Apolipoprotein E gene polymorphism is not a strong risk factor for diabetic nephropathy and retinopathy in Type I diabetes: case-control study

BACKGROUND: The gene encoding apolipoprotein E (APOE) has been proposed as a candidate gene for vascular complications in Type I diabetes. This study aimed to investigate the influence of three-allelic variations in the APOE gene for the development of diabetic retinopathy and nephropathy. RESULTS: Neither APOE alleles frequencies or APOE genotypes frequencies differed between Type I diabetic groups either with or without nephropathy. Similar results were found for patients with and without diabetic retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS: APOE gene polymorphism does not determine genetic susceptibility for the development of diabetic retinopathy in Type I diabetes patients. Association between APOE gene polymorphism and diabetic nephropathy may be weak or moderate, but not strong

Cladistic analysis of the apolipoprotein AI-CIH-AIV gene cluster using a healthy French Canadian sample. I. Haploid analysis

A cladistic analysis was carried out to identify haplotypes hypothesized to differ for functional DNA sequence variations within the apolipoprotein (apo) AI-CIII-AIV gene cluster that affect plasma lipid, lipoprotein and apolipoprotein levels. A sample of unrelated healthy French Canadians was studied. First, a cladogram of the observed apo AI-CIII-AIV haplotypes was estimated. Then this cladogram was used to define a statistical analysis of the association between haplotype variation and variation in plasma lipid, lipoprotein and apolipoprotein levels. Three haplotypes were identified which were associated with small (5–12% of the total sum of squares) pleiotropic effects on plasma lipid, lipoprotein and apolipoprotein traits and these effects were context, i.e. gender, dependent.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/66070/1/j.1469-1809.1995.tb00742.x.pd

A randomized trial to assess the impact of opinion leader endorsed evidence summaries on the use of secondary prevention strategies in patients with coronary artery disease: the ESP-CAD trial protocol [NCT00175240]

BACKGROUND: Although numerous therapies have been shown to be beneficial in the prevention of myocardial infarction and/or death in patients with coronary disease, these therapies are under-used and this gap contributes to sub-optimal patient outcomes. To increase the uptake of proven efficacious therapies in patients with coronary disease, we designed a multifaceted quality improvement intervention employing patient-specific reminders delivered at the point-of-care, with one-page treatment guidelines endorsed by local opinion leaders ("Local Opinion Leader Statement"). This trial is designed to evaluate the impact of these Local Opinion Leader Statements on the practices of primary care physicians caring for patients with coronary disease. In order to isolate the effects of the messenger (the local opinion leader) from the message, we will also test an identical quality improvement intervention that is not signed by a local opinion leader ("Unsigned Evidence Statement") in this trial. METHODS: Randomized trial testing three different interventions in patients with coronary disease: (1) usual care versus (2) Local Opinion Leader Statement versus (3) Unsigned Evidence Statement. Patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease after cardiac catheterization (but without acute coronary syndromes) will be randomly allocated to one of the three interventions by cluster randomization (at the level of their primary care physician), if they are not on optimal statin therapy at baseline. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients demonstrating improvement in their statin management in the first six months post-catheterization. Secondary outcomes include examinations of the use of ACE inhibitors, anti-platelet agents, beta-blockers, non-statin lipid lowering drugs, and provision of smoking cessation advice in the first six months post-catheterization in the three treatment arms. Although randomization will be clustered at the level of the primary care physician, the design effect is anticipated to be negligible and the unit of analysis will be the patient. DISCUSSION: If either the Local Opinion Leader Statement or the Unsigned Evidence Statement improves secondary prevention in patients with coronary disease, they can be easily modified and applied in other communities and for other target conditions

Impact of age and body size on inter-individual variation in measures of lipid metabolism: influence of gender and apolipoprotein E genotype

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/65323/1/j.1399-0004.2000.570106.x.pd