| Literature DB >> 22924123 |
Claudio Blasi1, Eunjung Kim, Anne A Knowlton.
Abstract
The diabetes-atherosclerosis relationship remains to be fully defined. Repeated prolonged hyperglycemia, increased ROS production and endothelial dysfunction are important factors. One theory is that increased blood levels of heat shock protein (HSP)60 are proinflammatory, through activation of innate immunity, and contribute to the progression of vascular disease. It was hypothesized that improvement of diabetes control in patients presenting with metabolic syndrome would lower HSP60, and anti-HSP60 antibody levels and decrease inflammatory markers. Paired sera of 17 Italian patients, before and after intensive treatment, were assayed for cytokines, HSP60 and anti-HSP60 antibodies. As expected, intensive treatment was associated with a decrease in HgbA1C (P < 0.001) and BMI (P < 0.001). After treatment, there was a significant decrease in IL-6 (P < 0.05). HSP60 levels were before treatment -6.9 + 1.9, after treatment -7.1 + 2.0 ng/mL (P = ns). Overall HSP60 concentrations were lower than published reports. Anti-HSP60 antibody titers were high and did not decrease with treatment. In conclusion, improvement of diabetic control did not alter HSP60 concentrations or antiHSP60 antibody titers, but led to a reduction of IL-6 levels.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22924123 PMCID: PMC3424633 DOI: 10.1155/2012/346501
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Autoimmune Dis ISSN: 2090-0430
Characteristics of patients enrolled in the study.
| Patient | Age | Sex | BMI | HgbA1C (n.v. 6,6) | HOMA | Waist circum (cm) | Diabetes treatment: drugs (+diet and physical activity) | Lenght of treatment (years/months) | Comorbidties | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | ||||||
| 1 | 51 | M | 35 | 34 | 8.5 | 7.2 | 2.9 | 3.6 | 136 | 112 | Gliclazid | 0/3 | HTN, DL |
| 2 | 66 | M | 30 | 30 | 15.6 | 6.0 | 6.0 | 6.0 | 104 | 100 | Repaglinid | 0/6 | HTN, DL |
| 3 | 52 | F | 31 | 31 | 7.9 | 6.3 | 7.3 | 6.9 | 98 | 89 | Metformin | 0/6 | HTN, DL |
| 4 | 67 | F | 36 | 35 | 7.3 | 6.7 | 5.0 | 5.2 | 113 | 105 | Metformin | 1/2 | HTN, DL, CVA |
| 5 | 64 | M | 28 | 24 | 7.3 | 5.6 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 104 | 93 | Metformin | 0/6 | HTN, DL |
| 6 | 65 | F | 27.5 | 25.5 | 9.5 | 6.7 | 5.1 | 1.9 | 113 | 104 | Metformin | 1/0 | HTN, DL |
| 7 | 67 | M | 31 | 27 | 7.9 | 5.8 | 4.8 | 2.3 | 107 | 96 | Metformin | 0/5 | HTN, DL |
| 8 | 60 | M | 31 | 30 | 9.4 | 7.2 | 5.6 | 3.9 | 103 | 96 | Metformin | 0/2 | HTN, DL |
| 9 | 74 | F | 37 | 33 | 7.7 | 6.6 | 3.2 | 1.8 | 124 | 107 | Metformin + Repaglinid | 1/2 | HTN, DL, Afib |
| 10 | 67 | F | 38 | 34 | 8.4 | 6.4 | 8.7 | 2.5 | 136 | 128 | Metformin + Glimepirid | 0/6 | HTN, DL |
| 11 | 50 | M | 29 | 27 | 12.0 | 6.9 | 3.8 | 1.6 | 96 | 106 | Metformin + Glimepirid | 0/6 | HTN, DL |
| 12 | 71 | F | 40 | 38 | 8.4 | 6.5 | 5.6 | 3.9 | 133 | 127 | Metformin | 0/8 | HTN, DL |
| 13 | 71 | F | 43 | 39 | 8.2 | 6.7 | 5.7 | 2.6 | 109 | 109 | Metformin | 0/5 | HTN, DL |
| 14 | 73 | F | 32 | 29 | 8 | 6.9 | 4.5 | 3.8 | 102 | 102 | Metformin | 0/8 | HTN, DL |
| 15 | 59 | F | 41 | 40 | 9.1 | 6.7 | 10.9 | 4.0 | 121 | 118 | Metformin | 1/5 | HTN, DL |
| 16 | 55 | F | 41 | 39 | 8.4 | 6.9 | 6.0 | 2.3 | 123 | 102 | Metformin | 0/2 | HTN, DL |
| 17 | 47 | M | 31 | 29 | 8.8 | 6.6 | 9.5 | 3.5 | 104 | 96 | Metformin | 1/9 | HTN, DL |
Pat: patient; n.v: normal value; circum: circumference; treatment: Treatment; comorbidities: cardiovascular comorbidities; HTN: hypertension; DL: dyslipidemia; CVA: cerebral vascular accident; Afib: atrial fibrillation.
Figure 1(a) HgbA1C before and after intensive treatment. (b) BMI before and after intensive treatment. (c) HOMA before and after intensive treatment. (d) Waist circumference before and after intensive treatment. (e) Serum HSP60 levels by ELISA before and after intensive treatment. *P < 0.001 except c, where P < 0.05.
Figure 2(a) Graph summarizes anti-HSP60 antibody titers before and after intensive treatment. Antibody levels were tested at two different dilutions: 1 : 100 (white bars) and 1 : 250 (black bars). (b) Representative slot blot. Arrow marks location of HSP60 on membrane. Lanes were read as positive or negative at a given dilution based on the presence of a band at the level of the arrow, which marks the location of the recombinant human HSP60 on the membrane. 1— 1 : 100; 2—1 : 250.
Figure 3Multiple inflammatory cytokines were measured by flow cytometry using a cytometric bead array. Graph summarizes results. Black bar is before intensive treatment and grey bar after intensive treatment. No IL-1β was detected in any samples. *P < 0.05 versus before treatment.
Significant Pearson correlations for clinical factors and inflammatory markers change with treatment.
| Before intensive treatment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HSP60 | IL-10 | IL-12 | TNF | BMI |
| −IL-12 0.040 | −HSP60 0.051 | −HSP60 0.040 | + IL-12 0.014 | + Waist 0.005 |
| −IL-10 0.051 | +IL-12 0.030 | +IL-10 0.030 | ||
| +IL-6 0.055 | +TNF | |||
|
| ||||
| After Intensive treatment | ||||
| TNF | HOMA | BMI | ||
|
| ||||
| +HSP60 0.055 | −IL-10 0.009 | +Waist 0.010 | ||
| +IL-12 0.023 | ||||
+ is positive correlation, − negative correlation. Number on right is P value.
Summary of serum cytokine values reported from recent studies.
| Reference | IL-1 | IL-6 pg/mL | IL-8 pg/mL | IL-10 pg/mL | IL-12 pg/mL | TNF | Diabetes duration (Years) | Nationality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mol et al. 1997 [ | 0.816 | 1.19 | 10 ± 7∗ | Dutch | ||||
| Adachi et al. 2004 [ | 2.4 | Unknown | Japanese | |||||
| Doganay et al. 2002 [ | <0.05 | <0.05 | 8.3 | 6.6 | 6.0 ± 0.6 | Turkish | ||
| Lee et al. 2008 [ | 0.94 | 1.47 | 5.11 | 0.77 | 3.95 | 9.0 ± 5.4 | Korean | |
| Mishra et al. 20111 [ | 6.12 | 118 | 38.6 | newly diagnosed | Indian | |||
| Mishra et al. 20112 [ | 9.55 | 147 | 50.8 | newly diagnosed | Indian | |||
| McGee et al. 2011 [ | 7.03 | 16.9 | 1 yr. Minimum | British | ||||
| Park et al. 2011 [ | 1.78 | 5.1 | Korean | |||||
| Hu et al. 20093 [ | 21.8 | 0.065 | Unknown | Chinese | ||||
| Hu et al. 20094 [ | 38.5 | 0.111 | Unknown | Chinese | ||||
|
Ozturk et al. 2009 [ | 4.01 | 104.8 | 8.13 | 9.84 ± 7.13 | Turkish | |||
| Current Study | 0 | 12.05 | 104.6 | 3.78 | 1.41 | 0.83 | 6.0 ± 5.3 | Italian |
Values ± SEM except where indicated. Mishra et al. and Hu et al. both divided their diabetic populations into 2 groups: one by CRP and the other by presence or absence of evidence of atherosclerosis. Last row is baseline values for current study. ∗Standard deviation; 1CRP< 3, 2CRP > 3; 3no evidence of atherosclerosis; 4evidence of atherosclerosis (increased carotid IMT).