↓ Skip to main content

Cadmium Level, Glycemic Control, and Indices of Renal Function in Treated Type II Diabetics: Implications for Polluted Environments

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cadmium Level, Glycemic Control, and Indices of Renal Function in Treated Type II Diabetics: Implications for Polluted Environments
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00114
Pubmed ID
Authors

John I. Anetor, Chukwuemelie Z. Uche, Emmanuel B. Ayita, Solomon K. Adedapo, Jokotade O. Adeleye, Gloria O. Anetor, Sola K. Akinlade

Abstract

Cadmium (Cd) has recently emerged as a major concern not only in environmental toxicology but also in metabolic diseases such as diabetes mellitus and its complications. Conflicting data aside, these studies have not been examined in a clinical population undergoing management as well as possible modulation by the prominent metabolic antagonist of Cd such as zinc (Zn). This study examined the relationship between cadmium levels, glycemic control, and renal pathology in established type II diabetic patients with focus on populations exposed to modern environmental health hazards (MEHHs). Sixty-five participants, consisting of 45 type-2 diabetics and 20 non-diabetics were enrolled for the study, mean age 61.51 ± 5.27 years. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) was used to classify them into three sub-groups: (A) good glycemic control (44.4%), (B) fair glycemic control (24.4%), and (C) poor glycemic control (31.1%). Plasma levels of glucose, Cd, Zn, HbA1c, creatinine, urinary creatinine, microalbuminuria, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were determined in all participants using standard methods. Fasting plasma glucose was higher in diabetics than in non-diabetics (p = 0.000) as well as Zn level, though not significantly. Interestingly, Cd level, Cd/Zn ratio, and urinary creatinine were significantly lower in diabetics than in non-diabetics. The group with poor glycemic control (C) had significantly higher Cd level compared to the one with good glycemic control (group A). The renal function revealed that microalbuminuria and urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR) was significantly higher in diabetics than in non-diabetics, while eGFR was found to be similar in both diabetics and non-diabetics. UACR inversely correlated with Cd level, while plasma creatinine level positively correlated with Cd but not significantly. Correlation between Cd and HbA1c revealed non-significant inverse correlation (r = -0.007; p > 0.05), while Zn showed a significant inverse correlation with Cd (r = -0.317; p < 0.014). The lower Cd level in diabetics compared to non-diabetics probably reflects the modulating effect of Zn in treated diabetics given nutritional education in addition to their regular regime, including good sources of Zn. The renal insufficiency with increasing Cd level may suggest that the progression of renal impairment may not be responsive to the putative modulating effect of Zn.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 23%
Professor 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 38%
Environmental Science 3 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,808,979
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#4,998
of 10,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,555
of 352,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#56
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,763 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.