© 2005 by the American Diabetes Association, Inc.
Second World Congress on the Insulin Resistance SyndromeHypertension, cardiovascular disease, and treatment approaches
Abbreviations: apoB, apolipoprotein B ARB, angiotensin II receptor blocker ATP, Adult Treatment Panel CPAP, continuous positive airways pressure CRP, C-reactive protein CVD, cardiovascular disease DPP, Diabetes Prevention Program DREAM, Diabetes Reduction Assessment with ramipril and rosiglitazone Medication EDS, excessive daytime sleepiness FDA, Food and Drug Administration FFA, free fatty acid IGT, impaired glucose tolerance IL, interleukin LPL, lipoprotein lipase PCOS, polycystic ovarian syndrome PPAR, peroxisome proliferatoractivated receptor RAS, renin-angiotensin system TZD, thiazolidinedione VA-HIT, Veterans Affairs HDL Intervention Trial This is the third and final installment in a series of articles on the Second World Congress on the Insulin Resistance Syndrome, Universal City, California, 1820 November 2004. Insulin resistance and hypertension
At a symposium on insulin resistance, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) cosponsored by the European Group for the Research of Obesity, Hypertension, and Insulin Resistance, Albert P. Rocchini (Ann Arbor, MI) discussed the relationship of hypertension and insulin resistance in obesity. Potential explanations for the frequency with which insulin resistance and hypertension are associated could be the coincidence of two common abnormalities, the causation of one by the other, or, intriguingly, the existence of a common underlying factor. The first explanation appears unlikely, with a preponderance of evidence suggesting that the two conditions are related (1). It also appears unlikely that hypertension causes insulin resistance, as glucose uptake is not affected in experimental renovascular hypertension and because lowering blood pressure in individuals with hypertension does not necessarily improve glucose uptake. There is, however, greater forearm vascular resistance in obese than in nonobese adolescents, with glucose uptake across this tissue inversely related to vascular resistance, suggesting that vascular resistance may play a role in some aspects of insulin action (2). The converse, that insulin resistance may cause hypertension, appears more likely to be a factor. Fasting insulin levels correlate with systolic blood pressure, and the drop in blood pressure following weight loss is related to the improvement in insulin sensitivity. Interestingly, in hypertensive obese individuals, somatostatin decreases both the insulin level and blood pressure, suggesting an effect of hyperinsulinemia. Insulin can lead to sodium retention (3) and angiotensin IImediated aldosterone production, can change vascular structure and function, can alter cation flux, and can activate the sympathetic nervous system. In both obese and nonobese individuals during water diuresis, however, sodium excretion decreases with a euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp, so insulin resistance cannot be certainly proposed as the cause of hypertension. Furthermore, improvement in insulin sensitivity need not lower blood pressure, as for example in dogs with high-fat dietinduced hypertension, where the blood pressure is not lowered by high-dose aspirin despite prevention of insulin resistance. Rocchini posited common factors related to obesity, explaining both insulin resistance and hypertension, suggesting activation of the sympathetic nervous system as one such factor. Thus, central and/or peripheral Arya M. Sharma (Hamilton, Canada) further discussed the question of a causal relationship between insulin resistance and hypertension, particularly addressing the question of whether angiotensin II blockade can be used both for treatment of hypertension and insulin resistance. He noted that "salt-sensitive" people, those whose blood pressure increases with increased sodium intake, show insulin resistance (4), which is present on either a low- or high-sodium diet (5). Furthermore, sympathetic nervous system activity is stimulated by insulin in what appears to be a central effect, suggesting that the hyperinsulinemia accompanying insulin resistance may be directly deleterious. He also cited a number of studies showing that insulin sensitizers decrease blood pressure, a phenomenon seen both with metformin (6,7) and thiazolidinediones (TZDs) (8). Thus, insulin may stimulate sympathetic activity and sodium Na reabsorption, as insulin-induced vasodilatation is reduced in individuals who develop hypertension. Insulin resistance can, however, occur without hypertension, there is no increase in blood pressure with insulin treatment, and insulin is more strongly correlated with body fat than with blood pressure. Another link between obesity and blood pressure is leptin, which increases sympathetic activity and may increase sodium reabsorption and heart rate.
Sharma pointed out that a potential relationship between blood pressure and insulin sensitivity may be mediated by the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). In HOPE (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation), ramipril decreased the likelihood of development of type 2 diabetes by 34% (9), with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of angiotensin II blockade showing a 22% decrease in diabetes development across a variety of patient groups (10). The adipocyte makes angiotensinogen, with levels regulated by nutritional factors; produces ACE and the alternative serine protease catalyzing conversion of angiotensin I to angiotensin II, chymase; and expresses the AT1 receptor, with adipocyte biopsy studies showing higher AT1 receptor expression in people with greater degrees of insulin resistance. Angiotensin II inhibits differentiation of preadipocytes to adipocytes in a dose-dependent fashion, while the angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) (11) and ACE inhibitors increase adipocyte differentiation. Mature adipocytes inhibit adipogenic differentiation of precursor cells, with irbesartan blocking this effect. Thus, an angiotensin IImediated paracrine effect of adipocytes in impairing recruitment of additional adipocytes may lead to excess visceral fat (12) or to fat storage in tissues other than adipose tissue, such as myocytes, while RAS blockade may allow excess lipids to be partitioned back into adipose tissue (13). Supporting this concept, in a fructose-fed rat model of insulin resistance, RAS blockade with either ACE inhibitors or ARBs reduced insulin levels, triglycerides, and free fatty acids (FFAs) and decreased intramyocellular lipids (14). In addition, there is evidence that the ARB telmisartan may have direct effects in activating the peroxisome proliferatoractivated receptor (PPAR)
Ele Ferrannini (Pisa, Italy) discussed insulin resistance, hypertension, and CVD, noting that hypertension was one of the initial core components of the insulin resistance syndrome identified by Reaven in 1988, but that the syndrome is now "vastly more complicated." He focused on hypertension as one element of the cluster, reviewing the inverse correlation of blood pressure with insulin sensitivity in individuals with normal as well as with elevated blood pressure levels (15). Lean individuals (BMI <25 kg/m2) have lower blood pressure than those with BMI >25 kg/m2for a given level of insulin sensitivity, suggesting that there may be an independent effect of obesity per se adding to the effect of associated insulin resistance. Furthermore, regardless of obesity, hypertensive individuals have Ferrannini further discussed the link between hyperinsulinemia and the autonomic nervous system, noting that insulin resistance is associated with sympathetic nervous system activation. Heart rate variability measures may be used to assess parasympathetic versus sympathetic tone, with lean individuals showing increased sympathetic tone after insulin infusion, whereas obese individuals already show maximal activation with no further increase following administration of insulin, presumably related to the obese person already being hyperinsulinemic. Indeed, heart rate decreases in association with decline in adrenergic activation during the night in both obese and lean individuals, but this is less marked with obesity, in which the phase of highest sympathetic activity occurs during feeding. Another marker of adrenergic tone is the QT interval of the electrocardiogram, which increases during insulin administration, suggesting an effect on intramyocardial cation levels. Insulin receptors are ubiquitous in the brain, including the cortex, with insulin crossing at least part of the blood brain barrier. Insulin reduces diastolic but not systolic blood pressure, in association with reduction in peripheral vascular resistance, thereby increasing pulse pressure. Heart rate and stroke volume increase, so cardiac output increases. "Obesity may," Ferrannini speculated, "be the chronic extension of what insulin does acutely," with insulins acute effect similar to the chronic changes associated with insulin resistance (increased epinephrine, norepinephrine, and cortisol; decreased thyroid-stimulating hormone; increased prolactin and adrenocortiatrophic-releasing hormone; and marked increase in corticotropin-releasing hormone), presumably requiring insulin to cross the blood-brain barrier and overall having characteristics of a "stress response." Ferrannini reviewed a set of concepts derived from the Mexico City Diabetes Study, in which >2,000 people were screened, with 3.25- and 7-year follow-up. Twelve percent of normotensive and 23% of hypertensive individuals had diabetes at onset. Among those originally neither hypertensive nor diabetic, 11% without diabetes developed hypertension. Seven percent of those without hypertension developed diabetes, while 13% of diabetic patients developed hypertension and 19% of hypertensive patients developed diabetes. Obesity was a powerful risk factor, as was waist circumference. Heart rate was greater in all classes of converters. Ferrannini postulated "a common soil" for converters, recognizing that there are subtypes converting to either or both conditions, so that it may be incorrect to assume that one overall underlying type exists. These data suggested both hypertension and diabetes tended to develop fairly quickly rather than there being a gradual rise in levels. Insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and heart disease At a symposium on insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and heart disease, Richard C. Pasternak (Boston, MA) speculated that the epidemic of insulin resistance syndrome will prevent our ability to improve rates of CVD, which currently accounts for half of deaths among men and one-third of deaths among women (17). Analysis of the 4S (Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study) showing higher event rates among placebo-treated individuals with than without insulin resistance syndrome, as well as showed greater reduction in adverse outcome among simvastatin-treated individuals with than without the syndrome (18). The syndrome represents a clustering of risk factors for CVD, including visceral obesity, atherogenic dyslipidemia, increased blood pressure and insulin resistance, and prothrombotic and proinflammatory state. Pasternak suggested that it will be crucial to determine whether insulin resistance causes atherosclerosis or a common factor causes both to develop new approaches to intervention. All of the available definitions of insulin resistance syndrome appear to be effective in defining the risk of coronary artery calcification, the number of syndrome features correlating with the degree of calcification (19). One problem with the current definitions is that many therapies have the desirable property of improving insulin resistance syndrome criteria, but may change the classification of a given person, while conceptually not changing their underlying diagnosis. There is a correlation between C-reactive protein (CRP) level and the number of syndrome components (20). CRP appears to have additional predictive power, and it has been proposed that it be considered an additional component of the insulin resistance syndrome (21), potentially allowing understanding of the benefits of therapies (e.g., the additive benefit of ezetimibe to simvastatin in lowering CRP). Sander Robins (Boston, MA) discussed fibrates and CVD event reduction in people with diabetes or insulin resistance, reviewing the selection of individuals who would benefit from these agents and potential mechanisms of their effect. The Helsinki (22) and Veterans Affairs HDL Intervention Trial (VA-HIT) (23,24) studies of gemfibrozil showed respective 17% and nil vs. 52 and 27% reductions in likelihood of cardiovascular events for individuals with BMI <26 vs. >26 kg/m2, and Robins noted that the BIP (Bezafibrate Infarct Prevention) study (25) showed event rates increasing versus decreasing by approximately one-quarter in the two groups. Similarly, weight gain predicted benefit of treatment in a trial with clofibrate (26). Thus, the presence of obesity, presumably indicating insulin resistance, appears crucial to the benefit of fibrate therapy. Further discussing the VA-HIT of 2,531 men with CHD, low HDL and relatively low LDL randomized to gemfibrozil versus placebo, Robins noted that this was a very-high-risk group, with CHD mortality of 9.3% over 5 years. Thirty-nine percent of participants had BMI >30 kg/m2, 30% had diabetes, 31% had fasting glucose 100125 mg/dl, and 32% had high fasting insulin, with high fasting insulin in 17% of the 1,732 people without diabetes. Four hundred-nineteen people had diabetes with and 339 had diabetes without high fasting insulin, and 431 had high fasting insulin without diabetes, with 1,302 study participants having neither diabetes nor hyperinsulinemia. The latter group had 0.9% CVD risk reduction with gemfibrozil compared with 8.2, 7.7, and 6.9% respective risk reduction in three diabetes and/or high fasting insulin groups. Stroke rates did not change with treatment in the nondiabetic, nonhigh fasting insulin group, while decreasing 2.4% in the diabetic and/or high fasting insulin group. Event rates increased with gemfibrozil among nondiabetic participants in the lowest fasting insulin quartile while decreasing in the 2nd and 3rd quartiles and showing even greater decrease in the 4th quartile (27). Between 1980 and 1998, there was a decrease in overall CVD mortality but an increase in diabetes mortality (28), leading Robins to suggest that the development of effective approaches for this group is critical for the future. Gemfibrozil decreased CHD mortality 41% among individuals with diabetes in the VA-HIT, with reduction demonstrable at 2 years and a suggestion of widening separation between the placebo and gemfibrozil groups over the subsequent period. There was progressively increasing benefit of gemfibrozil in reducing CVD death in increasing BMI quartiles, at 20, 29, 31, and 46% for BMI <25.6, 25.628.1, 28.231.5, and >31.5 kg/m2, respectively. The benefits of statin therapy for people with diabetes may, Robins pointed out, be less great than usually thought. Analysis of the combined CARE and LIPID trials showed a nonsignificant 17% reduction in risk of myocardial infarction or CVD death among people with diabetes, while the nondiabetic subgroup had a significant 25% risk reduction (29). Robins reviewed seven statin trials, including individuals with diabetes, with the number needed to treat between 28 and 111, while in the VA-HIT the number needed to treat was 12, suggesting a role of gemfibrozil among such patients.
Robins presented interesting data pertaining to the mechanism of benefit with gemfibrozil. He noted that it is not clear that the effect of gemfibrozil was mediated by an increase in HDL cholesterol levels, pointing out that in compliant patients in the VA-HIT, benefit was seen as long as there was any increase in HDL, suggesting a direct drug effect. Furthermore, there was an inverse linear relationship between the change in HDL cholesterol and fasting insulin, so that the patients with the highest fasting insulin, who had the greatest benefit, had the smallest change in HDL cholesterol. High fasting insulin was strongly associated with waist circumference. CRP was measured in 834 subjects in the VA-HIT, with CVD risk increasing above the median level of 2 mg/l. High CRP did not, however, track with increased waist circumference, with those subjects having both high CRP and high fasting insulin having the highest CVD event rate. Gemfibrozil reduced CRP only in individuals with high fasting insulin, and a fall in CRP was a marker of CVD risk reduction (by 34%) in this group but not in those without high fasting insulin. In the placebo group, the fasting insulin was similar at 0 and 12 months, while individuals treated with gemfibrozil had Fredrik Karpe (Oxford, U.K.) discussed postprandial lipid metabolism and the insulin resistance syndrome. Although most lipid measurements are made in the fasting state, we spend most of the day in the nonfasting state, implying that it is important to understanding normal lipid homeostasis. In a normal person, peak triglyceride levels double or triple following meals, with different levels after different meals and a tendency of triglycerides to accumulate during the day, leading Karpe to suggest that "we have to broaden our views a little bit." Postprandial lipid transport involves production of chylomicrons, with the hallmark protein apolipoprotein B (apoB)-48, which is only expressed in the small intestine. Lipoprotein lipase (LPL) leads to tissue uptake of fatty acids, with uptake of chylomicron remnants by the liver. The endogenous pathway of lipoprotein metabolism involves hepatic VLDL particles containing apoB-100 and following a similar pathway. Determinants of postprandial lipemia include the amount of dietary fat and endogenous triglyceride production as well as the rates of degradation of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins.
In a study of the incorporation of 1-13C[palmitate] from a mixed meal into VLDL particles using immunoaffinity capture with monoclonal antibodies to separate apoB-48 from apoB-100, the dietary fatty acid was rapidly incorporated into VLDL, with lipids containing only apoB-100 beginning to appear
In a patient with PPAR
Alexandros N. Vgontzas (Hershy, PA) discussed sleep apnea as a manifestation of the insulin resistance syndrome, noting that while obesity changes anatomic factors, altering the mechanics of respiration, the majority of adult apneics do not have structural abnormality, with Vgontzas suggesting that apnea may also be a manifestation of insulin resistance, having a strong association relationship with male sex and android obesity. The sleep apnea syndrome may have a progressive course, with weight gain progressing to further increase in snoring and apnea leading to excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), worsening weight gain. Sleep apnea has a number of insulin resistancerelated systemic effects, particularly increasing blood pressure, with the failure of mechanical treatment approaches with surgery furthering the concept of apnea as a systemic illness rather than a local abnormality. Levels of tumor necrosis factor- Treatment of the insulin resistance syndrome
Paul Jellinger (Hollywood, FL), representing the American Association of Clinical Endocrinology, introduced a session on treatment by noting that "we do not have, today, clear direction as to how to treat this syndrome," as opposed to our treatment of specific components of the syndrome. Edward Horton (Boston, MA) discussed effects of lifestyle modification on vascular reactivity and endothelial function in the insulin resistance syndrome, pointing out that this represents early intervention directed at the prevention of complications of the syndrome, and emphasizing the need to use lifestyle modification in appropriate combination with pharmacologic treatment. He reviewed projections of the diabetes epidemic, the "epicenter" of which will be the Indian subcontinent. Currently, 65% of Americans are overweight and 21% obese, with 24% having the insulin resistance syndrome (33). The lifetime risk of developing diabetes for people born in 2000 is 33% for men, 39% for women, and 50% for Hispanic women. The approach of Adult Treatment Panel (ATP)-III has been to focus on obesity, particularly abdominal obesity, which in the setting of environmental factors (physical inactivity and aging) leads to insulin resistance, which in turn causes atherogenic dyslipidemia, hypertension, and hyperglycemia, as well as the many other complications and associated conditions of the insulin resistance syndrome. "The real question is," Horton stated, "can we stop the progression to diabetes and cardiovascular disease?" A number of studies have addressed aspects of lifestyle modification. The Da Qing IGT and diabetes study involved 577 subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), in which clinics were assigned to no additional treatment, to diet, to exercise, or to diet and exercise, with each intervention applied to all patients in the clinic. The active lifestyle treatment strategies were associated with 4245% 5-year diabetes rates, as opposed to the 68% rate for the control clinics. The Finnish Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) involved 522 middle-aged overweight individuals with IGT randomly assigned to control or intervention groups, the latter exercising at least 4 h weekly, and with diet aimed at decreasing fat and increasing fiber. The intervention group had 4.2 and 3.5 lb weight loss at 1 and 2 years, respectively, with a 58% reduction in diabetes risk directly linked to lifestyle change so that individuals who lost Vivian Fonseca (New Orleans, LA) reviewed potential approaches to pharmaceutical management of the insulin resistance syndrome in people without diabetes, including those with IGT, obesity, lipodystrophy, previous gestational diabetes, CVD, PCOS, inflammatory conditions (such as psoriasis), nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, or use of drugs such as glucocorticoids, protease inhibitors, and antipsychotic agents. Treatment could be designed to improve surrogate markers, decrease inflammation, prevent diabetes, treat PCOS, and decrease development of CVD, as well as cirrhosis, cancer, and other non-CVD complications.
Both available sensitizers, metformin and TZDs, might be of benefit in treatment of the insulin resistance syndrome. In the DPP, metformin decreased diabetes progression 31%, and in the TRIPOD (Troglitazone in Prevention of Diabetes) study of 236 subjects, 400 mg troglitazone daily decreased diabetes by
Other potential treatments of the insulin resistance syndrome include Robert Misbin (Rockville, MD) of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) addressed aspects of the challenge of developing drugs to treat insulin resistance and asked what is needed to decide to treat the insulin resistance syndrome itself rather than its components. He noted that there are regulatory/bureaucratic reasons that developing new indications for treatment are difficult, as the FDA has difficulty even processing such applications, whereas it is much easier to develop new treatment approaches for recognized conditions. He suggested, however, that physicians should not consider it the role of the FDA to decide upon criteria for effective treatment, as this should be the consensus of experts, after which recommended treatment approaches can be developed. Challenges for drug development include definitions of insulin resistance, measurement of insulin resistance, trial design, and regulatory issues. He suggested that proponents must demonstrate benefit in clinical trials, such as by demonstrating reductions in CVD. Drugs for the indication must have an acceptable risk profile, and a sponsor must submit a New Drug Application. This is not a trivial point, as for example metformin in many ways has optimal characteristics but is indicated "on label" only for diabetes, and as a generic substance "no one has an interest in the pharmaceutical industry for developing further applications" for this agent. Traditionally, we evaluate drugs for benefit versus risk in individual diseases, but benefit versus risk considerations for diabetes and for PCOS are, for example, quite different, given the differences in risk of the two conditions. Misbin pointed out the great influence of the DCCT on the FDA, as its establishment of A1C as a surrogate marker for microvascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes treated with insulin was extrapolated to the use of metformin, acarbose, miglitol, the TZDs, repaglinide, and nateglinide as glucose-lowering agents for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Data-based evidence must be put forward to accept new approaches to treatment and to accept a new surrogate end point. Such an end point must have predictive value for an important outcome, must have a standardized methodology for measurement, and must be stable, reproducible, and suitable for a prospective DCCT-like study. "This is the kind of thing," Misbin stated, "that we need for the insulin resistance syndrome." Trial design would require defining a patient population with insulin resistance syndrome, with the major efficacy measure one clearly of major benefit, such as prevention of CVD events, and a surrogate end point for insulin resistance assessment. Misbin asked what he termed a "difficult question": What do you do about other treatments? In clinical practice, one must treat diabetes, dyslipidemia, PCOS, hypertension, IGT, steatohepatitis, and subjects in the placebo arm of the trial might require treatments for diabetes, for hypertension, and so on, which could influence insulin resistance. Thus, the concept of the insulin resistance syndrome does not lend itself in a straightforward fashion to the development of clinical trials.
Gerald Reaven (Stanford, CA) presented an analysis of approaches to identifying obese patients who will benefit from treatment. He noted that rather than establishing diagnostic criteria, it may be more appropriate to establish approaches for individuals with insulin resistance, recognizing that insulin resistance itself is not a disease but a physiologic state. Furthermore, insulin resistance is not itself the only cause of the constituents of the "insulin resistance syndrome," so that for example there are causes of hypertriglyceridemia having nothing to do with abnormality of insulin action. Recalling his studies of distribution of insulin sensitivity in the population, he suggested that one should ask: Who is at risk of adverse outcomes? With this approach, recognizing that 2535% of the population is at increased risk of CHD, which he agreed was the most important adverse outcome, one can begin to identify levels of insulin resistance at which treatment might be appropriate. BMI and waist circumference alone do not appropriately identify people who are really at risk, as one-third of the most-insulin-sensitive tertile are overweight or obese and one-sixth of the least sensitive tertile have normal weight. At any BMI, insulin resistance is associated with higher triglycerides and glucose and lower HDL. Reaven pointed out that triglycerides are as good a correlate of insulin sensitivity as is the insulin level, so that a useful approach is to find obese individuals with the typical dyslipidemia. Hypertension is not as good a marker, as people with hypertension without dyslipidemia do not have high CHD risk, whereas those who do have dyslipidemia have quite high risk. He showed, using receiver operator curves (plots of sensitivity vs. 1-specificity), that triglycerides, fasting insulin, and the triglyceridetoHDL cholesterol ratio are all effective discriminants of obese individuals with and without insulin resistance syndrome. Getting to the issue of "who do you treat," in a population with approximately two-thirds overweight, only half of these will be in the upper tertile of insulin resistance, so that twice as many people would be treated as necessary, but if the triglyceridetoHDL cholesterol cholesterol ratio is Footnotes Zachary T. Bloomgarden, MD, is a practicing endocrinologist in New York, New York, and is affiliated with the Division of Endocrinology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York. REFERENCES
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||