4.5 Article

Inverse correlation between serum free IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels and blood pressure in patients affected with type 1 diabetes

Journal

CYTOKINE
Volume 34, Issue 5-6, Pages 303-311

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cyto.2006.06.007

Keywords

IGF-1; blood pressure; TIDM

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Even though the gene encoding for IGF-I is considered of most importance amongst blood pressure-regulating genes in mouse models, little and discordant data are available in literature for what concerns a possible relationship between blood pressure and serum free IGF-I values in humans. In addition, no information is available on type I diabetes patients. Aim: our aim is to analyze the relationship between systolic and diastolic blood pressure and serum free IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels in subjects suffering from type I diabetes. Results: A highly significant inverse correlation was observed between serum free IGF-I levels and both systolic and diastolic blood pressure in subjects affected with type I diabetes. Similar but less significant relationships were observed for IGFBP-3, whose levels were also significantly and directly correlated with those of free IGF-I. The correlation between systolic and diastolic blood pressures with free IGF-I and between systolic blood pressure and IGFBP-3 levels were confirmed after adjusting for age, gender, age at diagnosis, disease duration, familial history, HBA1c, and amount of insulin administered by multivariate logistic regression analysis. A decrease in free IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels, along with increases in blood pressure, significantly influenced the presence of diabetic complications, confirming how these molecules may be considered as severity markers for patients with type I diabetes as well as risk factors for altered pressure control linked diseases. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available