Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
This review proposes that metabolic rundown in Type 2 diabetes causes cerebral vascular insufficiencies linked to neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease, mediated by dysregulated endothelial nitric oxide.
The endothelium performs a crucial role in maintaining vascular integrity leading to whole organ metabolic homeostasis. Endothelial dysfunction represents a key etiological factor leading to moderate to severe vasculopathies observed in both Type 2 diabetic and Alzheimer's Disease (AD) patients. Accordingly, evidence-based epidemiological factors support a compelling hypothesis stating that metabolic rundown encountered in Type 2 diabetes engenders severe cerebral vascular insufficiencies that are causally linked to long term neural degenerative processes in AD. Of mechanistic importance, Type 2 diabetes engenders an immunologically mediated chronic pro-inflammatory state involving interactive deleterious effects of leukocyte-derived cytokines and endothelial-derived chemotactic agents leading to vascular and whole organ dysfunction. The long term negative consequences of vascular pro-inflammatory processes on the integrity of CNS basal forebrain neuronal populations mediating complex cognitive functions establish a striking temporal comorbidity of AD with Type 2 diabetes. Extensive biomedical evidence supports the pivotal multi-functional role of constitutive nitric oxide (NO) production and release as a critical vasodilatory, anti-inflammatory, and anti-oxidant, mechanism within the vascular endothelium. Within this context, we currently review the functional contributions of dysregulated endothelial NO expression to the etiology and persistence of Type 2 diabetes-related and co morbid AD-related vasculopathies. Additionally, we provide up-to-date perspectives on critical areas of AD research with special reference to common NO-related etiological factors linking Type 2 diabetes to the pathogenesis of AD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: