OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to elucidate whether an antibody against oxidized low density lipoprotein (anti-Ox-LDL) could predict short-term coronary artery atherosclerotic lesion progression. BACKGROUND: It is still controversial whether higher levels of the anti-Ox-LDL titer are associated with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. METHODS: In 52 patients undergoing coronary angioplasty and six-month follow-up angiography, we performed quantitative coronary angiographic analysis of a lesion on a branch away from the intervention site vessel and assessed lesion progression or regression using the Progression-Regression score calculated as the baseline minimal lumen diameter minus the follow-up minimal lumen diameter. The serum anti-Ox-LDL titer was measured using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method just before the initial angiography in all patients. RESULTS: The anti-Ox-LDL titer was 16.6+/-1.5 AcU/ml in the progression group (Progression-Regression score >0.15 mm; n = 20), which was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than the value of 9.5+/-1.2 in the regression group (< or =-0.15 mm; n = 14) and also higher (p < 0.01) than the value of 11.4+/-1.3 in the no-change group (-0.15 to 0.15 mm; n = 18). The Progression-Regression score was correlated with the antibody titer in all patients (r = 0.56, p < 0.001). Multiple regression analysis showed that the Progression-Regression score was independently correlated with the antibody titer (r = 0.44, p < 0.01) as well as lipoprotein (a) (r = 0.33, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-Ox-LDL may be an independent predictor of coronary atherosclerotic lesion progression in the short term.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to elucidate whether an antibody against oxidized low density lipoprotein (anti-Ox-LDL) could predict short-term coronary artery atherosclerotic lesion progression. BACKGROUND: It is still controversial whether higher levels of the anti-Ox-LDL titer are associated with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. METHODS: In 52 patients undergoing coronary angioplasty and six-month follow-up angiography, we performed quantitative coronary angiographic analysis of a lesion on a branch away from the intervention site vessel and assessed lesion progression or regression using the Progression-Regression score calculated as the baseline minimal lumen diameter minus the follow-up minimal lumen diameter. The serum anti-Ox-LDL titer was measured using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method just before the initial angiography in all patients. RESULTS: The anti-Ox-LDL titer was 16.6+/-1.5 AcU/ml in the progression group (Progression-Regression score >0.15 mm; n = 20), which was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than the value of 9.5+/-1.2 in the regression group (< or =-0.15 mm; n = 14) and also higher (p < 0.01) than the value of 11.4+/-1.3 in the no-change group (-0.15 to 0.15 mm; n = 18). The Progression-Regression score was correlated with the antibody titer in all patients (r = 0.56, p < 0.001). Multiple regression analysis showed that the Progression-Regression score was independently correlated with the antibody titer (r = 0.44, p < 0.01) as well as lipoprotein (a) (r = 0.33, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-Ox-LDL may be an independent predictor of coronary atherosclerotic lesion progression in the short term.