Metformin, but not glimepiride, improves carotid artery diameter and blood flow in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of glimepiride and metformin on vascular reactivity, hemostatic factors and glucose and lipid profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A prospective study was performed in 16 uncontrolled patients with diabetes previously treated with dietary intervention. The participants were randomized into metformin or glimepiride therapy groups. After four months, the patients were crossed over with no washout period to the alternative treatment for an additional four-month period on similar dosage schedules. The following variables were assessed before and after four months of each treatment: 1) fasting glycemia, insulin, catecholamines, lipid profiles and HbA(1) levels; 2) t-PA and PAI-1 (antigen and activity), platelet aggregation and fibrinogen and plasminogen levels; and 3) the flow indices of the carotid and brachial arteries. In addition, at the end of each period, a 12-hour metabolic profile was obtained after fasting and every 2 hours thereafter. RESULTS: Both therapies resulted in similar decreases in fasting glucose, triglyceride and norepinephrine levels, and they increased the fibrinolytic factor plasminogen but decreased t-PA activity. Metformin caused lower insulin and pro-insulin levels and higher glucagon levels and increased systolic carotid diameter and blood flow. Neither metformin nor glimepiride affected endothelial-dependent or endothelial-independent vasodilation of the brachial artery. CONCLUSIONS: Glimepiride and metformin were effective in improving glucose and lipid profiles and norepinephrine levels. Metformin afforded more protection against macrovascular diabetes complications, increased systolic carotid artery diameter and total and systolic blood flow, and decreased insulin levels. As both therapies increased plasminogen levels but reduced t-PA activity, a coagulation process was likely still ongoing.

Exogenous influences on plant secondary metabolite levels

Plant secondary metabolites are a group of naturally occurring compound classes biosynthesized by differing biochemical pathways whose plant content and regulation is strongly susceptible to environmental influences and to potential herbal predators. Such abiotic and biotic factors might be specifically induced by means of various mechanisms, which create variation in the accumulation or biogenesis of secondary metabolites. Hence the dynamic aspect of bioactive compound synthesis and accumulation enables plants to communicate and react in order to overcome imminent threats. This contribution aims to review the most important mechanisms of various abiotic and biotic interactions, such as pathogenic microorganisms and herbivory, by which plants respond to exogenous influences, and will also report on time-scale variable influences on secondary metabolite profiles. Transmission of signals in plants commonly occurs by 'semiochemicals', which are comprised of terpenes, phenylpropanoids, benzenoids and other volatile compounds. Due to the important functions of volatile terpenes in communication processes of living organisms, as well as its emission susceptibility relative to exogenous influences, we also present different scenarios of concentration and emission variations. Toxic effects of plants vary depending on the level and type of secondary metabolites. In farming and cattle raising scenarios, the toxicity of plant secondary metabolites and respective concentration shifts may have severe consequences on livestock production and health, culminating in adverse effects on crop yields and/or their human consumers, or have an adverse economic impact. From a wider perspective, herbal medicines, agrochemicals or other natural products are also associated with variability in plant metabolite levels, which can impact the safety and reliable efficacy of these products. We also present typical examples of toxic plants which influence livestock production using Brazilian examples of toxicity of sapogenins and alkaloids on livestock to highlight the problem. (c) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Which factors are important for crossmodal attentional effect?

Some results in the literature suggest that crossmodal attention is very sensitive to the features of the experimental protocol. The current work examined the possible contribution of the asynchrony between the onset of the cue and the target (SOA) and the kind of task performed by the observer to the manifestation of crossmodal attentional effect. In a first experiment, a target (Gabor patch), whose spatial frequency had to be discriminated, was presented 133 or 159 ms after an auditory cue, in a close location on the same side or in a distant location on the opposite side. The crossmodal attentional effect was observed only for the 159 ms SOA. In a second experiment, the SOA was again 133 ms, but the location of the target had to be discriminated, instead of its spatial frequency. A crossmodal attentional effect was observed. The results of these two experiments indicate that crossmodal attentional effect depends on the SOA and the task. It takes longer to develop when the task requires the discrimination of the spatial frequency of the target than the discrimination of its location.