4.1 Article

High serum ACE activity predicts severe hypoglycaemia over time in patients with type 1 diabetes

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/00365513.2011.604132

Keywords

C-peptide; duration of diabetes; HbA1c; hypoglycaemia unawareness; diabetes complications

Funding

  1. EFSD/JDRF/Novo Nordisk Programme
  2. Foundation of Harald Jensen and wife
  3. Region 3 Foundation
  4. Foundation of Tvergaard
  5. Foundation of Frederiksborg County
  6. Hillerod Hospital

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims/hypothesis. High serum angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) activity is associated with increased risk of severe hypoglycaemia (SH) within 1year in type 1 diabetes. We wanted to find out whether ACE activity is stable over time and predicts SH beyond 1 year, and if gender differences exist in the association between ACE activity and risk of SH. Methods. A follow-up study of 128 adult patients with type 1 diabetes was conducted. At entry, ACE activity was measured. For 12 months, patients prospectively recorded events of severe hypoglycaemia (SH). At a median of 40 months, ACE activity was measured again and participants recalled the number of SH in the last year. Results. ACE activity is reproducible over 40 months (p < 0.00001). Patients with SH during the baseline study also had SH during follow-up (p < 0.00001). Serum ACE activity measured at baseline was positively associated with the rate of SH at follow-up (p = 0.0003) with a 3.2-fold increased rate of SH in subjects belonging to the upper ACE quartile compared to subjects in the three lowest quartiles (p < 0.00001). The association between high serum ACE activity and increased risk of SH did not differ significantly in women and men. Conclusion. In type 1 diabetes individual serum ACE activity is reproducible over time. High ACE activity predicts recurrent SH over at least 40 months with no differences between genders.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available