4.7 Article

Increased All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes and High-Expression Mannan-Binding Lectin Genotypes: A 12-Year Follow-up Study

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 38, 期 10, 页码 1898-1903

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/dc15-0851

关键词

-

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk Foundation
  2. Novo Nordisk Fonden [NNF13OC0003820] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVEMannan-binding lectin (MBL) is a complement-activating carbohydrate-recognizing molecule associated with diabetic nephropathy. MBL is associated with all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes, but whether MBL is associated with mortality in type 1 diabetes remains unknown. We therefore aimed to investigate this.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSWe studied an existing 12-year prospective cohort with type 1 diabetes with 198 patients with diabetic nephropathy (121 men, age 41 years [95% CI 40-42], estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] 67 mL/min/1.73 m(2) [95% CI 63-70]) and 174 normoalbuminuric patients (103 men, age 43 years [95% CI 41-44], eGFR 93 mL/min/1.73 m(2) [95% CI 91-95]). Mortality rates were compared according to the concentration-determining MBL2 genotype or the MBL concentration. Patients were classified as having high or low MBL expression genotypes. The effect of MBL concentration was estimated by comparing patients with MBL concentrations above or below the median.RESULTSNinety-eight patients died during follow-up. The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was 1.61 (95% CI 1.07-2.43) for patients with high MBL expression genotypes versus patients with low MBL expression genotypes (P = 0.023). All-cause mortality was higher in patients with MBL concentrations above the median than in patients with MBL concentrations below the median (unadjusted HR 1.90 [95% CI 1.26-2.87], P = 0.002).CONCLUSIONSHigh MBL expression genotypes and high MBL concentrations are both associated with increased mortality rates in type 1 diabetes compared with low MBL expression genotypes and low MBL concentrations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据