adiponectin and diabetes

a new article appeared in Nature which may be an important breakthrough in diabetes care/prevention in the future, targeting probably the primary pathophysiologic disturbance in the development of type 2 diabetes (see dm adiponectin analog nature 2014 in dropbox, or doi:10.1038/nature12656). adiponectin has been known for years as a naturally occurring hormone produced in adipocytes, with lower levels found in obese people and those with diabetes. there is a strong relationship between lower adiponectin levels and visceral adiposity as well as the development of insulin resistance, and by increasing adiponectin levels there is improved insulin sensitivity (presumably through increasing fatty acid oxidation and inhibition of hepatic glucose production) and lowered blood glucose levels. adiponectin levels are increased by the glitizones and that may be their mechanism to improve insulin sensitivity. in addition adiponectin has anti-inflammatory and anti-atherogenic effects in several studies.
 
with this background, there was this japanese study of a molecule (AdipoRon), an oral adiponectin analog, which stimulates both of the known adiponectin receptors. this med was found to improve insulin resistance and glucose tolerance when normal mice were fed a high-fat diet, to improve diabetes in genetically obese mice, and to prolong the otherwise shortened life span in these genetically obese mice fed a high-fat diet.
 
so, fyi. the main reason i am sending this out is that, to me, having low adiponectin levels is associated with the development of many of the characteristics of metabolic syndrome and diabetes, and at least theoretically increasing the adiponectin effect medically may be an important future intervention in preventing the development of type 2 diabetes and its complications. (of course, it would be even better if we could develop a comprehensive public health program to decrease obesity and increase exercise in the population as a whole, which is even more physiologic.....).

Comments

Post a Comment

if you would like to receive the near-daily emails regularly, please email me at gmodest@uphams.org

Popular posts from this blog

cystatin c: better predictor of bad outcomes than creatinine

  another article found significant discordance between creatinine and cystatin C in assessing renal function,  finding that the latter correlated most strongly with both renal and non-renal adverse clinical outcomes (see   ckd cystatin c better than creat AJKD2023  in  dropbox or doi: 10.1053/ j.ajkd.2023.04.002)   Details: -- 158,601 adults who were in the Stockholm Creatinine Measurements (SCREAM) project and had testing of creatinine and cystatin C on the same day during a healthcare encounter, from 2010-2018     -- >400,000 outpatient tests were done for both creatinine and cystatin C levels -- mean age 62, 48% female -- mean eGFR by creatinine (   eGFR cr ) 80; mean eGFR by cystatin C ( eGFR cys  ) 73 -- mean stage of renal insufficiency: 39%  eGFR cr   90+; 38%  eGFR cr  60-89; 12%  eGFR cr  45-59; 7.1%  eGFR cr  30-44; 3.2%  eGFR cr  15-29, 0.7%  eGFR cr ...
Read more

diabetes DPP-4 inhibitors and the risk of heart failure

the FDA just came out with a safety alert about 2 DPP-4 inhibitors and the increased risk of heart failure (released 04/05/2016)(see  http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm494252.htm?source=govdelivery&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery ​ ). details: --saxagliptin and alogliptin were singled out because of 2 clinical trials in diabetic patients with heart disease. in each trial more patients taking these meds were hospitalized for heart failure vs those on placebo     --in the saxagliptin trial: 3.5% were hospitalized for heart failure (vs 2.8% on placebo). risk factors included prior heart failure or kidney disease     --in the alogliptin trial: 3.9% were hospitalized for heart failure (vs 3.3% on placebo) --recommendation by the FDA:     -- we should consider stopping these drugs if the patient develops heart failure ...
Read more

UPDATE: ASCVD risk factor critique

I decided to do an extensive update of my prior ASCVD (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease) risk analysis and critique of risk calculators, with much more information about the “non-traditional” risk factors. I felt that there should be more data/clarification, since I think we are really undertreating/not preventing the most common cause of death by relying on the current ASCVD risk calculators   -- Cardiovascular risk models:      -- many of us rely on the various cardiovascular risk models to determine the appropriate approach to patients, and these are often integrated into the electronic medical records      -- these risk models have several very important limitations:          -- they are typically based on community data, eg from the Framingham study etc. But, in clinical practice, we are dealing with the individual and not the community:          ...
Read more