Michael Y Tsai1, Brian T Steffen, Weihua Guan, Robyn L McClelland, Russell Warnick, Joseph McConnell, Daniel M Hoefner, Alan T Remaley. 1. From the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology (M.Y.T., B.T.S.) and Division of Biostatistics (W.G.), University of Minnesota School of Public Health, Minneapolis, MN; Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (R.L.M.); Health Diagnostic Laboratory, Inc, Richmond, VA (R.W., J.M., D.M.H.); and National Institutes of Health Molecular Disease Branch, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, MD (A.T.R.).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death in the United States, yet assessing risk of its development remains challenging. The present study evaluates a new automated assay of small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol content (sdLDL-C) and whether sdLDL-C is a risk factor for CHD compared with LDL-C or small LDL particle concentrations derived from nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. APPROACH AND RESULTS: sdLDL-C was measured using a new automated enzymatic method, and small LDL concentrations were obtained by nuclear magnetic resonance in 4387 Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis participants. Cox regression analysis estimated hazard ratios for developing CHD for 8.5 years after adjustments for age, race, sex, systolic blood pressure, hypertension medication use, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. Elevated sdLDL-C was a risk factor for CHD in normoglycemic individuals. Those in the top sdLDL-C quartile showed higher risk of incident CHD (hazard ratio, 2.41; P=0.0037) compared with those in the bottom quartile and indicated greater CHD risk than the corresponding quartile of LDL-C (hazard ratio, 1.75; P=0.019). The association of sdLDL-C with CHD risk remained significant when LDL-C (<2.57 mmol/L) was included in a multivariate model (hazard ratio, 2.37; P=0.012). Nuclear magnetic resonance-derived small LDL concentrations did not convey a significant risk of CHD. Those with impaired fasting glucose or diabetes mellitus showed higher sdLDL-C and small LDL concentrations but neither was associated with higher CHD risk in these individuals. CONCLUSIONS: This new automated method for sdLDL-C identifies risk for CHD that would remain undetected using standard lipid measures, but only in normoglycemic, nondiabetic individuals.
OBJECTIVE:Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death in the United States, yet assessing risk of its development remains challenging. The present study evaluates a new automated assay of small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol content (sdLDL-C) and whether sdLDL-C is a risk factor for CHD compared with LDL-C or small LDL particle concentrations derived from nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. APPROACH AND RESULTS:sdLDL-C was measured using a new automated enzymatic method, and small LDL concentrations were obtained by nuclear magnetic resonance in 4387 Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosisparticipants. Cox regression analysis estimated hazard ratios for developing CHD for 8.5 years after adjustments for age, race, sex, systolic blood pressure, hypertension medication use, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. Elevated sdLDL-C was a risk factor for CHD in normoglycemic individuals. Those in the top sdLDL-C quartile showed higher risk of incident CHD (hazard ratio, 2.41; P=0.0037) compared with those in the bottom quartile and indicated greater CHD risk than the corresponding quartile of LDL-C (hazard ratio, 1.75; P=0.019). The association of sdLDL-C with CHD risk remained significant when LDL-C (<2.57 mmol/L) was included in a multivariate model (hazard ratio, 2.37; P=0.012). Nuclear magnetic resonance-derived small LDL concentrations did not convey a significant risk of CHD. Those with impaired fasting glucose or diabetes mellitus showed higher sdLDL-C and small LDL concentrations but neither was associated with higher CHD risk in these individuals. CONCLUSIONS: This new automated method for sdLDL-C identifies risk for CHD that would remain undetected using standard lipid measures, but only in normoglycemic, nondiabetic individuals.
Authors: A S Kamigaki; D S Siscovick; S M Schwartz; B M Psaty; K L Edwards; T E Raghunathan; M A Austin Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2001-05-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Alicia J Jenkins; Timothy J Lyons; Deyi Zheng; James D Otvos; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel McGee; W Timothy Garvey; Richard L Klein Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: D S Freedman; J D Otvos; E J Jeyarajah; J J Barboriak; A J Anderson; J A Walker Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 1998-07 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Brian T Steffen; Weihua Guan; Alan T Remaley; James H Stein; Mathew C Tattersall; Joel Kaufman; Michael Y Tsai Journal: J Clin Lipidol Date: 2017-07-12 Impact factor: 4.766
Authors: Álvaro Hernáez; Alan T Remaley; Marta Farràs; Sara Fernández-Castillejo; Isaac Subirana; Helmut Schröder; Mireia Fernández-Mampel; Daniel Muñoz-Aguayo; Maureen Sampson; Rosa Solà; Magí Farré; Rafael de la Torre; María-Carmen López-Sabater; Kristiina Nyyssönen; Hans-Joachim F Zunft; María-Isabel Covas; Montserrat Fitó Journal: J Nutr Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Fumiyoshi Tsunoda; Ivor B Asztalos; Katalin V Horvath; George Steiner; Ernst J Schaefer; Bela F Asztalos Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2016-01-22 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Ron C Hoogeveen; John W Gaubatz; Wensheng Sun; Rhiannon C Dodge; Jacy R Crosby; Jennifer Jiang; David Couper; Salim S Virani; Sekar Kathiresan; Eric Boerwinkle; Christie M Ballantyne Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 8.311