Urinary Liver-Type Fatty Acid–Binding Protein and Progression of Diabetic Nephropathy in Type 1 Diabetes
Article Figures & Tables
Figures
- Figure 1
A: Urinary L-FABP levels across study groups at baseline. The L-FABP levels were significantly different among the study groups. Significant differences (P < 0.001) in L-FABP levels were observed between the macroalbuminuria group and all other groups. L-FABP levels in the microalbuminuria group were significantly different (P < 0.001) from healthy patients and those with type 1 diabetes and normal AER. Patients with type 1 diabetes and normal AER had significantly (P < 0.001) higher L-FABP levels than healthy patients. B: Urinary L-FABP levels across study groups at baseline in relation with progression status. L-FABP level is significantly higher (P < 0.001) for progressors across all groups (normal AER, microalbuminuria, and macroalbuminuria) compared with nonprogressors. The horizontal line in the middle of each box indicates the median; the top and bottom borders of the box mark the 75th and 25th percentiles, respectively, and the whiskers mark the 90th and 10th percentiles.
- Figure 2
A: ROC curve analysis for L-FABP and AER in patients with type 1 diabetes and normal AER showed a trend toward an improvement of the risk prediction (P = 0.09) for L-FABP used together with AER (AUCL-FABP&AER = 0.786) compared with AER used alone (AUCAER = 0.778) in patients with type 1 diabetes and normal AER. B: ROC curve analysis for L-FABP and AER in the microalbuminuria group found no significant difference between AUCAER (0.847) and AUCL-FABP&AER (0.841). AUCL-FABP (0.777) was significantly smaller than AUCAER (P = 0.034). C: ROC curve analysis for L-FABP and AER in the macroalbuminuria group found no significant difference between AUCAER (0.862) and AUCL-FABP&AER (0.863). AUCAER&L-FABP was significantly larger (P = 0.012) than AUCL-FABP (0.850).
Tables
Current Issue
March 2021
Volume 44, Issue 3
