AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The apolipoprotein B (ApoB):apolipoprotein A (ApoA)-I ratio may be a better indicator of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in people with type 2 diabetes than traditional lipid risk markers (LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and triacylglycerol), but whether the ApoB:ApoA-I ratio should be used to indicate lipid-lowering therapy is still debated. METHODS: The Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study randomised 9,795 patients with type 2 diabetes tofenofibrate (200 mg daily) or placebo and followed them up for a median of 5 years. We compared ApoB, ApoA-I, ApoAII and the ApoB:ApoA-I ratio with traditional lipid variables as predictors of CVD risk. We estimated the HR of the effect of 1 SD difference in baseline concentrations of lipids, apolipoproteins and respective ratios on the risk of CVD events and also used receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. RESULTS: In the placebo group, the variables best predicting CVD events were non-HDL-cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol, total cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol (HR 1.21, p < 0.001 for both), ApoB:ApoA-I (HR 1.20, p < 0.001), LDL-cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol (HR 1.17, p < 0.001), HDL-cholesterol (HR 0.84, p < 0.001) and ApoA-I (HR 0.85, p < 0.001). In the fenofibrate group, the first four predictors were very similar (but ApoB:ApoA-I was fourth), followed by non-HDL-cholesterol and ApoB. Lipid ratios and ApoB:ApoA-I performed better than any single lipid or apolipoprotein in predicting CVD risk. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: In patients with type 2 diabetes in the FIELD study, traditional lipid ratios were as strong as the ApoB:ApoA-I ratio in predicting CVD risk. The data provide little evidence for replacement of traditional lipids and their ratios with measures of ApoB, ApoA-I and their ratio.
RCT Entities:
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The apolipoprotein B (ApoB):apolipoprotein A (ApoA)-I ratio may be a better indicator of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in people with type 2 diabetes than traditional lipid risk markers (LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and triacylglycerol), but whether the ApoB:ApoA-I ratio should be used to indicate lipid-lowering therapy is still debated. METHODS: The Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study randomised 9,795 patients with type 2 diabetes to fenofibrate (200 mg daily) or placebo and followed them up for a median of 5 years. We compared ApoB, ApoA-I, ApoAII and the ApoB:ApoA-I ratio with traditional lipid variables as predictors of CVD risk. We estimated the HR of the effect of 1 SD difference in baseline concentrations of lipids, apolipoproteins and respective ratios on the risk of CVD events and also used receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. RESULTS: In the placebo group, the variables best predicting CVD events were non-HDL-cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol, total cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol (HR 1.21, p < 0.001 for both), ApoB:ApoA-I (HR 1.20, p < 0.001), LDL-cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol (HR 1.17, p < 0.001), HDL-cholesterol (HR 0.84, p < 0.001) and ApoA-I (HR 0.85, p < 0.001). In the fenofibrate group, the first four predictors were very similar (but ApoB:ApoA-I was fourth), followed by non-HDL-cholesterol and ApoB. Lipid ratios and ApoB:ApoA-I performed better than any single lipid or apolipoprotein in predicting CVD risk. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: In patients with type 2 diabetes in the FIELD study, traditional lipid ratios were as strong as the ApoB:ApoA-I ratio in predicting CVD risk. The data provide little evidence for replacement of traditional lipids and their ratios with measures of ApoB, ApoA-I and their ratio.
Authors: John D Brunzell; Michael Davidson; Curt D Furberg; Ronald B Goldberg; Barbara V Howard; James H Stein; Joseph L Witztum Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Rui Jiang; Matthias B Schulze; Tricia Li; Nader Rifai; Meir J Stampfer; Eric B Rimm; Frank B Hu Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: William C Cromwell; James D Otvos; Michelle J Keyes; Michael J Pencina; Lisa Sullivan; Ramachandran S Vasan; Peter W F Wilson; Ralph B D'Agostino Journal: J Clin Lipidol Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 4.766
Authors: P J Barter; C M Ballantyne; R Carmena; M Castro Cabezas; M John Chapman; P Couture; J de Graaf; P N Durrington; O Faergeman; J Frohlich; C D Furberg; C Gagne; S M Haffner; S E Humphries; I Jungner; R M Krauss; P Kwiterovich; S Marcovina; C J Packard; T A Pearson; K Srinath Reddy; R Rosenson; N Sarrafzadegan; A D Sniderman; A F Stalenhoef; E Stein; P J Talmud; A M Tonkin; G Walldius; K M S Williams Journal: J Intern Med Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: John H Contois; Joseph P McConnell; Amar A Sethi; Gyorgy Csako; Sridevi Devaraj; Daniel M Hoefner; G Russell Warnick Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2009-01-23 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Iciar Martín-Timón; Cristina Sevillano-Collantes; Amparo Segura-Galindo; Francisco Javier Del Cañizo-Gómez Journal: World J Diabetes Date: 2014-08-15