Health & Medicine, UK (Commonwealth Union) – A novel investigation led by the University College London (UCL) and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) has revealed that individuals, regardless of gender, who exhibit elevated blood sugar levels, even below the diabetic threshold, face a heightened 30-50% risk of developing cardiovascular disease. This risk remains significant even for blood sugar levels considered within the normal range.
Appearing in The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, the study also brings to light a noteworthy observation: within the realm of diagnosed diabetes, the disparity in relative risk for cardiovascular disease between men and women vanishes once factors that can be modified, such as physical measurements and medication usage, are considered.
Through the analysis of data from the UK Biobank, encompassing 427,435 individuals in the UK (54.2% women, 45.8% men) and covering a range of glycaemic states, including normal blood sugar levels, prediabetes, and diabetes, the study unveiled a valuable insight. The results suggest that individuals with blood sugar levels within the “normal” range experience enhanced protection against cardiovascular disease—the lower the levels, the more pronounced the safeguarding effect. In contrast, individuals, particularly women, with elevated blood sugar below the diabetes threshold face a 30% greater risk of cardiovascular disease for men and a 30-50% greater risk for women. The risks are even more pronounced among those already diagnosed with diabetes, potentially doubling the vulnerability.
Upon accounting for age, the researchers established that both men and women with moderately elevated blood sugar levels, below the diabetic cutoff, confront elevated risks of developing any form of cardiovascular disease, with the risk increase being more pronounced for women.
However, intriguingly, the disparity in relative cardiovascular disease risk between genders fades once the researchers adjust for obesity metrics and the utilization of antihypertensive and statin therapies.
Furthermore, the study brought to light gender-based discrepancies in the employment of antihypertensive and statin treatments, with a higher prevalence among men. This discrepancy in prescription patterns implies that women with comparable blood sugar levels do not receive the same frequency of preventative medications as their male counterparts. The researchers emphasize the necessity for an investigation into the underlying causes of this observed “prescribing gap.”
Dr. Victoria Garfield, a co-author from UCL’s MRC Unit for Lifelong Health & Ageing, indicated that one of the most notable findings from the study was that individuals with the lowest blood sugar levels, when compared to those with normal levels, exhibited a decreased risk of cardiovascular disease. This discovery aligns with the team’s earlier research, which suggested potential cognitive benefits associated with being in the lowest blood sugar category, particularly concerning brain health.
Dr. Christopher Rentsch, the lead author from LSHTM, indicated that this study marks a significant advancement beyond decades of research into the relationship between diabetes and heart ailments. The research has quantified the disparities in heart disease risk between genders across the entire spectrum of blood sugar levels. What the findings unveil is that these risks extend beyond individuals with clinically diagnosed diabetes—both men and women with prediabetes are notably impacted. Moreover, the team has compellingly demonstrated that even within the ‘normal’ range of blood sugar levels, a lower level seems to offer superior protection against heart disease.
Ruth Goss, senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation that part-funded the study, says “This large study adds to what we know about the association between consistently elevated blood sugar levels and an increased risk of heart and circulatory diseases. However, it’s important to note that this can’t be applied to type 1 diabetes as people with the condition weren’t included in the analysis.”
