Setor K Kunutsor1, Stephan J L Bakker2,3, Robin P F Dullaart4. 1. School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol. 2. Department of Nephrology Medicine, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen. 3. Top Institute Food and Nutrition. 4. Department of Endocrinology, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen.
Abstract
AIM: Soluble cell adhesion molecules, such as vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1), intercellular adhesion molecule-1, E-selectin, and P-selectin, have been suggested to be associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk; however, the nature and magnitude of the association between VCAM-1 and CVD risk is uncertain. We aimed to assess the association of VCAM-1 with CVD risk and determine its potential utility for CVD risk prediction. METHODS: VCAM-1 concentrations were measured at baseline in the PREVEND prospective study of 2,638 participants. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals [CI]) and measures of risk discrimination for CVD (e.g., C-index) and reclassification (i.e., net reclassification improvement) of participants were assessed. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 9.9 years, 614 CVD events occurred. Plasma VCAM-1 was weakly associated with several cardiovascular risk markers. In analyses adjusted for established cardiovascular risk factors, the hazard ratio (95% CI) for CVD per 1 standard deviation increase in loge VCAM-1 was 0.91 (0.84-0.99; P =0.020), which remained consistent after additional adjustment for body mass index, alcohol consumption, triglycerides, renal function, and C-reactive protein; hazard ratio (95% CI) 0.89 (0.82-0.97; P =0.006). Comparing the top versus bottom quintiles of VCAM-1 levels, the corresponding adjusted hazard ratios were 0.74 (0.57-0.96; P =0.023) and 0.70 (0.54-0.91; P =0.007) respectively. Adding VCAM-1 to a CVD risk prediction model containing conventional risk factors did not improve the C-index or net reclassification. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma VCAM-1 is inversely and independently associated with CVD. However, VCAM-1 provides no significant improvement in CVD risk assessment beyond conventional CVD risk factors.
AIM: Soluble cell adhesion molecules, such as vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1), intercellular adhesion molecule-1, E-selectin, and P-selectin, have been suggested to be associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk; however, the nature and magnitude of the association between VCAM-1 and CVD risk is uncertain. We aimed to assess the association of VCAM-1 with CVD risk and determine its potential utility for CVD risk prediction. METHODS:VCAM-1 concentrations were measured at baseline in the PREVEND prospective study of 2,638 participants. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals [CI]) and measures of risk discrimination for CVD (e.g., C-index) and reclassification (i.e., net reclassification improvement) of participants were assessed. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 9.9 years, 614 CVD events occurred. Plasma VCAM-1 was weakly associated with several cardiovascular risk markers. In analyses adjusted for established cardiovascular risk factors, the hazard ratio (95% CI) for CVD per 1 standard deviation increase in loge VCAM-1 was 0.91 (0.84-0.99; P =0.020), which remained consistent after additional adjustment for body mass index, alcohol consumption, triglycerides, renal function, and C-reactive protein; hazard ratio (95% CI) 0.89 (0.82-0.97; P =0.006). Comparing the top versus bottom quintiles of VCAM-1 levels, the corresponding adjusted hazard ratios were 0.74 (0.57-0.96; P =0.023) and 0.70 (0.54-0.91; P =0.007) respectively. Adding VCAM-1 to a CVD risk prediction model containing conventional risk factors did not improve the C-index or net reclassification. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma VCAM-1 is inversely and independently associated with CVD. However, VCAM-1 provides no significant improvement in CVD risk assessment beyond conventional CVD risk factors.
Authors: Philip Greenland; Joseph S Alpert; George A Beller; Emelia J Benjamin; Matthew J Budoff; Zahi A Fayad; Elyse Foster; Mark A Hlatky; John McB Hodgson; Frederick G Kushner; Michael S Lauer; Leslee J Shaw; Sidney C Smith; Allen J Taylor; William S Weintraub; Nanette K Wenger; Alice K Jacobs Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-11-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: N Morisaki; I Saito; K Tamura; J Tashiro; M Masuda; T Kanzaki; S Watanabe; Y Masuda; Y Saito Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Susanna E Borggreve; Hans L Hillege; Geesje M Dallinga-Thie; Paul E de Jong; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel; Diederik E Grobbee; Arie van Tol; Robin P F Dullaart Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2007-04-04 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Lesley A Inker; Christopher H Schmid; Hocine Tighiouart; John H Eckfeldt; Harold I Feldman; Tom Greene; John W Kusek; Jane Manzi; Frederick Van Lente; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Josef Coresh; Andrew S Levey Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-07-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jan K Nowak; Irena Wojsyk-Banaszak; Edyta Mądry; Andrzej Wykrętowicz; Patrycja Krzyżanowska; Sławomira Drzymała-Czyż; Agata Nowicka; Andrzej Pogorzelski; Ewa Sapiejka; Wojciech Skorupa; Mariusz Szczepanik; Aleksandra Lisowska; Jaroslaw Walkowiak Journal: Lung Date: 2017-06-23 Impact factor: 2.584
Authors: Ioana Mozos; Clemens Malainer; Jarosław Horbańczuk; Cristina Gug; Dana Stoian; Constantin Tudor Luca; Atanas G Atanasov Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Andrew J Sandford; Amanda Ha; David A Ngan; Loubna Akhabir; Aabida Saferali; Nurit Fox; A J Hirsch Allen; Simon C Warby; Stephan F van Eeden; Najib T Ayas Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-01-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Shohreh F Farzan; Caitlin G Howe; Michael S Zens; Thomas Palys; Jacqueline Y Channon; Zhigang Li; Yu Chen; Margaret R Karagas Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 9.031