Diabetes Care
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wägner, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by Ordóñez-Llanos, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wägner, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by Ordóñez-Llanos, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Diabetes Care 26:2048-2051, 2003
© 2003 by the American Diabetes Association, Inc.

Epidemiology/Health Services/Psychosocial Research
Original Article

Non-HDL Cholesterol and Apolipoprotein B in the Dyslipidemic Classification of Type 2 Diabetic Patients

Ana Maria Wägner, MD, PHD1, Antonio Pérez, MD, PHD1, Edgar Zapico, MSC1 and Jordi Ordóñez-Llanos, MD, PHD2,3

1 Endocrinology and Nutrition Department, Hospital de Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma, Barcelona, Spain
2 Biochemistry Department, Hospital de Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma, Barcelona, Spain
3 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Department, Universitat Autònoma, Barcelona, Spain

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Ana Maria Wägner, MD, PhD, Endocrinology and Nutrition Department, Hospital de Sant Pau, S Antonio M Claret 167, 08025 Barcelona, Spain. E-mail: awagner{at}hsp.santpau.es.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 CONCLUSIONS
 References
 
OBJECTIVE—To compare non-HDL cholesterol (HDLc) and apolipoprotein B (apoB) in the identification of nonconventional high-risk dyslipidemic phenotypes in type 2 diabetic patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Total cholesterol and triglycerides, HDLc, LDL cholesterol, non-HDLc, apolipoprotein B (apoB), and LDL size were determined in 122 type 2 diabetic patients (68% male, aged 59.6 ± 9.7 years, and HbA1c 7.5% [range 5.2–16.0]). They were then classified as normo- and hypertriglyceridemic if their triglyceride concentrations were below/above 2.25 mmol/l, as normo/hyper-non-HDLc if non-HDLc concentrations were below/above 4.13 mmol/l, and as normo- and hyperapoB if apoB concentrations were below/above 0.97 g/l. Both classifications were compared (concordance assessed with the {kappa} index), and low HDLc and LDL phenotype B were identified in each category.

RESULTS—A total of 26 patients were hypertriglyceridemic and 96 were normotriglyceridemic. All hypertriglyceridemic subjects had increased non-HDLc, whereas 24 had increased apoB ({kappa}= 0.95). In the normotriglyceridemic group, 44 had increased non-HDLc, 68 had increased apoB, and 25 of the 52 patients with normal non-HDLc had increased apoB ({kappa}= 0.587). Low HDLc and LDL phenotype B were similarly distributed into the equivalent categories.

CONCLUSIONS—Non-HDLc and apoB are equivalent risk markers in hypertriglyceridemic patients, but apoB identifies additional patients with high-risk dyslipidemic phenotypes in normotriglyceridemic type 2 diabetic patients.

Abbreviations: apoB, apolipoprotein B • HDLc, HDL cholesterol • IDL, intermediate-density lipoproteins • LDLc, LDL cholesterol • NCEP, National Cholesterol Education Program


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 CONCLUSIONS
 References
 
LDL cholesterol (LDLc) is the main therapeutic target in the treatment of dyslipidemia (1,2). Nevertheless, several epidemiologic studies have shown that both non-HDL cholesterol (HDLc) and apolipoprotein B (apoB) are better predictors of cardiovascular events than LDLc (3–5). The former has, in fact, been included as a therapeutic target for hypertriglyceridemic patients in the most recent National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) recommendations (1) and is easy and cheap to calculate. On the other hand, apoB identifies high-risk dyslipidemic phenotypes that are not detected by the standard lipid profile in type 2 diabetic patients, who may present with hyperapoB-dependent dyslipidemic phenotypes (6,7). Because of the high correlation between non-HDLc and apoB in nondiabetic subjects (8), non-HDLc is considered a good surrogate marker for apoB. To our knowledge, however, no comparison has been made between non-HDLc and apoB in the classification of patients into dyslipidemic phenotypes.

The aim of this study was to compare the classification into nonconventional dyslipidemic phenotypes of a group of type 2 diabetic subjects using apoB and non-HDLc.


   RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
RESULTS
 CONCLUSIONS
 References
 
Patients
A total of 122 type 2 diabetic patients from a university hospital were consecutively included in the study. Those receiving treatments or who were in situations (unrelated to their diabetes) that are known to affect lipid metabolism were excluded. Patients with hypertension were not treated with nonselective ß-blockers or high-dose diuretics. A clinical history was taken and physical examination, including anthropometric parameters, was performed. The study group’s main clinical and laboratory features are displayed in Table 1.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1— Main clinical and laboratory features of the 122 patients included in the study

 
Laboratory determinations
Total cholesterol and triglyceride were measured by enzymatic methods; HDLc was measured by a direct method using polyethylene-glycol-pretreated enzymes (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland). High triglyceride and low HDLc were defined as recommended by the NCEP and the American Diabetes Association (1,2) (triglycerides >2.25 mmol/l and HDLc <1.04 mmol/l for men and <1.30 mmol/l for women), though the cutoff point 1.7 mmol/l (150 mg/dl) was also explored for the definition of hypertriglyceridemia. We calculated LDLc with Friedewald’s formula (9) when triglyceride did not exceed 3.45 mmol/l (300 mg/dl), as is the usual procedure in our laboratory, by dividing total triglyceride (in mmol/l) by 2.17. When triglycerides were ≥3.45 mmol/l (n = 11), we determined LDLc by ultracentrifugation in fresh or frozen serum stored at -80°C for no more than 96 h. Non-HDLc was calculated by subtracting HDLc from total cholesterol. High non-HDLc was defined by the cutoff point equivalent to an LDLc >3.36 mmol/l, i.e., when pharmacological intervention is recommended in type 2 diabetic patients, or non-HDLc >4.13 mmol/l (1). ApoB was measured by an immunoturbidimetric method (Tina-quant, Roche Diagnostics) calibrated against the World Health Organization/International Federation of Clinical Chemistry reference standard SP3-07. The apoB cutoff point was calculated according to Contois et al. (10) as the value equivalent to an LDLc value of 3.36 mmol/l in a nondiabetic normolipidemic control group, as described previously (6). Using the equation apoB (g/l) = 0.176 LDLc (mmol/l) + 0.377 (r = 0.712, P < 0.001), a value of 0.97 g/l resulted for apoB. LDL size was determined by electrophoresis on gradient (2–16%) polyacrylamide gel, as described elsewhere (11). LDL phenotype B was defined by a predominant LDL diameter <25.5 nm.

Patients were classified according to their triglyceride and apoB concentrations and also according to their triglyceride and non-HDLc concentrations. Patients with low HDLc and LDL phenotype B were identified in each group.

Statistical analysis
Analysis was performed using SPSS version 10.0 statistical package for Windows (SPSS, Chicago, IL). Continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD (gaussian distribution) or as median and range, and qualitative data is expressed in percentages. Bivariate correlation (Spearman) was performed between apoB and non-HDLc. Concordance between classifications according to apoB and non-HDLc was assessed using the {kappa} index. Values between 0.21–0.40, 0.41–0.60, 0.61–0.80, and 0.81–1.0 showed fair, moderate, good, and very good concordance, respectively (12). Tests were two tailed, and a P value <0.05 was considered significant.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
 RESULTS
CONCLUSIONS
 References
 
The 122 patients included in the study had, on average, fair glycemic control (half of them on insulin treatment) and were mildly overweight. Their main laboratory results are displayed in Table 1. Their distribution into the different dyslipidemic phenotypes is depicted in Fig. 1. The correlation between apoB and non-HDLc was strong in the group as a whole (r = 0.916, P < 0.0005) and better in the hypertriglyceridemic (r = 0.947, P < 0.0005) than in the normotriglyceridemic subgroup (r = 0.773, P < 0.0005). In addition, the concordance between both classifications was very good only in hypertriglyceridemic patients (n = 26) ({kappa}= 0.95), but moderate in normotriglyceridemic patients (n = 96) ({kappa}= 0.587). Actually, 25 of the 52 patients considered normolipidemic according to non-HDLc and triglyceride fell into the normotriglyceridemic-hyperapoB phenotype (and only 1 patient was discordant in the opposite way). On the other hand, the frequency of low HDLc and LDL phenotype B was similar in the equivalent dyslipidemic phenotypes and seemed to depend more on the presence of hypertriglyceridemia than on high apoB or high non-HDLc concentrations (Table 2). Nevertheless, the concordance between the classification into apoB and non-HDLc-dependent dyslipidemic phenotypes and the diagnosis of LDL phenotype B was moderate for hypertriglyceridemia-hyperapoB ({kappa}= 0.527) and hypertriglyceridemia-hyper-non-HDLc ({kappa}= 0.571), but fair for normotriglyceridemia-hyperapoB ({kappa}= -0.303) and poor for normotriglyceridemia-hyper-non-HDLc ({kappa}= -0.173). Similar results were obtained when triglycerides >1.7 mmol/l was used for the definition of hypertriglyceridemia (data not shown).



View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1— Phenotype distributions of the 122 type 2 diabetic patients according to non-HDLc (nonHDL) and triglyceride (tg) (A) and apoB and triglyceride (B). H, hyper; N, normo.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2— Frequency of low HDLc (<1.04 mmol/l for women and <1.30 mmol/l for men) and LDL phenotype B among the different dyslipidemic phenotypes

 

   CONCLUSIONS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 CONCLUSIONS
References
 
To our knowledge, this is the first time a comparison has been made between apoB and non-HDLc for the classification of type 2 diabetic patients into nonconventional dyslipidemic phenotypes. The present study reveals that 1) both hypertriglyceridemia/hyper apoB and hypertriglyceridemia/hyper-non-HDLc are phenotypes with a predominance of small dense LDL particles, and 2) although apoB and non-HDLc seem equivalent in hypertriglyceridemic patients, in normotriglyceridemic patients, apoB identifies patients at risk better than non-HDLc.

Although LDLc is the main therapeutic target in the treatment of diabetic and nondiabetic dyslipidemia (1,2), its concentrations do not stand for the whole mass of lipoprotein particles, which also include intermediate-density lipoproteins (IDLs) and VLDLs. ApoB is the principal protein moiety of LDL, IDL, and VLDL; its concentrations are a good estimate of the total mass of these particles, especially if LDL particles are predominantly small and dense. Furthermore, there are data from epidemiological (3) and intervention studies (13,14) suggesting that apoB is a better predictor of cardiovascular events than LDLc. Its measurement has gained relevance since an international standard has become available, making transferability of results from different methods and laboratories possible. Nevertheless, given the differences in normal apoB concentrations among different populations, with the 75th percentile ranging from 1.1 to 1.6 g/l (10,15,16), population-based reference values for this measure are still desirable. In addition, only the Canadian Cardiovascular Society has proposed therapeutic goals based on their population-based studies (17); therefore, values corresponding to LDLc concentrations are recommended (10).

Non-HDLc, calculated by subtracting HDLc from total cholesterol, represents the cholesterol contained in VLDL, IDL, and LDL particles and is considered an acceptable surrogate for apoB (18). It was proposed as an alternative target to LDLc in type 2 diabetes a few years ago (19), but now there are data supporting it as a better predictor of cardiovascular events (5,20) and mortality (4). The most recent recommendations of the NCEP include non-HDLc as a second line (after LDLc) therapeutic target in hypertriglyceridemic patients, with a cutoff point 30 mg/dl (0.78 mmol/l) above the LDLc target (1). In patients with triglyceride concentrations >4.51 mmol/l, when the Friedewald formula is not applicable for the estimation of LDLc, non-HDLc can be used as an alternative. In addition, given the inaccuracy of the Friedewald formula at even lower triglyceride concentrations, non-HDLc might even be an alternative to LDLc in patients with moderate hypertriglyceridemia (21). In type 2 diabetes, the estimation of LDLc carries a higher than recommended bias, even in patients with normal or slightly increased triglyceride concentrations (22). Thus, alternative risk predictors would be useful in all diabetic patients. We, among others, have shown that hyperapoB reveals high-risk phenotypes that are not identified by triglyceride, LDLc, and HDLc (6,7). In the present study, non-HDLc seemed to be a good alternative to apoB in hypertriglyceridemic patients, since a strong correlation and good concordance were found between both parameters in the classification of patients. Nevertheless, this correlation was weaker in the normotriglyceridemic group; almost one-third of the normotriglyceridemic patients, who account for most of the subjects with fair glycemic control (23,24), were misclassified into a low-risk category when non-HDLc was used. On the other hand, although the presence of LDL phenotype B seems to be more related to hypertriglyceridemia than to the increase in apoB or non-HDLc, as stated in previous studies (7), the higher concordance of hyperapoB than hyper-non-HDLc with LDL phenotype B in normotriglyceridemic patients suggests that there might be an increase in small dense LDL particles in normotriglyceridemic type 2 diabetic patients with increased apoB.

The fact that non-HDLc is easy (and cheap) to calculate supports it as a first-line component to be evaluated in diabetic dyslipidemia. ApoB, on the other hand, seems to better identify patients at risk in the normotriglyceridemic group, but its measurement comprises additional cost. Thus, we could propose that non-HDLc be used in all patients with diabetes and that apoB be measured in patients with triglycerides <2.25 mmol/l (or even <1.7 mmol/l) in whom non-HDLc is <4.13 mmol/l. In our group of patients, 42.6% would fall into this category (37.7% if 1.7 mmol/l were to be used for triglycerides). To conclude, non-HDLc and apoB seem to be equally useful in the detection of high-risk phenotypes in hypertriglyceridemic type 2 diabetic patients, whereas apoB seems to be superior in normotriglyceridemic subjects. In addition, recently published data from intervention studies (25) show that apoB is a better predictor of cardiovascular events and carotid intima-media thickness than non-HDLc. Therefore, especially given the difficulties in estimating LDLc in type 2 diabetic patients, our results support the use of non-HDLc in these subjects and apoB in those with normal triglyceride and non-HDLc concentrations for diagnostic and even therapeutic purposes.


   Footnotes
 
A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.

See accompanying editorial, p. 2207.

Received for publication February 7, 2003. Accepted for publication March 6, 2003.


   References
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 CONCLUSIONS
 References
 

  1. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults: Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on detection, evaluation and treatment of high blood cholesterol in adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA 285:2486–2496, 2001[Free Full Text]
  2. American Diabetes Association: Management of dyslipidemia in adults with diabetes (Position Statement). Diabetes Care 26 (Suppl. 1):S83–S86, 2003
  3. Walldius G, Jungner I, Holme I, Aastveit AH, Kolar W, Steiner E: High apolipoprotein B, low apolipoprotein A-I, and improvement in the prediction of fatal myocardial infarction (AMORIS study): a prospective study. Lancet 358:2026–2033, 2001[Medline]
  4. Cui Y, Blumenthal RS, Flaws JA, Whiteman MK, Langenberg P, Bachorik PS, Bush TL: Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level as a predictor of cardiovascular disease mortality. Arch Intern Med 161:1413–1419, 2001[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Bittner V, Hardison R, Kelsey SF, Weiner BH, Jacobs AK, Sopko G: Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels predict five-year outcome in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI). Circulation 106:2537–2542, 2002[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Wägner AM, Pérez A, Calvo F, Bonet R, Castellví A, Ordóñez J: Apolipoprotein(B) identifies dyslipidemic phenotypes associated with cardiovascular risk in normocholesterolemic type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 22:812–817, 1999[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Sniderman AD, Lamarche B, Tilley J, Secombe D, Frohlich J: Hypertriglyceridemic hyperapoB in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 25:579–582, 2002[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Leroux G, Lemieux I, Lamarche B, Cantin B, Dagenais GR, Lupien PJ, Després JP: Influence of triglyceride concentration on the relationship between lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B and A-I levels. Metabolism 49:53–61, 2000[Medline]
  9. Friedewald WT, Levy RJ, Fredrickson DS: Estimation of the concentration of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in plasma without use of the preparative ultracentrifuge. Clin Chem 18:499–502, 1972[Abstract]
  10. Contois JH, McNamara JR, Lammi-Keefe CJ, Wilson PW, Massov T, Schaeffer E: Reference intervals for plasma apolipoprotein B determined with a standardized commercial immunoturbidimetric assay: results from the Framingham Offspring Study. Clin Chem 42:515–523, 1996[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Wägner AM, Jorba O, Rigla M, Alonso E, Ordoñez-Llanos J, Pérez A: LDL-cholesterol/apolipoprotein B ratio is a good predictor of LDL phenotype B in type 2 diabetes. Acta Diabetol 39:215–220, 2002[Medline]
  12. Altman DG: Some common problems in medical research. In Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Altman DG, Ed. New York, Chapman and Hall, 1991, p. 396–439
  13. Gotto AM, Whitney E, Stein EA, Shapiro DR, Clearfield M, Weis S, Jou JY, Langendörfer A, Beere PA, Watson DJ, Downs JR, Cani JS: Relation between baseline and on-treatment lipid parameters and first acute major coronary events in the Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TexCAPS). Circulation 101:477–484, 2000[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Van Lennep JE, Westerveld HT, van Lennep HW, Zwinderman AH, Erkelens DW, van Der Wall EE: Apolipoprotein concentrations during treatment and recurrent coronary artery disease events. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 20:2408–2413, 2000[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Jungner I, Marcovina SM, Walldius G, Holme I, Kolar W, Steiner E: Apolipoprotein B, and A-I values in 147576 Swedish males and females, standardized according to the World Health Organization-International Federation of Clinical Chemistry First International Reference Materials. Clin Chem 44:1641–1649, 1998[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Bachorik PS, Lovejoy KL, Carroll MD, Johnson CL: Apolipoprotein B, and AI: distributions in the United States, 1988–1991: results of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III). Clin Chem 43:2364–2378, 1997[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Miremadi S, Sniderman A, Frohlich J: Can measurement of serum apolipoprotein B replace the lipid profile monitoring of patients with lipoprotein disorders? Clin Chem 48:484–488, 2002[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Grundy SM: Low-density lipoprotein, non-high-density lipoprotein and apolipoprotein B as targets of lipid-lowering therapy. Circulation 106:2526–2529
  19. Garg A, Grundy SM: Management of dyslipidemia in NIDDM. Diabetes Care 13:153–169, 1990[Abstract]
  20. Lu W, Resnik HE, Jablonski KA, Jones KL, Jain AK, Howard WJ, Robbins DC, Howard BV: Non-HDLc as a predictor of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: the Strong Heart Study. Diabetes Care 26:16–23, 2003[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. McNamara J Jr, Cohn JS, Wilson PWF, Schaefer EJ: Calculated values for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the assessment of lipid abnormalities and coronary disease risk. Clin Chem 36:36–42, 1990[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Wägner AM, Sánchez-Quesada JL, Pérez A, Rigla M, Blanco-Vaca F, Ordóñez-Llanos J: Inaccuracy of calculated LDLc in type 2 diabetes: consequences for patient risk classification and therapeutic decision. Clinical Chemistry 46:1830–1832, 2000[Free Full Text]
  23. Assmann G, Schulte H: The Prospective Cardiovascular Münster (PROCAM) study: prevalence of hyperlipidemia in persons with hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus and the relationship to coronary heart disease. Am Heart J 116:1713–1724, 1988[Medline]
  24. Siegel RD, Cupples A, Schaefer EJ, Wilson PWF: Lipoproteins, apolipoproteins and low-density lipoprotein size among diabetics in the Framingham Offspring study. Metabolism 45:1267–1272, 1996[Medline]
  25. Sniderman AD, Furberg CD, Keech A, Roeters van Lennep JE, Frohlich J, Jungner I, Walldius G: Apolipoproteins versus lipids as indices of coronary risk and as targets for statin treatment. Lancet 361:777–780, 2003[Medline]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
J. D. Brunzell, M. Davidson, C. D. Furberg, R. B. Goldberg, B. V. Howard, J. H. Stein, and J. L. Witztum
Lipoprotein Management in Patients With Cardiometabolic Risk: Consensus Conference Report From the American Diabetes Association and the American College of Cardiology Foundation
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 15, 2008; 51(15): 1512 - 1524.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
J. D. Brunzell, M. Davidson, C. D. Furberg, R. B. Goldberg, B. V. Howard, J. H. Stein, and J. L. Witztum
Lipoprotein Management in Patients With Cardiometabolic Risk: Consensus statement from the American Diabetes Association and the American College of Cardiology Foundation
Diabetes Care, April 1, 2008; 31(4): 811 - 822.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
B. J. Kim, S. T. Hwang, K. C. Sung, B. S. Kim, J. H. Kang, M. H. Lee, and J. R. Park
Comparison of the Relationships between Serum Apolipoprotein B and Serum Lipid Distributions
Clin. Chem., December 1, 2005; 51(12): 2257 - 2263.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CirculationHome page
A. D. Sniderman
Apolipoprotein B Versus Non-High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol: And the Winner Is...
Circulation, November 29, 2005; 112(22): 3366 - 3367.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
A. M. Wagner, A. Perez, J. L. Sanchez-Quesada, and J. Ordonez-Llanos
Triglyceride-to-HDL Cholesterol Ratio in the Dyslipidemic Classification of Type 2 Diabetes
Diabetes Care, July 1, 2005; 28(7): 1798 - 1800.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
The Diabetes and Nutrition Study Group of the Span
Diabetes Nutrition and Complications Trial: Trends in nutritional pattern between 1993 and 2000 and targets of diabetes treatment in a sample of Spanish people with diabetes
Diabetes Care, April 1, 2004; 27(4): 984 - 987.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Diabetes CareHome page
A. D. Sniderman
Non-HDL Cholesterol Versus Apolipoprotein B in Diabetic Dyslipoproteinemia: Alternatives and surrogates versus the real thing
Diabetes Care, July 1, 2003; 26(7): 2207 - 2208.
[Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wägner, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by Ordóñez-Llanos, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wägner, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by Ordóñez-Llanos, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Diabetes Diabetes Care Clinical Diabetes Diabetes Spectrum