BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that patients with high HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) may have dysfunctional HDL or unrecognized nonconventional risk factors. METHODS: Individuals with IHD (Copenhagen University Hospital) and either high HDL-C (n = 53; women >or=735 mg/L; men >or=619 mg/L) or low HDL-C (n = 42; women <or=387 mg/L; men <or=341 mg/L) were compared with individuals without IHD (Copenhagen City Heart Study) matched by age, sex, and HDL-C concentrations (n = 110). All participants had concentrations within reference intervals for LDL-C (<1600 mg/L) and triglyceride (<1500 mg/L), and none were treated with lipid-lowering medications. Pre-beta(1) HDL and phospholipid transfer protein concentrations were measured by using commercial kits and lecithin:cholesterol acyltransferase (LCAT) activity by using a proteoliposome cholesterol esterification assay. RESULTS: Pre-beta(1) HDL concentrations were 2-fold higher in individuals with IHD vs no IHD in both the high [63 (5.7) vs 35 (2.3) mg/L; P < 0.0001] and low HDL-C [49 (5.0) vs 27 (1.5) mg/L; P = 0.001] groups. Low LCAT activity was also associated with IHD in the high [95.2 (6.7) vs 123.0 (5.3) micromol x L(-1) x h(-1); P = 0.002] and low [93.4 (8.3) vs 113.5 (4.9) micromol x L(-1) . h(-1); P = 0.03] HDL-C groups. ROC curves for pre-beta(1) HDL in the high-HDL-C groups yielded an area under the curve of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.81) for predicting IHD, which increased to 0.92 (0.87-0.97) when LCAT was included. Similar results were obtained for low HDL-C groups. An inverse correlation between LCAT activity and pre-beta(1) HDL was observed (r(2) = 0.30; P < 0.0001) in IHD participants, which was stronger in the low HDL-C group (r(2) = 0.56; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: IHD was associated with high pre-beta(1) HDL concentrations and low LCAT levels, yielding correct classification in more than 90% of the IHD cases for which both were measured, thus making pre-beta(1) HDL concentration and LCAT activity level potentially useful diagnostic markers for cardiovascular disease.
BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that patients with high HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) may have dysfunctional HDL or unrecognized nonconventional risk factors. METHODS: Individuals with IHD (Copenhagen University Hospital) and either high HDL-C (n = 53; women >or=735 mg/L; men >or=619 mg/L) or low HDL-C (n = 42; women <or=387 mg/L; men <or=341 mg/L) were compared with individuals without IHD (Copenhagen City Heart Study) matched by age, sex, and HDL-C concentrations (n = 110). All participants had concentrations within reference intervals for LDL-C (<1600 mg/L) and triglyceride (<1500 mg/L), and none were treated with lipid-lowering medications. Pre-beta(1) HDL and phospholipid transfer protein concentrations were measured by using commercial kits and lecithin:cholesterol acyltransferase (LCAT) activity by using a proteoliposome cholesterol esterification assay. RESULTS: Pre-beta(1) HDL concentrations were 2-fold higher in individuals with IHD vs no IHD in both the high [63 (5.7) vs 35 (2.3) mg/L; P < 0.0001] and low HDL-C [49 (5.0) vs 27 (1.5) mg/L; P = 0.001] groups. Low LCAT activity was also associated with IHD in the high [95.2 (6.7) vs 123.0 (5.3) micromol x L(-1) x h(-1); P = 0.002] and low [93.4 (8.3) vs 113.5 (4.9) micromol x L(-1) . h(-1); P = 0.03] HDL-C groups. ROC curves for pre-beta(1) HDL in the high-HDL-C groups yielded an area under the curve of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.81) for predicting IHD, which increased to 0.92 (0.87-0.97) when LCAT was included. Similar results were obtained for low HDL-C groups. An inverse correlation between LCAT activity and pre-beta(1) HDL was observed (r(2) = 0.30; P < 0.0001) in IHD participants, which was stronger in the low HDL-C group (r(2) = 0.56; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: IHD was associated with high pre-beta(1) HDL concentrations and low LCAT levels, yielding correct classification in more than 90% of the IHD cases for which both were measured, thus making pre-beta(1) HDL concentration and LCAT activity level potentially useful diagnostic markers for cardiovascular disease.
Authors: Steven E Nissen; Jean-Claude Tardif; Stephen J Nicholls; James H Revkin; Charles L Shear; William T Duggan; Witold Ruzyllo; William B Bachinsky; Gabriel P Lasala; Gregory P Lasala; E Murat Tuzcu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: F M Sacks; M A Pfeffer; L A Moye; J L Rouleau; J D Rutherford; T G Cole; L Brown; J W Warnica; J M Arnold; C C Wun; B R Davis; E Braunwald Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-10-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J R Downs; M Clearfield; S Weis; E Whitney; D R Shapiro; P A Beere; A Langendorfer; E A Stein; W Kruyer; A M Gotto Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-05-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Angel C Y Mak; Clive R Pullinger; Ling Fung Tang; Jinny S Wong; Rahul C Deo; Jean-Marc Schwarz; Alejandro Gugliucci; Irina Movsesyan; Brian Y Ishida; Catherine Chu; Annie Poon; Phillip Kim; Eveline O Stock; Ernst J Schaefer; Bela F Asztalos; Joseph M Castellano; Tony Wyss-Coray; Jacque L Duncan; Bruce L Miller; John P Kane; Pui-Yan Kwok; Mary J Malloy Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Robert D Shamburek; Rebecca Bakker-Arkema; Alexandra M Shamburek; Lita A Freeman; Marcelo J Amar; Bruce Auerbach; Brian R Krause; Reynold Homan; Steve J Adelman; Heidi L Collins; Maureen Sampson; Anna Wolska; Alan T Remaley Journal: Circ Res Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: Lixin Li; Mohammad A Hossain; Sabreena Sadat; Lauren Hager; Lu Liu; Laetitia Tam; Stephanie Schroer; Lu Huogen; I George Fantus; Philip W Connelly; Minna Woo; Dominic S Ng Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2011-03-16 Impact factor: 5.157