death among patients with type 2 diabetes. Although statins reduce the risk of major vascular events by about one-fifth per millimole per liter reduction in LDL cholesterol, with similar proportional reductions in major coronary events, stroke, and the need for coronary revascularization, the residual risk remains high. In the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) (1), although the relative risk reduction in diabetic patients was larger than in nondiabetic patients, simvastatin-treated diabetic patients were still at higher risk of death than the placebo-treated nondiabetic patients. Multifactorial intervention reduces the risk even further, but significant danger remains. Current guidelines call for an aggressive treatment strategy to reduce LDL cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose levels in diabetic patients, but data concerning the management of high triglyceride (TG) levels and low HDL cholesterol levels remains inconclusive. This article reviews the data concerning diabetic dyslipidemia and its management. The cluster of lipid abnormalities associated with type 2 diabetes is defined by a high concentration of TG and small dense LDL and a low concentration of HDL cholesterol. Plasma LDL cholesterol levels are generally normal. Insulin resistance is believed to contribute to this atherogenic dyslipidemia by increasing the hepatic secretion of VLDL and other apolipoprotein (apo)B-containing lipoprotein particles, as a result of increased free fatty acid flux to the liver (2,3). This may also be the result of a diminished suppressive effect of insulin on apoB secretion, either at the level of the regulation of apoB degradation, or inhibition of microsomal TG transfer protein activity (4). Through the action of cholesterol ester transfer protein, TGs are transferred from VLDL to HDL, creating TG-rich HDL particles, which are hydrolyzed by hepatic …

Intolerance to Statins: Mechanisms and Management

Statins are considered very effective in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients. However, although adherence to statins improves morbidity and mortality (1), it remains suboptimal (2). One of the most important causes of nonadherence is the so-called statin intolerance, mainly because of muscle-related symptoms. These symptoms most often consist of myalgia unaccompanied by significant creatine kinase (CK) elevations. Less often, myositis (elevated CK >10 times the upper limit of normal) or rhabdomyolysis (CK level >10,000 IU/L or accompanied by significant elevation in creatinine level) develops. In randomized controlled trials, the incidence of statin myopathy is ~1.5–5.0% (3). However, this low incidence may be misleading for several reasons. First, in most studies patients with a history of statin intolerance were excluded. Other studies had a single-blinded statin run-in phase, and patients experiencing muscle-related symptoms or CK elevations during this phase were excluded. Patients who tend to be at risk for developing muscle-related symptoms, such as women, elderly patients, and patients with significant comorbidity, who comprise a large proportion of statin-treated patients in real-life settings, are underrepresented in randomized controlled trials. Some studies have defined muscle-related effects by elevated CK levels only, disregarding myalgia. Last but not least, patients enrolled in studies might be motivated and so minimize reporting of mild myalgias, thus leading to underestimation of the magnitude of the problem. Data concerning real-life incidence of statin-related myopathy are scarce. In the Prediction of Muscular Risk in Observational Conditions (PRIMO) study (4), 7,924 patients receiving high-dosage statin therapy in an outpatient setting in France were asked about muscle-related symptoms. Overall, muscular symptoms were reported by 10.5% of the patients. A weakness of this study is that it lacked a comparison/control group not treated with statins. In a study of adults aged ≥40 years who participated in National Health and …

Should All Diabetic Patients Be Treated With a Statin

The prevalence of diabetes for all age-groups worldwide was estimated to be 2.8% (171 million) in the year 2000, and the projected number could rise to 4.4% (366 million) in 2030 (1). This rapid rise is mainly attributable to the increase of diabetes. The continuing escalation of obesity and the metabolic syndrome contribute to the upsurge in frequency of diabetes (2,3). Interestingly, the appreciation in the number of people >65 years of age was found to be the most important demographic change to diabetes prevalence around the world, indicating that the “diabetes epidemic” will continue even if levels of obesity remain constant. Therefore, it is likely that future diabetes preponderance is underestimated, given the growing frequency of obesity (1). Because the vast majority of diabetic patients have type 2 diabetes and almost all the studies were performed in such subjects, in this article, “type 2 diabetes” will be referred to as “diabetes.” Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the foremost causes of mortality and is a major contributor to morbidity for individuals with diabetes. In addition, diabetes is an independent risk factor for macrovascular disease, as are the common coexisting conditions (hypertension and dyslipidemia). The U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) evaluated baseline risk factors for coronary artery disease in patients with newly diagnosed diabetes without evidence of vascular disease. When comparing the relative contribution of the three modifiable coexisting conditions (dyslipidemia, hypertension, and hyperglycemia) with development of future coronary heart disease (CHD), the estimated hazard ratio (HR) for the upper third, relative to the lower third, for LDL cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, and A1C were 2.26, 1.82, and 1.52, respectively (4). This finding supports the notion that dyslipidemia, and specifically LDL cholesterol, are major contributors to the increased CHD risk in patients with diabetes (4,5 …

Characterisation of atherosclerotic lesions with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) of wet tissue

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the universal leading cause of mortality and a major cause of morbidity. Additionally, the global epidemic of diabetes is associated with considerable cardiovascular mortality risk due to accelerated premature atherosclerosis. Development of effective therapies for atherosclerosis is dependent upon improved tools to assess atherosclerotic lesion progression in animal models. We present a novel technique that utilises scanning electron microscopy (SEM) for imaging wet biological specimens, thus enabling rapid and high-resolution imaging of atherosclerotic lesions. This wet SEM technique was used in an apoE-deficient mice model for morphological characterisation of early and advanced atherosclerotic lesions. Further demonstration of lipid-rich atherosclerotic lesions was carried out with osmium tetroxide staining for cholesterol. Gold immunolabelling of specific epitopes was applied in identification of the cellular and molecular components within the atherosclerotic lesions, namely foam cells, smooth muscle cells and collagen. The wet SEM technique demonstrates an accurate and detailed structural evaluation of the pathological process of atherosclerosis. Understanding the mechanisms that precipitate the atherosclerotic process, utilising this novel technique, may assist in the development of innovative therapeutic interventions for CVD management and prevention in the general population and in those with diabetes.

Omapatrilat, an angiotensin-converting enzyme and neutral endopeptidase inhibitor, attenuates early atherosclerosis in diabetic and in nondiabetic low-density lipoprotein receptor-deficient mice.

Omapatrilat inhibits both angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and neutral endopeptidase (NEP). ACE inhibitors have been shown to inhibit atherosclerosis in apoE-deficient mice and in several other animal models but failed in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor– deficient mice despite effective inhibition of the reninangiotensin- aldosterone system. The aim of the present study was to examine the effect of omapatrilat on atherogenesis in diabetic and nondiabetic LDL receptor–deficient mice. LDL receptor–deficient male mice were randomly divided into 4 groups (n = 11 each). Diabetes was induced in 2 groups by low-dose STZ, the other 2 groups served as nondiabetic controls. Omapatrilat (70 mg/kg/day) was administered to one of the diabetic and to one of the nondiabetic groups. The diabetic and the nondiabetic mice were sacrificed after 3 and 5 weeks, respectively. The aortae were examined and the atherosclerotic plaque area was measured. The atherosclerotic plaque area was significantly smaller in the omapatrilat-treated mice, both diabetic and nondiabetic, as compared to nontreated controls. The mean plaque area of omapatrilattreated nondiabetic mice was 9357 ± 7293 μm2, versus 71977 ± 34610 μm2 in the nontreated mice (P = .002). In the diabetic animals, the plaque area was 8887 ± 5386 μm2 and 23220 ± 10400 μm2, respectively for treated and nontreated mice (P = .001). Plasma lipids were increased by omapatrilat: Meanplasma cholesterol in treated mice, diabetic and nondiabetic combined, was 39.31 ± 6.00 mmol/L, versus 33.12 ± 7.64 mmol/L in the nontreated animals (P = .008). The corresponding combined mean values of triglycerides were 4.83 ± 1.93 versus 3.00 ± 1.26 mmol/L (P = .02). Omapatrilat treatment did not affect weight or plasma glucose levels. Treatment with omapatrilat inhibits atherogenesis in diabetic as well as nondiabetic LDL receptor–deficient mice despite an increase in plasma lipids, suggesting a direct effect on the arterial wall.

Targets for Body Fat, Blood Pressure, Lipids, and Glucose-Lowering Interventions in Healthy Older People

Improving cardiovascular (CV) risk profile, by lowering elevated body weight, blood pressure (BP), plasma cholesterol, and blood glucose (BG) levels, is of relevance for decreasing fatal and nonfatal CV events in young and middle-aged patients (1–4). Evidence also exists that the above-mentioned interventions are also highly effective in older patients, i.e., in subjects >65 years of age (3–6). However, it is unclear whether the same therapeutic approaches should be always used to treat old patients, taking into account on one hand the heterogeneity of the aged population and on the other the fact that frequently there is a discrepancy between chronological and biological age values. In addition, it is still undefined whether the threshold values used for initiating treatment of patients of younger ages should also apply to the older patients. Finally, it is debated whether the targets for treatment used for younger patients should be used for the older ones. Here, we aim to provide a general review on the above-mentioned issues, giving, whenever possible, indications useful for current clinical practice and having as a specific target the general population of healthy older patients. The review will be focused on aged individuals without major disabilities, such as multiple comorbidities, severe cognitive impairment, and in general, systemic diseases that will require continuous medical and nursing assistance. With this aim, the information available for the various variables, such as BMI, BP, blood cholesterol (BC), and BG, will be analyzed separately in the following sections. ### BMI in healthy older subjects Obesity is becoming a global epidemic, causing a sharp rise in many chronic diseases including diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension (7). Among older adults, the rate of obesity has also risen dramatically over the last few decades, independent of sex, race, and educational level (8). Obesity has significant implications on the health status of …

Endothelin B receptor antagonist increases preproendothelin-1 transcription in bovine aortic endothelial cells and in vivo.

Endothelin-1 (ET-1) receptor antagonists increase plasma immunoreactive ET-1 levels. However, their effect on preproendothelin-1 (PPE-1) mRNA levels is still controversial. Few studies have found a decrease in PPE-1 mRNA levels in endothelial cells treated with the nonselective ETA/B receptor antagonist, and others demonstrated that an ETB blockade by the selective antagonist BQ788 increases PPE-1 mRNA levels. We studied the effect of ETA and ETB selective receptor antagonists on PPE-1 transcription, both in vitro and in vivo. Endothelial cells, transiently transfected with PPE-1 luciferase plasmid, were treated with ET-1 receptor antagonists. Bosentan, a dual ETA/B receptor antagonist, and BQ788 (ETB receptor antagonist) treatment resulted in a 1.6-fold and 1.3-fold increase, respectively in luciferase activity as compared with the untreated control. In contrast, the ETA receptor antagonist, BQ123, had no effect on luciferase activity. Transgenic mice that express the luciferase gene under the control of PPE-1 promoter were treated with Bosentan. Luciferase activity, PPE-1 mRNA levels, and plasma immunoreactive ET-1 levels were increased by 1.6-fold to 2.0-fold in the Bosentan-treated group compared with the untreated, control group. ET-1 receptor blockade increased PPE-1 transcription both in vitro and in vivo. The increased transcription can be attributed to ETB receptor blockade, because BQ-788, but not BQ-123, increased PPE-1 transcription.