

, Daeun Jung3*
, Da Hyun Kang4*
, Hyeongseok Kim1,5,6, Junyoung O. Park7, Jun Young Heo1,5,6, Seong Eun Lee6, Hyun Jin Kim1,4, Ju Hee Lee1,4, Yea Eun Kang1,4,6

1Department of Medical Science, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
2Brain Korea 21 FOUR Project for Medical Science, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Korea
3Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
4Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
5Department of Biochemistry, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea
6System Network Inflammation Control Research Center, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Korea
7Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, 282 Munhwa-ro, Jung-gu, Daejeon 35015, Korea E-mail: yeeuni2200@gmail.com
Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, 282 Munhwa-ro, Jung-gu, Daejeon 35015, Korea E-mail: bonjeong@cnu.ac.kr Copyright © 2026 Korean Diabetes Association
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
FUNDING
This research was financially supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) (grant number RS-2021-NR061617). This work was supported by the NRF grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (grant number RS-2024-00406568). This work is also supported by the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the KHIDI, founded by the Ministry of Health and Welfare (grant number RS-2020-KH088690 and RS-2025- 24536373). We also thank the use of the Histopathology Core Facility of the Regional Medica Research Capability Enhancement Project, Biomedical Research Institute, Chungnam National University Hospital, for providing data analysis support.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
None
| Type | Biomarker | Population | Performance | P value | Predictive metric | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1DM | Neutrophil count | T1DM (n=416) vs. controls (n=7,479) | No difference in neutrophil count between T1DM and controls (−0.10×10⁹/L; 95% CI, −0.90 to 0.70) | >0.05 | - | Bambo et al. [63] |
| T1DM (n=102) vs. controls (n=75) | No difference in neutrophil count between T1DM and controls (3.4±1.2 vs. 3.3±1.7×10⁹/L) | 0.576 | - | Aukrust et al. [64] | ||
| T1DM (n=189) vs. controls (n=250) | Lower neutrophil count in T1DM compared to controls | <0.05 | Negative correlation with autoantibody titers: GADA (r=−0.200), IA−2A (r=−0.376), ZnT8A (r=−0.825) | Huang et al. [22] | ||
| NLR | T1DM children (n=102) vs. controls (n=65) | Higher NLR with increasing renal damage severity in T1DM (5.54 [95% CI, 2.58–9.55] vs. 1.80 [95% CI, 1.17–2.59] vs. 1.42 [95% CI, 1.02–1.95] vs. 1.12 [95% CI, 0.69–1.46]) | <0.001 | AUC 0.70 (95% CI, 0.603–0.804); cutoff: 2.17 | Cao et al. [111] | |
| T1DM patients with low vs. high insulin requirement (n=68) | Lower NLR in patients with low insulin requirement (NLR 1.6 [95% CI, 1.2–2.5] vs. 1.3 [95% CI, 1.0–1.8]) | 0.011 | - | Erbas et al. [71] | ||
| LADA | Neutrophil count | LADA (n=86) vs. Controls (n=145) | No significant difference in neutrophil count between LADA and controls | >0.05 | - | Huang et al. [22] |
| T2DM | Neutrophil count | T2DM (n=301) vs. prediabetes (n=167) vs. controls (n=359) | Higher neutrophil count in T2DM (3.74 vs. 3.26 vs. 3.18×10⁹/L) | <0.001 | OR, 1.427 (95% CI, 1.275–1.594; P<0.001) with HbA1c | Klisic et al. [23] |
| T2DM (n=100) vs. controls (n=100) | Higher neutrophil count in T2DM (5.29±1.51 vs. 3.540±0.338×10³/μL) | 0.026 | Correlation coefficient r=0.197 with FBS (P=0.050) | Al-Dewachi et al. [59] | ||
| T2DM (n=250) vs. controls (n=175) | Higher neutrophil count in T2DM (3.7±1.5 vs. 2.9±1.3×10³/μL) | <0.0001 | Correlation coefficient r=0.05811 | Essawi et al. [75] | ||
| Regulated T2DM (n=34) vs. unregulated T2DM (HbA1c >7%) (n=37) | Higher neutrophil count in unregulated T2DM (5.4±1.4 vs. 3.4±0.8×10⁶/L) | <0.001 | - | Sefil et al. [61] | ||
| T2DM patients with excellent control (n=110) vs. poor control (n=110) vs. worst control (n=110) | Higher neutrophil count in worse glycemic control (4.6±2.4 vs. 5.6±3.2 vs. 7.4±2.8×10⁹/L) | 0.001 | - | Hussain et al. [62] | ||
| T2DM (n=235) vs. controls (n=314) | Higher WBC and neutrophil counts in T2DM; progressive increase from T1DM → LADA → T2DM | <0.001 | Positive correlation with FCP (r=0.263), 2hCP (r=0.258) | Huang et al. [22] | ||
| NLR | T2DM (n=301) vs. prediabetes (n=167) vs. controls (n=359) | Higher NLR in T2DM (1.55 vs. 1.40 vs. 1.44) | 0.006 | OR, 1.350 (95% CI, 1.090–1.670) | Klisic et al. [23] | |
| T2DM (n=77) vs. controls (n=33) | Higher NLR in T2DM (2.44±1.9 vs. 1.5±0.9) | <0.001 | Correlation coefficient r=0.38 (with FPG), r=0.49 (with HbA1c) | Duman et al. [68] | ||
| T2DM (n=1,280) vs. controls (n=8,623) | Higher NLR associated with T2DM (2.12 vs. 1.88) | <0.001 | OR, 1.20 (95% CI, 1.13–1.28) | Chen et al. [70] | ||
| NGT (n=42) vs. IGT (n=25) vs. newly diagnosed (n=9) vs. established T2DM (n=34) | Progressive increase in NLR from NGT (1.37±0.69) to T2DM (2.07±0.95) | 0.004 | - | Mertoglu et al. [76] | ||
| Regulated T2DM (n=34) vs. unregulated T2DM (HbA1c >7%) (n=37) | Higher NLR in unregulated T2DM (1.97±0.57 vs. 1.45±0.56) | <0.001 | OR, 1.409 (95% CI, 0.912–1.906) | Sefil et al. [61] | ||
| T2DM patients with excellent control (n=110) vs. poor control (n=110) vs. worst control (n=110) | Higher NLR in worse glycemic control (2.0±0.5 vs. 2.7±1.0 vs. 4.3±2.8) | 0.001 | OR, 1.809 (95% CI, 1.459–2.401) for worst control | Hussain et al. [62] | ||
| T2DM patients (n=294) | Lower NLR (<1.940) associated with better quality of life in T2DM | <0.001 | OR, 0.987 (95% CI, 0.981–0.993) | Rias et al. [74] | ||
| PNR | T2DM (n=301) vs. prediabetes (n=167) vs. controls (n=359) | PNR was lowest in T2DM (62.10 vs. 68.20 vs. 73.77) | <0.001 | OR, 0.987 (95% CI, 0.981–0.993) | Klisic et al. [23] | |
| T2DM (n=250) vs. controls (n=175) | Lower PNR in T2DM (89±38.9 vs. 115±52) | <0.0001 | - | Essawi et al. [75] | ||
| NPAR | Participants (n=33,768) | Higher NPAR associated with diabetes | <0.05 | - | Wang et al. [77] | |
| DM (n=6,962) | Higher NPAR associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality | 0.001 | HR, 1.14 (95% CI, 1.12–1.15); AUC 0.809 | Li et al. [122] | ||
| DM (n=3,858) | Higher NPAR associated with higher risk of all‐cause mortality | <0.001 | HR, 1.58 (95% CI, 1.41–1.77); AUC 0.734 | Jing et al. [78] | ||
| SII | T2DM (n=90) vs. controls (n=90) | Higher SII in T2DM (14.9±4.5 vs. 5.9±2.4) | 0.005 | - | Lewis et al. [80] | |
| DM (n=1,266) vs. controls (n=6,611) | Higher SII in diabetes (597.58±419.76 vs. 532.32±334.90) | 0.0006 | OR, 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02–1.06) | Nie et al. [81] |
T1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus; CI, confidence interval; GADA, glutamic acid decarboxylase antibody; IA−2A, insulinoma-associated protein 2 antibody; ZnT8A, zinc transporter 8 autoantibody; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; AUC, area under the curve; LADA, latent autoimmune diabetes in adults; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; OR, odds ratio; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; FBS, fasting blood sugar; WBC, white blood cell; FCP, fecal calprotectin; 2hCP, 2-hour C-peptide; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; NGT, normal glucose tolerance; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; PNR, platelet-to-neutrophil ratio; NPAR, neutrophil-to-albumin ratio; SII, systemic immune-inflammation index.
| Diabetes type | Complication | Biomarker | Population | Performance | P value | Predictive metric | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1DM | Diabetic kidney disease | Circulating neutrophil | T1DM patients (n=226) | Higher neutrophil counts in DKD; correlated with ACR | 0.043 | OR, 1.659 (95% CI, 1.017–2.706) | Yu et al. [95] |
| NLR | T1DM patients (n=226) | Correlation with ln(ACR): r=0.312 | <0.001 | - | Yu et al. [95] | ||
| T1DM with/without early-stage DN (n=90) | Higher NLR in microalbuminuria (r=0.274 with urinary albumin) | 0.003 | AUC, 0.745; cutoff 1.675 | Yildirim et al. [103] | |||
| SII | T1DM with/without early-stage DN (n=102) | SII is an independent predictor of early kidney damage | <0.001 | OR, 1.002 (95% CI, 1.0008–1.0033); AUC 0.719 (95% CI, 0.612–0.826); cutoff ≥624.015 | Cao et al. [111] | ||
| Diabetic retinopathy | SII | T1DM without clinical DR (n=64) | Higher SII in T1DM (381.78 vs. 284.86); r=0.686 with choroidal thickness | <0.001 | - | Kahraman et al. [128] | |
| LADA | Diabetic kidney disease | NLR | LADA patients (normoalbuminuria vs. micro/macroalbuminuria) (n=79) | Higher NLR associated with albuminuria progression in LADA | <0.05 | AUC, 0.601 (95% CI, 0.510–0.693) | Xiang et al. [104] |
| T2DMa | Diabetic kidney disease | Circulating neutrophil | DKD patients (n=2,220) | Higher neutrophil counts associated with mortality; positive correlation with uACR | <0.001 | HR, 1.73 (95% CI, 1.34–2.25) | Xie et al. [94] |
| NLR | T2DM with/without early-stage DN (n=253) | Higher NLR in early-stage DN | 0.004 | OR, 2.09 (95% CI, 1.27–3.43) | Huang et al. [96] | ||
| T2DM patients (n=358) | NLR independently associated with rapid eGFR decline | 0.013 | OR, 8.03 (95% CI, 1.54–41.9; β=0.138) | Akase et al. [24] | |||
| Diabetic outpatients (n=386) | NLR negatively related to eGFR, positively related to UAE | 0.036 | OR, 1.77 (95% CI, 1.04–3.01) for microalbuminuria | Kawamoto et al. [97] | |||
| T2DM patients (n=200) | Albuminuria levels increased with increase of NLR | 0.045 | OR, 1.90 (95% CI, 1.02–3.56) | Akbas et al. [98] | |||
| Cross-sectional study (n=3,221) | Higher NLR associated with DKD | <0.001 | OR, 2.50 (95% CI, 1.95–3.19) | Wan et al. [99] | |||
| T2DM patients (n=376) | Higher neutrophil and lower lymphocyte counts in CKD; NLR best predictor of GFR | <0.001 | β=–1.995±0.45 | Nakhjavani et al. [100] | |||
| Diabetic patients (n=338, 3-year follow-up) | Higher NLR tertiles associated with worsening renal function; lowest tertile 2.7% vs. middle 8.7% vs. highest 11.5% | 0.016 | - | Azab et al. [4] | |||
| T2DM patients (n=1,224, 2-year follow-up) | Higher NLR predicted kidney function decline | <0.001 | HR, 1.39 (95% CI, 1.21–1.60) | Moh et al. [102] | |||
| NPAR | T2DM patients (n=2,755) | Positive correlation with DKD | <0.001 | OR, 1.49 (95% CI, 1.15–1.90) | Li et al. [105] | ||
| SII | NHANES data of T2DM patients (n=3,937) | High SII level associated with increased likelihood of DKD | 0.01 | OR, 1.42 (95% CI, 1.10–1.83) | Guo et al. [107] | ||
| T2DM with/without DKD (n=1,922) | SII level increased from non-DKD to DKD groups; positive with ACR, negative association with eGFR | <0.001 | OR, 2.74 (95% CI, 1.84–4.06); cutoff 609.85 | Yan et al. [108] | |||
| T2DM with/without DN (n=200) | SII is a risk factor for the occurrence of DN | 0.002 | OR, 1.004 (95% CI, 1.001–1.006); AUC, 0.761 (95% CI, 0.694–0.828) | Zhang et al. [109] | |||
| T2DM with/without DKI (n=539) | Median SII: DKI 584 vs. non-DKI 282 vs. control 236 | <0.001 | OR, 1.29 (95% CI, 1.01–1.42); cutoff >336 | Duman et al. [110] | |||
| Diabetic retinopathy | Circulating neutrophil | T2DM patients (n=30,793) | Higher ANC in DR vs. non-DR (3,900 vs. 3,566); linear trend with DR severity | 0.0143 | OR, 1.21 (95% CI, 1.05–1.39); AUC, 0.590 | Woo et al. [115] | |
| NLR | Meta-analysis (10 studies, n=1,911) | Higher NLR levels in DR patients vs. diabetic controls | <0.001 | SMD, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.43–1.03) | Luo et al. [25] | ||
| Three-group comparison (NDR/NPDR/PDR) (n=141) | Higher NLR in PDR vs. NPDR vs. NDR; significant predictor of DR | 0.028 | OR, 1.12 (95% CI, 0.20–2.04); AUC, 0.821 | Gao et al. [119] | |||
| Cross-sectional study (n=115) | Microvascular leakage correlated with NLR (r=0.186) | 0.027 | - | Huang et al. [118] | |||
| Proliferative DR patients (n=129) | NLR higher in PDR vs. NDR/NPDR | 0.005 | OR, 1.65 (95% CI, 1.19–2.28) | Dascalu et al. [129] | |||
| NPAR | Cross-sectional study (n=1,058) | Positive linear relationship between NPAR and DR | 0.019 | OR, 1.24 (95% CI, 1.04–1.48) for highest vs. lowest NPAR quartile | He et al. [26] | ||
| PNR | T2DM patients (n=248) | Lower PNR associated with increased risk of PDR | <0.05 | - | Ali et al. [123] | ||
| DME patients (n=115) | Lower PNR is an independent predictor of DME | <0.001 | OR, 12.05 (95% CI, 4.31–33.72); AUC, 0.832 | Sun et al. [124] | |||
| SII | Three-group comparison (NDR/NPDR/PDR) (n=141) | Higher in SII in PDR; significant predictor of DR | <0.001 | AUC, 0.925 | Gao et al. [119] | ||
| Diabetic neuropathy | NLR | 7 studies (Meta-analysis) (n=1,380) | Higher NLR in DPN vs. non DPN | <0.001 | OR, 2.86 (95% CI, 1.73–4.73) | Rezaei Shahrabi et al. [132] | |
| T2DM with/without DPN (n=557) | NLR significantly higher in DPN (2.58±0.50 vs. 2.18±0.61) | <0.001 | OR, 4.92 (95% CI, 1.94–12.45); cutoff 2.13 | Xu et al. [134] | |||
| SII | T2DM with/without DPN (n=1,460) | Higher SII quartiles associated with higher VPT and DPN prevalence | 0.011 | OR, 1.21 (95% CI, 1.05–1.40); cutoff 617.67 | Li et al. [135] |
T1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus; DKD, diabetic kidney disease; ACR, albumin-to-creatinine ratio; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; DN, diabetic neuropathy; AUC, area under the curve; SII, systemic immune-inflammation index; LADA, latent autoimmune diabetes in adults; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; uACR, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio; HR, hazard ratio; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; UAE, urinary albumin excretion; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; NPAR, neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio; NHANES, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; DKI, diabetic kidney injury; ANC, absolute neutrophil count; DR, diabetic retinopathy; SMD, standardized mean difference; NDR, non-diabetic retinopathy; NPDR, non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy; PDR, proliferative diabetic retinopathy; DME, diabetic macular edema; DPN, diabetic peripheral neuropathy; VPT, vibration perception threshold.
a Studies labeled as ‘T2DM’ include both explicitly identified T2DM populations and studies reporting ‘diabetes’ or ‘diabetic patients’ without specifying type, as these predominantly represent T2DM given its higher prevalence.
| Target/Strategy | Evidence | Neutrophil phenotype | Proposed mechanism | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. NETosis inhibition | Preclinical: Akita T1DM mouse with NET-deficient genetic model | Circulating NETs in Akita mice ↑ | NETosis → ↑ thromboxane B₂ (TXB₂) → impaired acetylcholine-mediated aortic relaxation in T1DM, linking NETs to vasoconstrictive prostanoid signaling | Liu et al. [136] |
| PAD4 or NE deficiency → NET markers ↓ | ||||
| Preclinical: STZ-induced DKD mouse | NET formation ↑ (CitH3, PAD4, dsDNA) in diabetes | High glucose-induced NETs → NLRP3 inflammasome activation in glomerular endothelial cells → eNOS dysfunction and GFB injury; PAD4/NET inhibition disrupts the NET–NLRP3–endothelium axis | Gupta et al. [137] | |
| In vitro: High glucose–treated glomerular endothelial cells and neutrophils | ||||
| Clinical: Human diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) | Spontaneous NETosis ↑, NET components ↑ (NE, PR3, extracellular DNA) | Diabetes primes neutrophils toward PAD4-dependent NETosis → excessive NET accumulation in wounds → delayed healing; pharmacologic PAD4/NET inhibition improves repair | Fadini et al. [138] | |
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse wound model | ||||
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse wound model | Diabetes primes neutrophils to exaggerated NETosis in wounds; NET accumulation delays healing; inhibition of NETosis accelerates closure | NETs → TLR9–PAK2 activation in endothelial cells → Merlin/NF2 phosphorylation → Hippo–YAP inhibition → YAP/SMAD2-driven EndMT, impaired angiogenesis, and delayed wound healing | Yang et al. [139] | |
| In vitro: Endothelial cells exposed to NETs | ||||
| 2. Hormone-driven NETosis modulation | Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse excisional wound model | GnRH agonist → NET formation ↑ | Neutrophil GnRH–GnRHR signaling → enhanced PAD4-dependent NETosis → exacerbated diabetic wound repair defects; GnRH blockade reverses this phenotype | Lee et al. [140] |
| In vitro: Human neutrophils | GnRH antagonist → NETosis ↓ | |||
| 3. Suppression of NET-inflammasome amplification | Clinical: Human DFU patients | Spontaneous NETosis ↑, NE/PR3 in DFU ↑ | MFG-E8 restrains the NET–NLRP3 inflammatory loop (NETs activate NLRP3 in macrophages → IL-1β/IL-18/TNF-α); rmMFG-E8 dampens NET-driven NLRP3 activation | Huang et al. [141] |
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse wound model | MFG-E8 deficiency → excessive NET accumulation | |||
| In vitro: Neutrophils and macrophages | ||||
| 4. Neutrophil elastase inhibition | Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse (retinopathy model) | NE activity ↑, leukostasis in diabetic retina ↑ | Neutrophil elastase → PAR2/MyD88/NF-κB signaling → endothelial barrier disruption and retinal vascular permeability; genetic or pharmacologic NE inhibition preserves barrier integrity | Liu et al. [86] |
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse (early diabetic retinopathy) | Neutrophil accumulation ↑, neutrophil-derived protease activity ↑ | Neutrophil-intrinsic proteases directly injure endothelial barriers → leukostasis, vascular leakage, and early capillary degeneration, identifying protease activity as a pathogenic effector and therapeutic entry point | Lessieur et al. [84] |
NETosis, neutrophil extracellular trap formation; T1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus; NET, neutrophil extracellular trap; PAD4, peptidylarginine deiminase 4; NE, neutrophil elastase; STZ, streptozotocin; DKD, diabetic kidney disease; CitH3, citrullinated histone H3; dsDNA, doublestranded DNA; NLRP3, NOD-like receptor family pyrin domain containing 3; NOD, nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain; eNOS, endothelial nitric oxide synthase; GFB, glomerular filtration barrier; PR3, proteinase 3; TLR9, Toll-like receptor 9; PAK2, p21-activated kinase 2; YAP, Yes-associated protein; SMAD2, SMAD family member 2; EndMT, endothelial-to-mesenchymal transition; GnRH, gonadotropin-releasing hormone; GnRHR, gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor; MFG-E8, milk fat globule–epidermal growth factor factor 8; IL, interleukin; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor alpha; rmMFG-E8, recombinant MFG-E8; PAR2, protease-activated receptor 2; MyD88, myeloid differentiation primary response 88; NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa B.
| Drug/Agent | Diabetes complications | Mechanisms of action | Effects on neutrophils | Study | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metformin | T2DM | Inhibition of PKC-βII membrane translocation → NADPH oxidase activation during NETosis ↓ | Circulating NET components (NE, PR3, histones, dsDNA)↓ vs. control PMA/Ca2+ -induced NETosis in vitro↓ (via PKC–NADPH oxidase pathway) | Menegazzo et al. [142] | |
| T2DM | Glycemic control with reduction in systemic inflammation ↓ (IL-6, TNF-α) | Baseline NETosis ↑ → normalized after metformin; ↓ circulating NET markers (nucleosomes, HNE–DNA) | Carestia et al. [143] | ||
| Diabetic osteopathy | Hyperglycemia-induced NET–macrophage inflammatory activation ↓ → osteogenic function restored | High glucose-induced NET formation ↓ NET-mediated inhibition of osteogenesis ↓; bone healing in diabetic models ↑ | Zhu et al. [144] | ||
| T2DM | AMPK activation ↑ → NF-κB signaling ↓ → systemic inflammatory indices ↓ | Neutrophil-driven inflammatory indices (e.g., NLR)↓ | Cameron et al. [145] | ||
| SGLT2 inhibitor | Empagliflozin | T2DM | Improved glycemic and lipid control with reduced systemic oxidative/inflammatory stress↓ | Monocyte count↓ and monocyte/HDL ratio↓ | Sen Uzeli et al. [146] |
| Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio shows no consistent change NLR not confirmed as a sensitive neutrophil-based marker in this setting | |||||
| Dapagliflozin | T2DM | Glycemic control via renal glucose excretion (fasting glucose ↓, HbA1c ↓) | Leukocyte count↑ and neutrophil count↑ after treatment | Topsakal et al. [147] | |
| Lymphocyte count unchanged; neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio unchanged | |||||
| Baseline NLR correlates with fasting glucose↑ but not with HbA1c | |||||
| SGLT2 inhibitor | T2DM with acute myocardial infarction | Association with reduced inflammatory burden and smaller infarct size independent of admission glycemia | Lower WBC, neutrophil count, and NLR/PLR/NPR at admission and 24-hour rise in neutrophils attenuated vs. non SGLT2 inhibitor users | Paolisso et al. [148] | |
| GLP-1RA | Liraglutide | Diabetic osteopathy | GLP-1R activation → SIRT1 activation ↑ → oxidative stress/inflammation ↓ → NETosis in bone microenvironment ↓ | Diabetes-induced NETs in bone↓ (CitH3, MPO, NE, PAD4↓) | Zhong et al. [149] |
| Thiazolidinedione | Rosiglitazone | T2DM | PPAR-γ activation → postprandial inflammatory response ↓ and neutrophil recruitment ↓ (with IL-6/IL-8 response attenuation) | Postprandial leukocyte excursion↓ (~37%); neutrophil-driven component↓ (~39%), post-fat-load IL-6 and IL-8↓ | van Wijk et al. [150] |
| Pioglitazone | Obesity-induced insulin resistance/T2DM | PPAR-γ activation → insulin resistance ↓ and systemic inflammation ↓; adipose inflammatory gene expression and ATM infiltration ↓ | Circulating WBC and neutrophils↑ with HFD; pioglitazone normalizes circulating neutrophils↓, circulating Ly6C hi monocytes and Ly6C hi counts↑; lymphocytes↓ | Kim et al. [151] |
T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; PKC-βII, protein kinase C beta II; NADPH, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate; NETosis, neutrophil extracellular trap formation; NET, neutrophil extracellular trap; NE, neutrophil elastase; PR3, proteinase 3; dsDNA, double-stranded DNA; PMA, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate; PKC, protein kinase C; IL, interleukin; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor alpha; HNE, human neutrophil elastase; AMPK, AMP-activated protein kinase; NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa B; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; SGLT2, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; WBC, white blood cell; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; NPR, neutrophil-to-platelet ratio; GLP-1RA, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist; SIRT1, sirtuin 1; CitH3, citrullinated histone H3; MPO, myeloperoxidase; PAD4, peptidylarginine deiminase 4; PPAR-γ, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma; ATM, adipose tissue macrophage; HFD, high-fat diet.
PubReader
ePub Link
Cite this Article
| Type | Biomarker | Population | Performance | P value | Predictive metric | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1DM | Neutrophil count | T1DM (n=416) vs. controls (n=7,479) | No difference in neutrophil count between T1DM and controls (−0.10×10⁹/L; 95% CI, −0.90 to 0.70) | >0.05 | - | Bambo et al. [63] |
| T1DM (n=102) vs. controls (n=75) | No difference in neutrophil count between T1DM and controls (3.4±1.2 vs. 3.3±1.7×10⁹/L) | 0.576 | - | Aukrust et al. [64] | ||
| T1DM (n=189) vs. controls (n=250) | Lower neutrophil count in T1DM compared to controls | <0.05 | Negative correlation with autoantibody titers: GADA (r=−0.200), IA−2A (r=−0.376), ZnT8A (r=−0.825) | Huang et al. [22] | ||
| NLR | T1DM children (n=102) vs. controls (n=65) | Higher NLR with increasing renal damage severity in T1DM (5.54 [95% CI, 2.58–9.55] vs. 1.80 [95% CI, 1.17–2.59] vs. 1.42 [95% CI, 1.02–1.95] vs. 1.12 [95% CI, 0.69–1.46]) | <0.001 | AUC 0.70 (95% CI, 0.603–0.804); cutoff: 2.17 | Cao et al. [111] | |
| T1DM patients with low vs. high insulin requirement (n=68) | Lower NLR in patients with low insulin requirement (NLR 1.6 [95% CI, 1.2–2.5] vs. 1.3 [95% CI, 1.0–1.8]) | 0.011 | - | Erbas et al. [71] | ||
| LADA | Neutrophil count | LADA (n=86) vs. Controls (n=145) | No significant difference in neutrophil count between LADA and controls | >0.05 | - | Huang et al. [22] |
| T2DM | Neutrophil count | T2DM (n=301) vs. prediabetes (n=167) vs. controls (n=359) | Higher neutrophil count in T2DM (3.74 vs. 3.26 vs. 3.18×10⁹/L) | <0.001 | OR, 1.427 (95% CI, 1.275–1.594; P<0.001) with HbA1c | Klisic et al. [23] |
| T2DM (n=100) vs. controls (n=100) | Higher neutrophil count in T2DM (5.29±1.51 vs. 3.540±0.338×10³/μL) | 0.026 | Correlation coefficient r=0.197 with FBS (P=0.050) | Al-Dewachi et al. [59] | ||
| T2DM (n=250) vs. controls (n=175) | Higher neutrophil count in T2DM (3.7±1.5 vs. 2.9±1.3×10³/μL) | <0.0001 | Correlation coefficient r=0.05811 | Essawi et al. [75] | ||
| Regulated T2DM (n=34) vs. unregulated T2DM (HbA1c >7%) (n=37) | Higher neutrophil count in unregulated T2DM (5.4±1.4 vs. 3.4±0.8×10⁶/L) | <0.001 | - | Sefil et al. [61] | ||
| T2DM patients with excellent control (n=110) vs. poor control (n=110) vs. worst control (n=110) | Higher neutrophil count in worse glycemic control (4.6±2.4 vs. 5.6±3.2 vs. 7.4±2.8×10⁹/L) | 0.001 | - | Hussain et al. [62] | ||
| T2DM (n=235) vs. controls (n=314) | Higher WBC and neutrophil counts in T2DM; progressive increase from T1DM → LADA → T2DM | <0.001 | Positive correlation with FCP (r=0.263), 2hCP (r=0.258) | Huang et al. [22] | ||
| NLR | T2DM (n=301) vs. prediabetes (n=167) vs. controls (n=359) | Higher NLR in T2DM (1.55 vs. 1.40 vs. 1.44) | 0.006 | OR, 1.350 (95% CI, 1.090–1.670) | Klisic et al. [23] | |
| T2DM (n=77) vs. controls (n=33) | Higher NLR in T2DM (2.44±1.9 vs. 1.5±0.9) | <0.001 | Correlation coefficient r=0.38 (with FPG), r=0.49 (with HbA1c) | Duman et al. [68] | ||
| T2DM (n=1,280) vs. controls (n=8,623) | Higher NLR associated with T2DM (2.12 vs. 1.88) | <0.001 | OR, 1.20 (95% CI, 1.13–1.28) | Chen et al. [70] | ||
| NGT (n=42) vs. IGT (n=25) vs. newly diagnosed (n=9) vs. established T2DM (n=34) | Progressive increase in NLR from NGT (1.37±0.69) to T2DM (2.07±0.95) | 0.004 | - | Mertoglu et al. [76] | ||
| Regulated T2DM (n=34) vs. unregulated T2DM (HbA1c >7%) (n=37) | Higher NLR in unregulated T2DM (1.97±0.57 vs. 1.45±0.56) | <0.001 | OR, 1.409 (95% CI, 0.912–1.906) | Sefil et al. [61] | ||
| T2DM patients with excellent control (n=110) vs. poor control (n=110) vs. worst control (n=110) | Higher NLR in worse glycemic control (2.0±0.5 vs. 2.7±1.0 vs. 4.3±2.8) | 0.001 | OR, 1.809 (95% CI, 1.459–2.401) for worst control | Hussain et al. [62] | ||
| T2DM patients (n=294) | Lower NLR (<1.940) associated with better quality of life in T2DM | <0.001 | OR, 0.987 (95% CI, 0.981–0.993) | Rias et al. [74] | ||
| PNR | T2DM (n=301) vs. prediabetes (n=167) vs. controls (n=359) | PNR was lowest in T2DM (62.10 vs. 68.20 vs. 73.77) | <0.001 | OR, 0.987 (95% CI, 0.981–0.993) | Klisic et al. [23] | |
| T2DM (n=250) vs. controls (n=175) | Lower PNR in T2DM (89±38.9 vs. 115±52) | <0.0001 | - | Essawi et al. [75] | ||
| NPAR | Participants (n=33,768) | Higher NPAR associated with diabetes | <0.05 | - | Wang et al. [77] | |
| DM (n=6,962) | Higher NPAR associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality | 0.001 | HR, 1.14 (95% CI, 1.12–1.15); AUC 0.809 | Li et al. [122] | ||
| DM (n=3,858) | Higher NPAR associated with higher risk of all‐cause mortality | <0.001 | HR, 1.58 (95% CI, 1.41–1.77); AUC 0.734 | Jing et al. [78] | ||
| SII | T2DM (n=90) vs. controls (n=90) | Higher SII in T2DM (14.9±4.5 vs. 5.9±2.4) | 0.005 | - | Lewis et al. [80] | |
| DM (n=1,266) vs. controls (n=6,611) | Higher SII in diabetes (597.58±419.76 vs. 532.32±334.90) | 0.0006 | OR, 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02–1.06) | Nie et al. [81] |
| Diabetes type | Complication | Biomarker | Population | Performance | P value | Predictive metric | Study |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1DM | Diabetic kidney disease | Circulating neutrophil | T1DM patients (n=226) | Higher neutrophil counts in DKD; correlated with ACR | 0.043 | OR, 1.659 (95% CI, 1.017–2.706) | Yu et al. [95] |
| NLR | T1DM patients (n=226) | Correlation with ln(ACR): r=0.312 | <0.001 | - | Yu et al. [95] | ||
| T1DM with/without early-stage DN (n=90) | Higher NLR in microalbuminuria (r=0.274 with urinary albumin) | 0.003 | AUC, 0.745; cutoff 1.675 | Yildirim et al. [103] | |||
| SII | T1DM with/without early-stage DN (n=102) | SII is an independent predictor of early kidney damage | <0.001 | OR, 1.002 (95% CI, 1.0008–1.0033); AUC 0.719 (95% CI, 0.612–0.826); cutoff ≥624.015 | Cao et al. [111] | ||
| Diabetic retinopathy | SII | T1DM without clinical DR (n=64) | Higher SII in T1DM (381.78 vs. 284.86); r=0.686 with choroidal thickness | <0.001 | - | Kahraman et al. [128] | |
| LADA | Diabetic kidney disease | NLR | LADA patients (normoalbuminuria vs. micro/macroalbuminuria) (n=79) | Higher NLR associated with albuminuria progression in LADA | <0.05 | AUC, 0.601 (95% CI, 0.510–0.693) | Xiang et al. [104] |
| T2DM |
Diabetic kidney disease | Circulating neutrophil | DKD patients (n=2,220) | Higher neutrophil counts associated with mortality; positive correlation with uACR | <0.001 | HR, 1.73 (95% CI, 1.34–2.25) | Xie et al. [94] |
| NLR | T2DM with/without early-stage DN (n=253) | Higher NLR in early-stage DN | 0.004 | OR, 2.09 (95% CI, 1.27–3.43) | Huang et al. [96] | ||
| T2DM patients (n=358) | NLR independently associated with rapid eGFR decline | 0.013 | OR, 8.03 (95% CI, 1.54–41.9; β=0.138) | Akase et al. [24] | |||
| Diabetic outpatients (n=386) | NLR negatively related to eGFR, positively related to UAE | 0.036 | OR, 1.77 (95% CI, 1.04–3.01) for microalbuminuria | Kawamoto et al. [97] | |||
| T2DM patients (n=200) | Albuminuria levels increased with increase of NLR | 0.045 | OR, 1.90 (95% CI, 1.02–3.56) | Akbas et al. [98] | |||
| Cross-sectional study (n=3,221) | Higher NLR associated with DKD | <0.001 | OR, 2.50 (95% CI, 1.95–3.19) | Wan et al. [99] | |||
| T2DM patients (n=376) | Higher neutrophil and lower lymphocyte counts in CKD; NLR best predictor of GFR | <0.001 | β=–1.995±0.45 | Nakhjavani et al. [100] | |||
| Diabetic patients (n=338, 3-year follow-up) | Higher NLR tertiles associated with worsening renal function; lowest tertile 2.7% vs. middle 8.7% vs. highest 11.5% | 0.016 | - | Azab et al. [4] | |||
| T2DM patients (n=1,224, 2-year follow-up) | Higher NLR predicted kidney function decline | <0.001 | HR, 1.39 (95% CI, 1.21–1.60) | Moh et al. [102] | |||
| NPAR | T2DM patients (n=2,755) | Positive correlation with DKD | <0.001 | OR, 1.49 (95% CI, 1.15–1.90) | Li et al. [105] | ||
| SII | NHANES data of T2DM patients (n=3,937) | High SII level associated with increased likelihood of DKD | 0.01 | OR, 1.42 (95% CI, 1.10–1.83) | Guo et al. [107] | ||
| T2DM with/without DKD (n=1,922) | SII level increased from non-DKD to DKD groups; positive with ACR, negative association with eGFR | <0.001 | OR, 2.74 (95% CI, 1.84–4.06); cutoff 609.85 | Yan et al. [108] | |||
| T2DM with/without DN (n=200) | SII is a risk factor for the occurrence of DN | 0.002 | OR, 1.004 (95% CI, 1.001–1.006); AUC, 0.761 (95% CI, 0.694–0.828) | Zhang et al. [109] | |||
| T2DM with/without DKI (n=539) | Median SII: DKI 584 vs. non-DKI 282 vs. control 236 | <0.001 | OR, 1.29 (95% CI, 1.01–1.42); cutoff >336 | Duman et al. [110] | |||
| Diabetic retinopathy | Circulating neutrophil | T2DM patients (n=30,793) | Higher ANC in DR vs. non-DR (3,900 vs. 3,566); linear trend with DR severity | 0.0143 | OR, 1.21 (95% CI, 1.05–1.39); AUC, 0.590 | Woo et al. [115] | |
| NLR | Meta-analysis (10 studies, n=1,911) | Higher NLR levels in DR patients vs. diabetic controls | <0.001 | SMD, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.43–1.03) | Luo et al. [25] | ||
| Three-group comparison (NDR/NPDR/PDR) (n=141) | Higher NLR in PDR vs. NPDR vs. NDR; significant predictor of DR | 0.028 | OR, 1.12 (95% CI, 0.20–2.04); AUC, 0.821 | Gao et al. [119] | |||
| Cross-sectional study (n=115) | Microvascular leakage correlated with NLR (r=0.186) | 0.027 | - | Huang et al. [118] | |||
| Proliferative DR patients (n=129) | NLR higher in PDR vs. NDR/NPDR | 0.005 | OR, 1.65 (95% CI, 1.19–2.28) | Dascalu et al. [129] | |||
| NPAR | Cross-sectional study (n=1,058) | Positive linear relationship between NPAR and DR | 0.019 | OR, 1.24 (95% CI, 1.04–1.48) for highest vs. lowest NPAR quartile | He et al. [26] | ||
| PNR | T2DM patients (n=248) | Lower PNR associated with increased risk of PDR | <0.05 | - | Ali et al. [123] | ||
| DME patients (n=115) | Lower PNR is an independent predictor of DME | <0.001 | OR, 12.05 (95% CI, 4.31–33.72); AUC, 0.832 | Sun et al. [124] | |||
| SII | Three-group comparison (NDR/NPDR/PDR) (n=141) | Higher in SII in PDR; significant predictor of DR | <0.001 | AUC, 0.925 | Gao et al. [119] | ||
| Diabetic neuropathy | NLR | 7 studies (Meta-analysis) (n=1,380) | Higher NLR in DPN vs. non DPN | <0.001 | OR, 2.86 (95% CI, 1.73–4.73) | Rezaei Shahrabi et al. [132] | |
| T2DM with/without DPN (n=557) | NLR significantly higher in DPN (2.58±0.50 vs. 2.18±0.61) | <0.001 | OR, 4.92 (95% CI, 1.94–12.45); cutoff 2.13 | Xu et al. [134] | |||
| SII | T2DM with/without DPN (n=1,460) | Higher SII quartiles associated with higher VPT and DPN prevalence | 0.011 | OR, 1.21 (95% CI, 1.05–1.40); cutoff 617.67 | Li et al. [135] |
| Target/Strategy | Evidence | Neutrophil phenotype | Proposed mechanism | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. NETosis inhibition | Preclinical: Akita T1DM mouse with NET-deficient genetic model | Circulating NETs in Akita mice ↑ | NETosis → ↑ thromboxane B₂ (TXB₂) → impaired acetylcholine-mediated aortic relaxation in T1DM, linking NETs to vasoconstrictive prostanoid signaling | Liu et al. [136] |
| PAD4 or NE deficiency → NET markers ↓ | ||||
| Preclinical: STZ-induced DKD mouse | NET formation ↑ (CitH3, PAD4, dsDNA) in diabetes | High glucose-induced NETs → NLRP3 inflammasome activation in glomerular endothelial cells → eNOS dysfunction and GFB injury; PAD4/NET inhibition disrupts the NET–NLRP3–endothelium axis | Gupta et al. [137] | |
| In vitro: High glucose–treated glomerular endothelial cells and neutrophils | ||||
| Clinical: Human diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) | Spontaneous NETosis ↑, NET components ↑ (NE, PR3, extracellular DNA) | Diabetes primes neutrophils toward PAD4-dependent NETosis → excessive NET accumulation in wounds → delayed healing; pharmacologic PAD4/NET inhibition improves repair | Fadini et al. [138] | |
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse wound model | ||||
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse wound model | Diabetes primes neutrophils to exaggerated NETosis in wounds; NET accumulation delays healing; inhibition of NETosis accelerates closure | NETs → TLR9–PAK2 activation in endothelial cells → Merlin/NF2 phosphorylation → Hippo–YAP inhibition → YAP/SMAD2-driven EndMT, impaired angiogenesis, and delayed wound healing | Yang et al. [139] | |
| In vitro: Endothelial cells exposed to NETs | ||||
| 2. Hormone-driven NETosis modulation | Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse excisional wound model | GnRH agonist → NET formation ↑ | Neutrophil GnRH–GnRHR signaling → enhanced PAD4-dependent NETosis → exacerbated diabetic wound repair defects; GnRH blockade reverses this phenotype | Lee et al. [140] |
| In vitro: Human neutrophils | GnRH antagonist → NETosis ↓ | |||
| 3. Suppression of NET-inflammasome amplification | Clinical: Human DFU patients | Spontaneous NETosis ↑, NE/PR3 in DFU ↑ | MFG-E8 restrains the NET–NLRP3 inflammatory loop (NETs activate NLRP3 in macrophages → IL-1β/IL-18/TNF-α); rmMFG-E8 dampens NET-driven NLRP3 activation | Huang et al. [141] |
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse wound model | MFG-E8 deficiency → excessive NET accumulation | |||
| In vitro: Neutrophils and macrophages | ||||
| 4. Neutrophil elastase inhibition | Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse (retinopathy model) | NE activity ↑, leukostasis in diabetic retina ↑ | Neutrophil elastase → PAR2/MyD88/NF-κB signaling → endothelial barrier disruption and retinal vascular permeability; genetic or pharmacologic NE inhibition preserves barrier integrity | Liu et al. [86] |
| Preclinical: STZ-induced diabetic mouse (early diabetic retinopathy) | Neutrophil accumulation ↑, neutrophil-derived protease activity ↑ | Neutrophil-intrinsic proteases directly injure endothelial barriers → leukostasis, vascular leakage, and early capillary degeneration, identifying protease activity as a pathogenic effector and therapeutic entry point | Lessieur et al. [84] |
| Drug/Agent | Diabetes complications | Mechanisms of action | Effects on neutrophils | Study | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metformin | T2DM | Inhibition of PKC-βII membrane translocation → NADPH oxidase activation during NETosis ↓ | Circulating NET components (NE, PR3, histones, dsDNA)↓ vs. control PMA/Ca2+ -induced NETosis in vitro↓ (via PKC–NADPH oxidase pathway) | Menegazzo et al. [142] | |
| T2DM | Glycemic control with reduction in systemic inflammation ↓ (IL-6, TNF-α) | Baseline NETosis ↑ → normalized after metformin; ↓ circulating NET markers (nucleosomes, HNE–DNA) | Carestia et al. [143] | ||
| Diabetic osteopathy | Hyperglycemia-induced NET–macrophage inflammatory activation ↓ → osteogenic function restored | High glucose-induced NET formation ↓ NET-mediated inhibition of osteogenesis ↓; bone healing in diabetic models ↑ | Zhu et al. [144] | ||
| T2DM | AMPK activation ↑ → NF-κB signaling ↓ → systemic inflammatory indices ↓ | Neutrophil-driven inflammatory indices (e.g., NLR)↓ | Cameron et al. [145] | ||
| SGLT2 inhibitor | Empagliflozin | T2DM | Improved glycemic and lipid control with reduced systemic oxidative/inflammatory stress↓ | Monocyte count↓ and monocyte/HDL ratio↓ | Sen Uzeli et al. [146] |
| Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio shows no consistent change NLR not confirmed as a sensitive neutrophil-based marker in this setting | |||||
| Dapagliflozin | T2DM | Glycemic control via renal glucose excretion (fasting glucose ↓, HbA1c ↓) | Leukocyte count↑ and neutrophil count↑ after treatment | Topsakal et al. [147] | |
| Lymphocyte count unchanged; neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio unchanged | |||||
| Baseline NLR correlates with fasting glucose↑ but not with HbA1c | |||||
| SGLT2 inhibitor | T2DM with acute myocardial infarction | Association with reduced inflammatory burden and smaller infarct size independent of admission glycemia | Lower WBC, neutrophil count, and NLR/PLR/NPR at admission and 24-hour rise in neutrophils attenuated vs. non SGLT2 inhibitor users | Paolisso et al. [148] | |
| GLP-1RA | Liraglutide | Diabetic osteopathy | GLP-1R activation → SIRT1 activation ↑ → oxidative stress/inflammation ↓ → NETosis in bone microenvironment ↓ | Diabetes-induced NETs in bone↓ (CitH3, MPO, NE, PAD4↓) | Zhong et al. [149] |
| Thiazolidinedione | Rosiglitazone | T2DM | PPAR-γ activation → postprandial inflammatory response ↓ and neutrophil recruitment ↓ (with IL-6/IL-8 response attenuation) | Postprandial leukocyte excursion↓ (~37%); neutrophil-driven component↓ (~39%), post-fat-load IL-6 and IL-8↓ | van Wijk et al. [150] |
| Pioglitazone | Obesity-induced insulin resistance/T2DM | PPAR-γ activation → insulin resistance ↓ and systemic inflammation ↓; adipose inflammatory gene expression and ATM infiltration ↓ | Circulating WBC and neutrophils↑ with HFD; pioglitazone normalizes circulating neutrophils↓, circulating Ly6C hi monocytes and Ly6C hi counts↑; lymphocytes↓ | Kim et al. [151] |
T1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus; CI, confidence interval; GADA, glutamic acid decarboxylase antibody; IA−2A, insulinoma-associated protein 2 antibody; ZnT8A, zinc transporter 8 autoantibody; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; AUC, area under the curve; LADA, latent autoimmune diabetes in adults; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; OR, odds ratio; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; FBS, fasting blood sugar; WBC, white blood cell; FCP, fecal calprotectin; 2hCP, 2-hour C-peptide; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; NGT, normal glucose tolerance; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; PNR, platelet-to-neutrophil ratio; NPAR, neutrophil-to-albumin ratio; SII, systemic immune-inflammation index.
T1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus; DKD, diabetic kidney disease; ACR, albumin-to-creatinine ratio; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; DN, diabetic neuropathy; AUC, area under the curve; SII, systemic immune-inflammation index; LADA, latent autoimmune diabetes in adults; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; uACR, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio; HR, hazard ratio; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; UAE, urinary albumin excretion; GFR, glomerular filtration rate; NPAR, neutrophil percentage-to-albumin ratio; NHANES, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; DKI, diabetic kidney injury; ANC, absolute neutrophil count; DR, diabetic retinopathy; SMD, standardized mean difference; NDR, non-diabetic retinopathy; NPDR, non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy; PDR, proliferative diabetic retinopathy; DME, diabetic macular edema; DPN, diabetic peripheral neuropathy; VPT, vibration perception threshold. Studies labeled as ‘T2DM’ include both explicitly identified T2DM populations and studies reporting ‘diabetes’ or ‘diabetic patients’ without specifying type, as these predominantly represent T2DM given its higher prevalence.
NETosis, neutrophil extracellular trap formation; T1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus; NET, neutrophil extracellular trap; PAD4, peptidylarginine deiminase 4; NE, neutrophil elastase; STZ, streptozotocin; DKD, diabetic kidney disease; CitH3, citrullinated histone H3; dsDNA, doublestranded DNA; NLRP3, NOD-like receptor family pyrin domain containing 3; NOD, nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain; eNOS, endothelial nitric oxide synthase; GFB, glomerular filtration barrier; PR3, proteinase 3; TLR9, Toll-like receptor 9; PAK2, p21-activated kinase 2; YAP, Yes-associated protein; SMAD2, SMAD family member 2; EndMT, endothelial-to-mesenchymal transition; GnRH, gonadotropin-releasing hormone; GnRHR, gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor; MFG-E8, milk fat globule–epidermal growth factor factor 8; IL, interleukin; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor alpha; rmMFG-E8, recombinant MFG-E8; PAR2, protease-activated receptor 2; MyD88, myeloid differentiation primary response 88; NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa B.
T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; PKC-βII, protein kinase C beta II; NADPH, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate; NETosis, neutrophil extracellular trap formation; NET, neutrophil extracellular trap; NE, neutrophil elastase; PR3, proteinase 3; dsDNA, double-stranded DNA; PMA, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate; PKC, protein kinase C; IL, interleukin; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor alpha; HNE, human neutrophil elastase; AMPK, AMP-activated protein kinase; NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa B; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; SGLT2, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; WBC, white blood cell; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; NPR, neutrophil-to-platelet ratio; GLP-1RA, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist; SIRT1, sirtuin 1; CitH3, citrullinated histone H3; MPO, myeloperoxidase; PAD4, peptidylarginine deiminase 4; PPAR-γ, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma; ATM, adipose tissue macrophage; HFD, high-fat diet.
