Physical Activity and Mortality in Individuals With Diabetes Mellitus A Prospective Study and Meta-analysis

Background: Physical activity (PA) is considered a cornerstone of diabetes mellitus management to prevent complications, but conclusive evidence is lacking. Methods: This prospective cohort study and meta-analysis of existing studies investigated the association between PA and mortality in individuals with diabetes. In the EPIC study (European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition), a cohort was defined of 5859 individuals with diabetes at baseline. Associations of leisure-time and total PA and walking with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and total mortality were studied using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. Fixed-and random-effects meta-analyses of prospective studies published up to December 2010 were pooled with inverse variance weighting. Results: In the prospective analysis, total PA was associated with lower risk of CVD and total mortality. Compared with physically inactive persons, the lowest mortality risk was observed in moderately active persons: hazard ratios were 0.62 (95% CI, 0.49-0.78) for total mortality and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.32-0.81) for CVD mortality. Leisure-time PA was associated with lower total mortality risk, and walking was associated with lower CVD mortality risk. In the meta-analysis, the pooled random-effects hazard ratio from 5 studies for high vs low total PA and all-cause mortality was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.49-0.73). Conclusions: Higher levels of PA were associated with lower mortality risk in individuals with diabetes. Even those undertaking moderate amounts of activity were at appreciably lower risk for early death compared with inactive persons. These findings provide empirical evidence supporting the widely shared view that persons with diabetes should engage in regular PA

Cephalopods in neuroscience: regulations, research and the 3Rs

Cephalopods have been utilised in neurosci- ence research for more than 100 years particularly because of their phenotypic plasticity, complex and centralised nervous system, tractability for studies of learning and cellular mechanisms of memory (e.g. long-term potentia- tion) and anatomical features facilitating physiological studies (e.g. squid giant axon and synapse). On 1 January 2013, research using any of the about 700 extant species of ‘‘live cephalopods’’ became regulated within the European Union by Directive 2010/63/EU on the ‘‘Protection of Animals used for Scientific Purposes’’, giving cephalopods the same EU legal protection as previously afforded only to vertebrates. The Directive has a number of implications, particularly for neuroscience research. These include: (1) projects will need justification, authorisation from local competent authorities, and be subject to review including a harm-benefit assessment and adherence to the 3Rs princi- ples (Replacement, Refinement and Reduction). (2) To support project evaluation and compliance with the new EU law, guidelines specific to cephalopods will need to be developed, covering capture, transport, handling, housing, care, maintenance, health monitoring, humane anaesthesia, analgesia and euthanasia. (3) Objective criteria need to be developed to identify signs of pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm particularly in the context of their induction by an experimental procedure. Despite diversity of views existing on some of these topics, this paper reviews the above topics and describes the approaches being taken by the cephalopod research community (represented by the authorship) to produce ‘‘guidelines’’ and the potential contribution of neuroscience research to cephalopod welfare

Prolactin determinants in healthy women: A large cross-sectional study within the EPIC cohort.

BACKGROUND: Experimental and epidemiologic data suggest that higher circulating prolactin is associated with breast cancer risk; however, how various risk factors for breast cancer influence prolactin levels in healthy women is not clear. METHODS: We analyzed cross-sectional associations between several suggested reproductive and lifestyle risk factors for breast cancer and circulating prolactin among pre- and postmenopausal women, taking into account the use of current postmenopausal hormone therapy, among 2,560 controls from a breast cancer nested case-control study within the EPIC cohort. RESULTS: Adjusted geometric mean prolactin levels were significantly higher among premenopausal women, and among postmenopausal women using hormone therapy compared with nonusers (8.2, 7.0, and 6.3 ng/mL, respectively; Pcat = <0.0001). Furthermore, prolactin levels were significantly higher among users of combined estrogen-progestin hormone therapy compared with users of estrogen-alone hormone therapy (6.66 vs. 5.90 ng/mL; Pcat = 0.001). Prolactin levels were lower among parous women compared with nulliparous women (8.61 vs. 10.95 ng/mL; Pcat = 0.0002, premenopausal women); the magnitude of this difference depended on the number of full-term pregnancies (22.1% lower, ≥3 vs. 1 pregnancy, Ptrend = 0.01). Results for parity were similar but lower in magnitude among postmenopausal women. Prolactin did not vary by other studied factors, with the exception of lower levels among postmenopausal smokers compared with never smokers. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that current hormone therapy use, especially the use of combined hormone therapy, is associated with higher circulating prolactin levels in postmenopausal women, and confirms prior findings of lower circulating prolactin in parous women. IMPACT: Our study extends the knowledge linking various breast cancer risk factors with circulating prolactin