B Greg Brown1, Karen Hinckley Stukovsky, Xue-Qiao Zhao. 1. Cardiology Division, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA. bgbrown@u.washington.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Our analysis presents an alternative hypothesis to the prevailing view that low-density lipoprotein-C is the only important target of lipid therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Two recently published studies showed surprising results. In the Armed Forces Regression Study, low-density lipoprotein-C was lowered only 22% with cholystyramine, niacin and gemfibrozil. Coronary stenosis regressed, however, and the primary clinical event rate was reduced by 54%. Conversely, in the FIELD trial, the primary event rate reduction was only 11% (P = NS). These differences appeared to be explained largely by the difference in high-density lipoprotein response to these regimens (38 vs. 3%). This meta-analysis of 23 trials strongly supports the notion that the sum of percent reduction in low-density lipoprotein-C plus percent increase in high-density lipoprotein-C predicts benefits much more effectively than either lipoprotein component. SUMMARY: Epidemiology suggests that the cardiovascular event rate is reduced by nearly 1% for each 1% reduction in low-density lipoprotein-C and by at least 1% for each 1% increase in high-density lipoprotein. These effects are statistically independent; thus, for moderate lipid changes, they are additive. If this simple algorithm is proven accurate, a 30% high-density lipoprotein-C increase and a 40% low-density lipoprotein-C reduction would result in a nearly 70% CHD risk reduction - and a revolution in cardiovascular prevention.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Our analysis presents an alternative hypothesis to the prevailing view that low-density lipoprotein-C is the only important target of lipid therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Two recently published studies showed surprising results. In the Armed Forces Regression Study, low-density lipoprotein-C was lowered only 22% with cholystyramine, niacin and gemfibrozil. Coronary stenosis regressed, however, and the primary clinical event rate was reduced by 54%. Conversely, in the FIELD trial, the primary event rate reduction was only 11% (P = NS). These differences appeared to be explained largely by the difference in high-density lipoprotein response to these regimens (38 vs. 3%). This meta-analysis of 23 trials strongly supports the notion that the sum of percent reduction in low-density lipoprotein-C plus percent increase in high-density lipoprotein-C predicts benefits much more effectively than either lipoprotein component. SUMMARY: Epidemiology suggests that the cardiovascular event rate is reduced by nearly 1% for each 1% reduction in low-density lipoprotein-C and by at least 1% for each 1% increase in high-density lipoprotein. These effects are statistically independent; thus, for moderate lipid changes, they are additive. If this simple algorithm is proven accurate, a 30% high-density lipoprotein-C increase and a 40% low-density lipoprotein-C reduction would result in a nearly 70% CHD risk reduction - and a revolution in cardiovascular prevention.
Authors: S Dodic; D Kovacevic; M Bjelobrk; M Petrovic; T Miljkovic; M Cankovic; B Vujin; N Cemerlic-Adjic; B Dodic Journal: Herz Date: 2013-08-03 Impact factor: 1.443
Authors: Stefan Schandelmaier; Matthias Briel; Ramon Saccilotto; Kelechi K Olu; Armon Arpagaus; Lars G Hemkens; Alain J Nordmann Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-06-14
Authors: Binh An P Phan; Andrew B Moore; Joseph Davis; Laura J Pollan; Blazej Neradilek; B Greg Brown; Xue-Qiao Zhao Journal: J Clin Lipidol Date: 2014-07-12 Impact factor: 4.766
Authors: Xue-Qiao Zhao; Richard A Krasuski; Jefferson Baer; Edwin J Whitney; Blazej Neradilek; Alan Chait; Santica Marcovina; John J Albers; B Greg Brown Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2009-12-01 Impact factor: 2.778