Skip to main content

Table 3 Correlations between primary outcome variables and clinical characteristics at baseline and twelve-months

From: The therapeutic efficacy of intensive medical therapy in ameliorating high-density lipoprotein dysfunction in subjects with type two diabetes

 

Parameter

n

rho

95 % CI

p value

Baseline Combined Group Correlations

     

 Cp Activity

Age

21

−0.46

(−0.88,−0.03)

0.037

 MPO Activity

Total cholesterol

21

0.55

(0.14,0.95)

0.011

 PON1 Activity

Total cholesterol

21

0.46

(0.03,0.89)

0.036

 

Systolic blood pressure

21

0.45

(0.03,0.88)

0.038

 pHDL Assay

Body mass index

21

0.74

(0.42,1.00)

< 0.001

 

Fasting insulin

21

0.73

(0.41,1.00)

< 0.001

 

Fasting glucose

21

0.71

(0.37,1.00)

< 0.001

 

HOMA

21

0.72

(0.38,1.00)

< 0.001

 

High-density lipoproteins

21

−0.65

(−1.00,−0.29)

0.001

 

Triglycerides

21

0.53

(0.12,0.94)

0.014

 

Systolic blood pressure

21

0.74

(0.41,1.00)

< 0.001

 

Diastolic blood pressure

21

0.61

(0.22,0.99)

0.004

Baseline Correlations among T2D

     

 Cp Activity

C-reactive protein

12

0.66

(0.13,1.00)

0.019

 PON1 Activity

High-density lipoproteins

12

0.78

(0.35,1.00)

0.003

 pHDL Assay

Low-density lipoproteins

12

0.59

(0.03,1.00)

0.042

One Year Correlations among T2D

     

 Cp - Difference

C-reactive protein – difference

12

0.69

(0.19,1.00)

0.012

 

Tumor necrosis factor – difference

12

0.79

(0.36,1.00)

0.002

 MPO - Difference

Fasting cholesterol – difference

12

0.59

(0.02,1.00)

0.044

 pHDL - Difference

Weight – difference

12

0.62

(0.07,1.00)

0.032

 

Fasting glucose – difference

12

0.65

(0.12,1.00)

0.022

  1. Intent-to-treat analysis, r-values: Spearman correlation
  2. Cp ceruloplasmin, MPO myeloperoxidase, PON1 paraoxonase one, pHDL pro-inflammatory high-density lipoproteins