AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Glucose fluctuations may help predict diabetic complications. We evaluated the relation between glucose variability and oxidative stress in patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Continuous glucose monitors were inserted subcutaneously in 25 patients. During the measurement, patients collected two 24 h urine samples, while 24 healthy controls collected one 24 h urine sample for determination of 15(S)-8-iso-prostaglandin F2alpha(PGF2alpha) using HPLC tandem mass spectrometry. Mean of the daily differences (MODD), mean amplitude of glycaemic excursions (MAGE) and continuous overlapping net glycaemic action calculated with n hour time-intervals (CONGA-n) were calculated as markers for glucose variability and correlation with 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha excretion was calculated. RESULTS: Median [interquartile range (IQR)] urinary 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha was higher in patients than healthy controls: 161 (140-217) pg/mg creatinine vs 118 (101-146) pg/mg creatinine (p = 0.001). Median (IQR) MODD was 3.7 (3.2-5.0) mmol/l, MAGE 7.6 (6.4-9.0) mmol/l and CONGA-1 2.3 (2.1-2.8) mmol/l. Univariate regression did not reveal an association for MODD (r2 = 0.01), MAGE (0.08) or CONGA-1 (0.07) with 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha excretion, nor was an association revealed when corrected for HbA1c, age, sex and smoking. Spearman correlation coefficients (r) between 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha excretion and MODD, MAGE and CONGA-1 were non-significant: -0.112, -0.381 and -0.177. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: We report that there is no relationship between glucose variability and urinary 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha. We also confirm that patients with type 1 diabetes have higher levels of urinary 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha than healthy controls, suggesting that in addition to glucose variability, other factors favouring oxidative stress may exist. We did not see a relation between high glucose variability and elevated levels of oxidative stress in patients with type 1 diabetes.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Glucose fluctuations may help predict diabetic complications. We evaluated the relation between glucose variability and oxidative stress in patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Continuous glucose monitors were inserted subcutaneously in 25 patients. During the measurement, patients collected two 24 h urine samples, while 24 healthy controls collected one 24 h urine sample for determination of 15(S)-8-iso-prostaglandin F2alpha(PGF2alpha) using HPLC tandem mass spectrometry. Mean of the daily differences (MODD), mean amplitude of glycaemic excursions (MAGE) and continuous overlapping net glycaemic action calculated with n hour time-intervals (CONGA-n) were calculated as markers for glucose variability and correlation with 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha excretion was calculated. RESULTS: Median [interquartile range (IQR)] urinary 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha was higher in patients than healthy controls: 161 (140-217) pg/mg creatinine vs 118 (101-146) pg/mg creatinine (p = 0.001). Median (IQR) MODD was 3.7 (3.2-5.0) mmol/l, MAGE 7.6 (6.4-9.0) mmol/l and CONGA-1 2.3 (2.1-2.8) mmol/l. Univariate regression did not reveal an association for MODD (r2 = 0.01), MAGE (0.08) or CONGA-1 (0.07) with 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha excretion, nor was an association revealed when corrected for HbA1c, age, sex and smoking. Spearman correlation coefficients (r) between 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha excretion and MODD, MAGE and CONGA-1 were non-significant: -0.112, -0.381 and -0.177. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: We report that there is no relationship between glucose variability and urinary 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha. We also confirm that patients with type 1 diabetes have higher levels of urinary 15(S)-8-iso-PGF2alpha than healthy controls, suggesting that in addition to glucose variability, other factors favouring oxidative stress may exist. We did not see a relation between high glucose variability and elevated levels of oxidative stress in patients with type 1 diabetes.
Authors: Stephan F E Praet; Ralph J F Manders; Ruth C R Meex; A G Lieverse; Coen D A Stehouwer; Harm Kuipers; Hans A Keizer; Luc J C van Loon Journal: Clin Sci (Lond) Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 6.124
Authors: David M Nathan; Patricia A Cleary; Jye-Yu C Backlund; Saul M Genuth; John M Lachin; Trevor J Orchard; Philip Raskin; Bernard Zinman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-12-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J D Morrow; B Frei; A W Longmire; J M Gaziano; S M Lynch; Y Shyr; W E Strauss; J A Oates; L J Roberts Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-05-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: E E Blaak; J-M Antoine; D Benton; I Björck; L Bozzetto; F Brouns; M Diamant; L Dye; T Hulshof; J J Holst; D J Lamport; M Laville; C L Lawton; A Meheust; A Nilson; S Normand; A A Rivellese; S Theis; S S Torekov; S Vinoy Journal: Obes Rev Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 9.213
Authors: Alexia S Peña; Jennifer J Couper; Jennifer Harrington; Roger Gent; Jan Fairchild; Elaine Tham; Peter Baghurst Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2012-02-07 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Esther G Gerrits; Helen L Lutgers; Nanne Kleefstra; Klaas H Groenier; Andries J Smit; Rijk O B Gans; Henk J G Bilo Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2008-07
Authors: Johan Wadén; Carol Forsblom; Lena M Thorn; Daniel Gordin; Markku Saraheimo; Per-Henrik Groop Journal: Diabetes Date: 2009-08-03 Impact factor: 9.461