Search

Aims: To determine the magnitude of the association between abdominal adiposity and low‐grade inflammation in persons with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) and to determine to what extent this association is mediated by low physical activity level, hyperinsulinaemia, hyperglycaemia, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, and comorbidities. Materials and Methods: We measured waist circumference, clinical characteristics, and inflammatory markers i.e. tumour necrosis factor‐alpha (TNF‐α), interleukin‐6 (IL‐6), and high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein (hsCRP), in >9000 persons with recently diagnosed T2D. We applied multiple mediation analysis using structural equation modelling, with adjustment for age and sex. Results: Waist circumference as a proxy for abdominal adiposity was positively associated with all inflammatory markers. Hence, a one‐standard deviation (SD) increase in waist circumference (SD = 15 cm) was associated with a 22%, 35%, and 46% SD increase in TNF‐α (SD = 1.5 pg/mL), IL‐6 (SD = 4.4 pg/mL), and hsCRP (SD = 6.9 mg/L), respectively. The level of hyperinsulinaemia assessed by fasting C‐peptide was quantitatively the most important mediator, accounting for 9%–25% of the association between abdominal adiposity and low‐grade inflammation, followed by low physical activity (5%–7%) and high triglyceride levels (2%–6%). Although mediation of adiposity‐induced inflammation by greater comorbidity and higher glycated haemoglobin levels reached statistical significance, their impact was minor (1%–2%). Conclusions: In persons with recently diagnosed T2D, there was a clear association between abdominal adiposity and low‐grade inflammation. A considerable part (20%–40%) of this association was mediated by other factors, with hyperinsulinaemia as a potentially important driver of adiposity‐induced inflammation in T2D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To estimate if newly diagnosed patients with different subphenotypes of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) or latent autoimmune diabetes of adults (LADA) differ with respect to subclinical retinal microvascular structure or diabetic retinopathy (DR). Methods: This population‐based, cross‐sectional study of 340 patients (675 eyes) classified patients with recently diagnosed T2DM in different subphenotypes according to beta cell function and insulin sensitivity in to; classical (n = 218), hyperinsulinaemic (n = 86), insulinopenic (n = 20), or LADA (n = 16). Retinal 6‐field images were graded according to the International Clinical DR Severity Scale by a retinal expert. Retinal microvascular structures were analysed in eyes by a semiautomatic software. Results: Median age and duration of diabetes were 58.1 (49.9; 65.5) and 0.9 (0.5; 2.4) years, respectively, and 56.8% were male. In a multivariate linear mixed model regression analysis of eyes without DR (n = 570), there was no statistically significant difference in retinal venular or arteriolar width between subtypes and patients with classical T2DM. In addition, eyes from different subphenotypes did not differ according to vessel density, tortuosity or fractal dimension. In a multivariate logistic regression model adjusted for age, sex, HbA1c, diabetes duration, body mass index, mean arterial blood pressure and history of cardiovascular disease, there was a tendency towards persons with hyperinsulinaemic T2DM to be more likely to have DR (OR 1.97, 95% CI 0.95; 4.09) compared to classical T2DM. Conclusion: We found no difference in retinal microvascular structure in patients with newly diagnosed subtypes of T2DM. However, DR may be more prevalent in newly diagnosed patients with hyperinsulinaemic T2DM compared to individuals with classical T2DM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Type 2 diabetes may be a more heterogeneous disease than previously thought. Better understanding of pathophysiological subphenotypes could lead to more individualized diabetes treatment. We examined the characteristics of different phenotypes among 5813 Danish patients with new clinically diagnosed type 2 diabetes.Methods: We first identified all patients with rare subtypes of diabetes, latent autoimmune diabetes of adults (LADA), secondary diabetes, or glucocorticoid-associated diabetes. We then used the homeostatic assessment model to subphenotype all remaining patients into insulinopenic (high insulin sensitivity and low beta cell function), classical (low insulin sensitivity and low beta cell function), or hyperinsulinemic (low insulin sensitivity and high beta cell function) type 2 diabetes.Results: Among 5813 patients diagnosed with incident type 2 diabetes in the community clinical setting, 0.4% had rare subtypes of diabetes, 2.8% had LADA, 0.7% had secondary diabetes, 2.4% had glucocorticoid-associated diabetes, and 93.7% had WHO-defined type 2 diabetes. In the latter group, 9.7% had insulinopenic, 63.1% had classical, and 27.2% had hyperinsulinemic type 2 diabetes. Classical patients were obese (median waist 105 cm), and 20.5% had cardiovascular disease (CVD) at diagnosis, while insulinopenic patients were fairly lean (waist 92 cm) and 17.5% had CVD (P = 0.14 vs classical diabetes). Hyperinsulinemic patients were severely obese (waist 112 cm), and 25.5% had CVD (P < 0.0001 vs classical diabetes).Conclusions: Patients clinically diagnosed with type 2 diabetes are a heterogeneous group. In the future, targeted treatment based on pathophysiological characteristics rather than the current "one size fits all" approach may improve patient prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]