© American Diabetes Association ®, Inc., 2007
Diabetes and C-Reactive Protein
Since Celsus ( In this issue, we see several attempts to understand or respond to the processes that underlie dysfunction. At a forest level, Robb Malone, PharmD, CDE, CPP; Betsy Bryant Shilliday, PharmD, CDE, CPP; Timothy J. Ives, PharmD, MPH; and Michael Pignone, MD, MPH (p. 31) describe an attempt to improve care at a large hospital in North Carolina based on perceived dysfunctions in the system that delivers care. With this elegant and detailed description of an attempt to improve diabetes care, Malone et al. launch "Bridges to Excellence," a new department within Clinical Diabetes that characterizes quality improvement initiatives aimed at improving the care delivered to individuals with diabetes. Michael J. Fowler, MD (p. 25), after reviewing the burden of diabetes, gives a tree-level view of the mechanism underlying the four categories of diabetes as part of "Diabetes: A Foundation," another new department aimed at equipping physicians-in-training with core knowledge of diabetes. It is notable how simple our current diabetes classification system remains, despite significant advances in our understanding of the heterogeneous condition we call diabetes. Finally, David M. Capuzzi, MD, PhD, and Jeffrey S. Freeman, DO (p. 16), give leaflevel attention to a particular peptide that is sometimes elevated in diabetes: C-reactive protein (CRP). CRP is indiscriminately elevated in a variety of inflammatory conditions, and Capuzzi and Freeman make the case that inflammation is a key attribute of diabetes and that CRP has an important role in at least predicting future macrovascular events. An argument follows in support of recommendations for measuring CRP in certain populations.
It has been said that there are three common denominators of disease
pathogenesis: inflammation, oxidation, and coagulation. Although such
characterizations are simple if not simplistic, it is remarkable how many
conditions appear to involve disturbances of these three
"denominators" at some point along the continuum that
characterizes their pathogenesis. Type 2 diabetes, unlike type 1, is perceived
by some physicians to not involve these mechanisms. This ought not be. From
seminal work by Michael
Brownlee1 describing
the key role of reactive oxygen species in the pathogenesis of microvascular
complications to the vast body of work implicating inflammation in diabetes
and atherogenesis, these broad mechanisms are quite relevant to diabetes.
Inflammation, whose attributes Celsus purportedly described and Rudolf Virchow
( Capuzzi and Freeman implicate CRP in the atherogenic process, characterize its potential in predicting cardiovascular events, and review two large well-conducted studies that suggest CRP's association with the development of diabetes. These observations contribute to our understanding of the dysfunction associated with diabetes. Yet, one ought to be circumspect in transitioning from processes underlying disease to recommendations. This is especially relevant in diabetes, which is treated as the equivalent of having had a coronary event and thereby already necessitates intensive attention to known coronary risk factors. In addition, recommendations for monitoring are rarely associated with the same rig- or as recommendations for treatment. Although the consequences of monitoring are unlikely to result in fulminant hepatic failure, there are considerable efficacy and cost considerations that are often left untested at the time of monitoring recommendations. To be clear, the ease with which we issue recommendations for monitoring is not unique to CRP. Capuzzi and Freeman do hedge a bit regarding the added value of CRP beyond existing known risk factors for either the atherogenic process or the development of diabetes. It may be that many of these cytokine markers of inflammation represent more nibbling around the edges than core causal compounds related to meaningful outcomes. Even so, it is not surprising, given what appears to be a clear role of inflammation in atherogenesis and diabetes, that a variety of treatment options beyond aspirin are being developed in hopes of attenuating the impact of inflammation. The contribution of inflammation will continue to be unraveled in both atherogenic processes and diabetes. Additional compounds, perhaps somewhat less promiscuous than CRP, will be identified, and the role of known peptides will be further clarified. Whether CRP is the pawn or the queen remains to be seen.2 REFERENCES 1 Brownlee M: Biochemistry and molecular cell biology of diabetic complications. Nature 414:813 -820, 2001[Medline] 2 Yeh ETH, Palusinski RP: C-reactive protein: the pawn has been promoted to queen. Curr Atheroscler Rep 5:101 -105, 2003[Medline]
Related Articles:
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||