Modulating an oxidative-inflammatory cascade: potential new treatment strategy for improving glucose metabolism, insulin resistance, and vascular function

Type 2 diabetes is a result of derangement of homeostatic systems of metabolic control and immune defense. Increases in visceral fat and organ adipose, environmental factors and genetic predisposition create imbalances of these homeostatic mechanisms, ultimately leading to a condition in which the oxidative environment cannot be held in check. A significant imbalance between the production of reactive oxygen species and antioxidant defenses, a condition called to oxidative stress, ensues, leading to alterations in stress-signalling pathways and potentially end-organ damage. Oxidative stress and metabolic inflammation upregulate the expression pro-inflammatory cytokines, including tissue necrosis factor alpha, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 and interleukin-6, as well as activating stress-sensitive kinases, such as c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK), phosphokinase C isoforms, mitogen-activated protein kinase and inhibitor of kappa B kinase. The JNK pathway (specifically JNK-1) appears to be a regulator that triggers the oxidative-inflammation cascade that, if left unchecked, can become chronic and cause abnormal glucose metabolism. This can lead to insulin resistance and dysfunction of the vasculature and pancreatic β-cell. The series of events set in motion by the interaction between metabolic inflammation and oxidative stress constitutes an ‘oxidative-inflammatory cascade’, a delicate balance driven by mediators of the immune and metabolic systems, maintained through a positive feedback loop. Modulating an oxidative-inflammation cascade may improve glucose metabolism, insulin resistance and vascular function, thereby slowing the development and progression to cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes

Differences in access to coronary care unit among patients with acute myocardial infarction in Rome: old, ill, and poor people hold the burden of inefficiency

BACKGROUND: Direct admission to Coronary Care Unit (CCU) on hospital arrival can be considered as a good proxy for adequate management in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), as it has been associated with better prognosis. We analyzed a cohort of patients with AMI hospitalized in Rome (Italy) in 1997–2000 to assess the proportion directly admitted to CCU and to investigate the effect of patient characteristics such as gender, age, illness severity on admission, and socio-economic status (SES) on CCU admission practices. METHODS: Using discharge data, we analyzed a cohort of 9127 AMI patients. Illness severity on admission was determined using the Deyo's adaptation of the Charlson's comorbidity index, and each patient was assigned to one to four SES groups (level I referring to the highest SES) defined by a socioeconomic index, derived by the characteristics of the census tract of residence. The effect of gender, age, illness severity and SES, on risk of non-admission to CCU was investigated using a logistic regression model (OR, CI 95%). RESULTS: Only 53.9% of patients were directly admitted to CCU, and access to optimal care was more frequently offered to younger patients (OR = 0.35; 95%CI = 0.25–0.48 when comparing 85+ to >=50 years), those with less severe illness (OR = 0.48; 95%CI = 0.37–0.61 when comparing Charlson index 3+ to 0) and the socially advantaged (OR = 0.81; 95%CI = 0.66–0.99 when comparing low to high SES). CONCLUSION: In Rome, Italy, standard optimal coronary care is underprovided. It seems to be granted preferentially to the better off, even after controversial clinical criteria, such as age and severity of illness, are taken into account

Omega-3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Background: Researchers have suggested that omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids from oily fish (long-chain omega-3 (LCn3), including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)), as well as from plants (alpha-linolenic acid (ALA)) benefit cardiovascular health. Guidelines recommend increasing omega-3-rich foods, and sometimes supplementation, but recent trials have not confirmed this. Objectives: To assess effects of increased intake of fish- and plant-based omega-3 for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CVD) events, adiposity and lipids. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017, plus ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry to September 2016, with no language restrictions. We handsearched systematic review references and bibliographies and contacted authors. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that lasted at least 12 months and compared supplementation and/or advice to increase LCn3 or ALA intake versus usual or lower intake. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed validity. We performed separate random-effects meta-analysis for ALA and LCn3 interventions, and assessed dose-response relationships through meta-regression. Main results: We included 79 RCTs (112,059 participants) in this review update and found that 25 were at low summary risk of bias. Trials were of 12 to 72 months' duration and included adults at varying cardiovascular risk, mainly in high-income countries. Most studies assessed LCn3 supplementation with capsules, but some used LCn3- or ALA-rich or enriched foods or dietary advice compared to placebo or usual diet. Meta-analysis and sensitivity analyses suggested little or no effect of increasing LCn3 on all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03, 92,653 participants; 8189 deaths in 39 trials, high-quality evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03, 67,772 participants; 4544 CVD deaths in 25 RCTs), cardiovascular events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.04, 90,378 participants; 14,737 people experienced events in 38 trials, high-quality evidence), coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.09, 73,491 participants; 1596 CHD deaths in 21 RCTs), stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, 89,358 participants; 1822 strokes in 28 trials) or arrhythmia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05, 53,796 participants; 3788 people experienced arrhythmia in 28 RCTs). There was a suggestion that LCn3 reduced CHD events (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97, 84,301 participants; 5469 people experienced CHD events in 28 RCTs); however, this was not maintained in sensitivity analyses - LCn3 probably makes little or no difference to CHD event risk. All evidence was of moderate GRADE quality, except as noted. Increasing ALA intake probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20, 19,327 participants; 459 deaths, 5 RCTs),cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25, 18,619 participants; 219 cardiovascular deaths, 4 RCTs), and it may make little or no difference to CHD events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22, 19,061 participants, 397 CHD events, 4 RCTs, low-quality evidence). However, increased ALA may slightly reduce risk of cardiovascular events (from 4.8% to 4.7%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07, 19,327 participants; 884 CVD events, 5 RCTs, low-quality evidence), and probably reduces risk of CHD mortality (1.1% to 1.0%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26, 18,353 participants; 193 CHD deaths, 3 RCTs), and arrhythmia (3.3% to 2.6%, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.10, 4,837 participants; 141 events, 1 RCT). Effects on stroke are unclear. Sensitivity analysis retaining only trials at low summary risk of bias moved effect sizes towards the null (RR 1.0) for all LCn3 primary outcomes except arrhythmias, but for most ALA outcomes, effect sizes moved to suggest protection. LCn3 funnel plots suggested that adding in missing studies/results would move effect sizes towards null for most primary outcomes. There were no dose or duration effects in subgrouping or meta-regression. There was no evidence that increasing LCn3 or ALA altered serious adverse events, adiposity or lipids, although LCn3 slightly reduced triglycerides and increased HDL. ALA probably reduces HDL (high- or moderate-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions: This is the most extensive systematic assessment of effects of omega-3 fats on cardiovascular health to date. Moderate- and high-quality evidence suggests that increasing EPA and DHA has little or no effect on mortality or cardiovascular health (evidence mainly from supplement trials). Previous suggestions of benefits from EPA and DHA supplements appear to spring from trials with higher risk of bias. Low-quality evidence suggests ALA may slightly reduce CVD event risk, CHD mortality and arrhythmia

Polyunsaturated fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Background: Evidence on the health effects of total polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) is equivocal. Fish oils are rich in omega-3 PUFA and plant oils in omega-6 PUFA. Evidence suggests increasing PUFA-rich foods, supplements or supplemented foods can reduce serum cholesterol, but may increase body weight, so overall cardiovascular effects are unclear. Objectives: To assess effects of increasing PUFA intake on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause mortality in adults. Search method: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017 and ClinicalTrials.com and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to September 2016, without language restrictions. We checked trials included in relevant systematic reviews. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing higher with lower PUFA intakes in adults with or without CVD that assessed effects over ≥12 months. We included full-text, abstracts, trials registry entries and unpublished data. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, CVD mortality and events, risk factors (blood lipids, adiposity, blood pressure), and adverse events. We excluded trials where we could not separate effects of PUFA intake from other dietary, lifestyle or medication interventions. Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts, assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We wrote to authors of included studies for further data. Meta-analyses used random-effects analysis, sensitivity analyses included fixed-effects and limiting to low summary risk of bias. We assessed GRADE quality of evidence. Main result: We included 49 RCTs randomising 24,272 participants, with duration of one to eight years. Twelve included trials were at low summary risk of bias, 33 recruited participants without cardiovascular disease. Baseline PUFA intake was unclear in most trials, but 3.9% to 8% of total energy intake where reported. Most trials gave supplemental capsules, but eight gave dietary advice, eight gave supplemental foods such as nuts or margarine, and three used a combination of methods to increase PUFA. Increasing PUFA intake probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (risk 3.4% vs 3.3% in primary prevention, 11.7% vs 11.5% in secondary prevention, risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.07, 24 trials in 19290 participants), but probably reduces risk of CVD events from 5.8% to 4.9% in primary prevention, 23.3% to 20.8% in secondary prevention (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.01, 20 trials in 17,073 participants), both moderate quality evidence. Increasing PUFA may reduce risk of CHD events from 13.4% to 7.1% primary prevention, 14.3% to 13.7% secondary prevention (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.06, 15 trials, 10,076 participants), CHD death (5.2% to 4.4% primary prevention, 6.8% to 6.1% secondary prevention, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06, 9 trials, 8810 participants) and may slightly reduce stroke risk (2.1% to 1.5% primary prevention, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.44, 11 trials, 14,742 participants), but has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26, I2 31%, 16 trials, 15,107 participants) all low quality evidence. Effects of increasing PUFA on major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and atrial fibrillation are unclear as evidence is of very low quality. Event outcomes were all downgraded for indirectness, as most events occurred in men in westernised countries. Increasing PUFA intake reduces total cholesterol (MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.02, I2 79%, 8072 participants, 26 trials) and probably decreases triglycerides (TG, MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.04, I2 50%, 3905 participants, 20 trials), but has little or no effect on HDL (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, I2 0%, 4674 participants, 18 trials) and LDL (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.06, I2 44%, 3362 participants, 15 trials). Increasing PUFA probably causes slight weight gain (MD 0.76 kg, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.19, I2 59%, 7100 participants, 12 trials). Effects of increasing PUFA on serious adverse events such as pulmonary embolism and bleeding are unclear as the evidence is of very low quality. Authors' conclusions: Increasing PUFA intake probably reduces risk of CVD events, may reduce risk of CHD events and CHD mortality,and may slightly reduce stroke risk, but has little or no effect on all-cause or CVD mortality. The mechanism may be via lipid reduction, but increasing PUFA probably slightly increases weight