No abstract

; for the Italian Diabetes and Exercise Study 2 (IDES_2) Investigators IMPORTANCE There is no definitive evidence that changes in physical activity/sedentary behavior can be maintained long term in individuals with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE Toinvestigatewhetherabehavioralinterventionstrategycanproduceasustainedincrease in physical activity and reduction in sedentary time among individuals with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Italian Diabetes and Exercise Study 2 was an open-label, assessor-blinded,randomizedclinicalsuperioritytrial,withrecruitmentfromOctober2012toFebruary 2014andfollow-upuntilFebruary2017.In3outpatientdiabetesclinicsinRome,300physicallyinactive andsedentarypatientswithtype2diabeteswererandomized1:1(stratifiedbycenter,age,anddiabetes treatment) to receive a behavioral intervention or standard care for 3 years. INTERVENTIONS All participants received usual care targeted to meet American Diabetes Association guideline recommendations. Participants in the behavioral intervention group (n = 150) received 1 individual theoretical counseling session and 8 individual biweekly theoretical and practical counseling sessions each year. Participants in the standard care group (n = 150) received only general physician recommendations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Co-primary end points were sustained change in physical activity volume, time spent in light-intensity and moderate-to vigorous-intensity physical activity, and sedentary time, measured by an accelerometer. RESULTS Of the 300 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 61.6 [8.5] years; 116 women [38.7%]), 267 completed the study (133 in the behavioral intervention group and 134 in the standard care group). Median follow-up was 3.0 years. Participants in the behavioral intervention and standard care groups accumulated, respectively, 13.8 vs 10.5 metabolic equivalent-h/wk of physical activity volume (difference, 3.3 [95% CI, 2.2-4.4]; P < .001), 18.9 vs 12.5 min/d of moderate-to vigorous-intensity physical activity (difference, 6.4 [95% CI, 5.0-7.8]; P < .001), 4.6 vs 3.8 h/d of light-intensity physical activity (difference, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.5-1.1]; P < .001), and 10.9 vs 11.7 h/d of sedentary time (difference, −0.8 [95% CI, −1.0 to −0.5]; P < .001). Significant between-group differences were maintained throughout the study, but the between-group difference in moderate-to vigorous-intensity physical activity decreased during the third year from 6.5 to 3.6 min/d. There were 41 adverse events in the behavioral intervention group and 59 in the standard care group outside of the sessions; participants in the behavioral intervention group experienced 30 adverse events during the sessions (most commonly musculoskeletal injury/discomfort and mild hypoglycemia). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with type 2 diabetes at 3 diabetes clinics in Rome who were followed up for 3 years, a behavioral intervention strategy compared with standard care resulted in a sustained increase in physical activity and decrease in sedentary time. Further rese...

Our results strongly support the hypothesis of a pivotal role of innate immunity in type-A Stanford AAD.

BackgroundWhile current recommendations on exercise type and volume have strong experimental bases, there is no clear evidence from large-sized studies indicating whether increasing training intensity provides additional benefits to subjects with type 2 diabetes.ObjectiveTo compare the effects of moderate-to-high intensity (HI) versus low-to-moderate intensity (LI) training of equal energy cost, i.e. exercise volume, on modifiable cardiovascular risk factors.DesignPre-specified sub-analysis of the Italian Diabetes and Exercise Study (IDES), a randomized multicenter prospective trial comparing a supervised exercise intervention with standard care for 12 months (2005–2006).SettingTwenty-two outpatient diabetes clinics across Italy.PatientsSedentary patients with type 2 diabetes assigned to twice-a-week supervised progressive aerobic and resistance training plus exercise counseling (n = 303).InterventionsSubjects were randomized by center to LI (n = 142, 136 completed) or HI (n = 161, 152 completed) progressive aerobic and resistance training, i.e. at 55% or 70% of predicted maximal oxygen consumption and at 60% or 80% of predicted 1-Repetition Maximum, respectively, of equal volume.Main Outcome Measure(s)Hemoglobin (Hb) A1c and other cardiovascular risk factors; 10-year coronary heart disease (CHD) risk scores.ResultsVolume of physical activity, both supervised and non-supervised, was similar in LI and HI participants. Compared with LI training, HI training produced only clinically marginal, though statistically significant, improvements in HbA1c (mean difference −0.17% [95% confidence interval −0.44,0.10], P = 0.03), triglycerides (−0.12 mmol/l [−0.34,0.10], P = 0.02) and total cholesterol (−0.24 mmol/l [−0.46, −0.01], P = 0.04), but not in other risk factors and CHD risk scores. However, intensity was not an independent predictor of reduction of any of these parameters. Adverse event rate was similar in HI and LI subjects.ConclusionsData from the large IDES cohort indicate that, in low-fitness individuals such as sedentary subjects with type 2 diabetes, increasing exercise intensity is not harmful, but does not provide additional benefits on cardiovascular risk factors.Trial Registration www.ISRCTN.org ISRCTN-04252749.

No abstract

OBJECTIVEPhysical fitness is inversely related to mortality in the general population and in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Here, we present data concerning the relationship between changes in physical fitness and modifiable cardiovascular risk factors in subjects with type 2 diabetes from the Italian Diabetes and Exercise Study.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSSedentary patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 606) were enrolled in 22 outpatient diabetes clinics and randomized to twice-a-week supervised aerobic and resistance training plus exercise counseling versus counseling alone for 12 months. Baseline to end-of-study changes in cardiorespiratory fitness, strength, and flexibility, as assessed by Vo2max estimation, a 5–8 maximal repetition test, and a hip/trunk flexibility test, respectively, were calculated in the whole cohort, and multiple regression analyses were applied to assess the relationship with cardiovascular risk factors.RESULTSChanges in Vo2max, upper and lower body strength, and flexibility were significantly associated with the variation in the volume of physical activity, HbA1c, BMI, waist circumference, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), coronary heart disease (CHD) risk score, and inversely, HDL cholesterol. Changes in fitness predicted improvements in HbA1c, waist circumference, HDL cholesterol, hs-CRP, and CHD risk score, independent of study arm, BMI, and in case of strength, also waist circumference.CONCLUSIONSPhysical activity/exercise-induced increases in fitness, particularly muscular, predict improvements in cardiovascular risk factors in subjects with type 2 diabetes independently of weight loss, thus indicating the need for targeting fitness in these individuals, particularly in subjects who struggle to lose weight.

BackgroundProenkephalin (PENK) has been suggested as a novel biomarker for kidney function. We investigated the diagnostic and prognostic utility of plasma PENK in comparison with neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR) in septic patients.MethodsA total of 167 septic patients were enrolled: 99 with sepsis, 37 with septic shock, and 31 with suspected sepsis. PENK and NGAL concentrations were measured and GFR was estimated by using the isotope dilution mass spectrometry traceable-Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) Study and three Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations: CKD-EPICr, CDK-EPICysC, and CKD-EPICr-CysC. The PENK, NGAL, and eGFR results were compared according to sepsis severity, presence or absence of acute kidney injury (AKI), and clinical outcomes.ResultsThe PENK, NGAL, and eGFR results were significantly associated with sepsis severity and differed significantly between patients with and without AKI only in the sepsis group (all P<0.05). PENK was superior to NGAL in predicting AKI (P=0.022) and renal replacement therapy (RRT) (P=0.0085). Regardless of the variable GFR category by the different eGFR equations, PENK showed constant and significant associations with all eGFR equations. Unlike NGAL, PENK was not influenced by inflammation and predicted the 30-day mortality.ConclusionsPENK is a highly sensitive and objective biomarker of AKI and RRT and is useful for prognosis prediction in septic patients. With its diagnostic robustness and predictive power for survival, PENK constitutes a promising biomarker in critical care settings including sepsis.

The prognostic value of absolute lymphocytic count (ALC), has been a recent matter of debate in non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (NHL). We assessed prospectively the value of ALC at diagnosis and also after the completion of immuno-chemotherapy in 101 diffuse-large-B-cell-lymphoma (DLBCL). Analysis of prognostic factors with respect to overall survival (OS), event free survival (EFS) and progression free survival (PFS) was done by two-tailed log-rank test. The ALC cut-off value was calculated as <0.84 x 10(9)/L at diagnosis: this was a strong negative prognostic factor for OS (p = 0.0004), EFS (p < 0.00001) and PFS (p < 0.00001) and in multivariate analysis was independent from the revised-international-prognostic-index (R-IPI). ALC after chemo-immunotherapy was not of prognostic value. As R-IPI and ALC < 0.84 x 10(9)/L, were the factors better discriminating poor prognosis, a new trichotomous score (ALC/R-IPI) was built up: (1) low risk: R-IPI = very good or good and ALC < 0.84 x 10(9)/L; (2) intermediate risk: patients with at least one risk factor (R-IPI = poor or ALC < 0.84 x 10(9)/L). (3) high risk: patients with both risk factors. This new prognostic score was highly significant in univariate analysis for OS (p = 0.0002), EFS (p < 0.00001) and PFS (p < 0.00001). In multivariate analysis ALC/R-IPI was the most predictive factor for OS (OR = 2.954; p = 0.002) and EFS (OR = 2.381; p < 0.00001) and the only predictive factor for PFS (OR = 4.018; p < 0.00001). Our data, show that ALC at diagnosis has a strong prognostic relevance and is independent from the R-IPI. The new score including both values proved the most powerful predictor at multivariate analysis.