Serum Lipoproteins in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Intervention and Complications Cohort

Associations with gender and glycemia

  1. Alicia J. Jenkins, MD1,
  2. Timothy J. Lyons, MD1,
  3. Deyi Zheng, MD, PHD2,
  4. James D. Otvos, PHD3,
  5. Daniel T. Lackland, PHD2,
  6. Daniel McGee, PHD2,
  7. W. Timothy Garvey, MD14,
  8. Richard L. Klein, PHD14 and
  9. The DCCT/EDIC Research Group5
  1. 1Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Medical Genetics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina
  2. 2Department of Biometry, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina
  3. 3Department of Biochemistry, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina
  4. 4Ralph H. Johnson Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Charleston, South Carolina
  5. 5National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse (NDIC) Epidemiology of Diabetes Intervention and Complications, Bethesda, Maryland

    Abstract

    OBJECTIVE—To relate the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)-determined lipoprotein profile, conventional lipid and apolipoprotein measures, and in vitro oxidizibility of LDL with gender and glycemia in type 1 diabetes.

    RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—In the 1997–1999 Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Intervention and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) cohort, serum from 428 women and 540 men were characterized by conventional lipids, NMR, apolipoprotein levels, and LDL susceptibility to in vitro oxidation. Simple and partial correlation coefficients were calculated for each lipoprotein-related parameter versus gender, with and without covariates (age, diabetes duration, concurrent HbA1c, DCCT randomization, hypertension, BMI, waist-to-hip ratio, and albuminuria). For concurrent HbA1c, data were analyzed as above, exchanging gender for HbA1c. Associations were significant if P < 0.05.

    RESULTS—Although men and women had similar total and LDL cholesterol and triglycerides, men exhibited the following significant percent differences in NMR profiles versus women: small VLDL 41; IDL −30; medium LDL 39; small LDL 21; large HDL −32; small HDL 35; LDL particle concentration 4; VLDL and HDL diameters −8 and −4, respectively. Small VLDL, small HDL, medium LDL (women only), small LDL (men only), and LDL particle concentration were positively correlated, and HDL size was inversely correlated, with concurrent HbA1c. NMR profile was unrelated to prior DCCT randomization. Susceptibility of LDL to oxidation was unrelated to gender and glycemia.

    CONCLUSIONS—Male gender and poor glycemia are associated with a potentially more atherogenic NMR lipoprotein profile. Neither gender nor glycemia influence LDL oxidation in vitro.

    Footnotes

    • Address correspondence and reprint requests to Richard L Klein, PHD, P.O. Box 250766, Medical University of South Carolina, 114 Doughty Street, Charleston, SC 29403. E-mail: kleinrl{at}musc.edu.

      Received for publication 15 May 2002 and accepted in revised form 10 December 2002.

      A.J.J. and T.J.L. contributed equally.

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

    « Previous | Next Article »Table of Contents