Amit V Khera1, Olga V Demler1, Steven J Adelman1, Heidi L Collins1, Robert J Glynn1, Paul M Ridker1, Daniel J Rader1, Samia Mora2. 1. From Cardiology Division and Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (A.V.K.); Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (A.V.K., O.V.D., P.MR., S.M.); Center for Lipid Metabolomics and Division of Preventive Medicine (A.V.K., O.V.D., R.J.G., P.MR., S.M.), Division of Cardiovascular Medicine (P.MR., S.M.), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Vascular Strategies, Plymouth Meeting, PA (S.J.A., H.L.C.); and Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (D.J.R.). 2. From Cardiology Division and Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (A.V.K.); Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (A.V.K., O.V.D., P.MR., S.M.); Center for Lipid Metabolomics and Division of Preventive Medicine (A.V.K., O.V.D., R.J.G., P.MR., S.M.), Division of Cardiovascular Medicine (P.MR., S.M.), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA; Vascular Strategies, Plymouth Meeting, PA (S.J.A., H.L.C.); and Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (D.J.R.). smora@partners.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent failures of drugs that raised high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels to reduce cardiovascular events in clinical trials have led to increased interest in alternative indices of HDL quality, such as cholesterol efflux capacity, and HDL quantity, such as HDL particle number. However, no studies have directly compared these metrics in a contemporary population that includes potent statin therapy and low low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. METHODS:HDL cholesterol levels, apolipoprotein A-I, cholesterol efflux capacity, and HDL particle number were assessed at baseline and 12 months in a nested case-control study of the JUPITER trial (Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: An Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin), a randomized primary prevention trial that compared rosuvastatin treatment to placebo in individuals with normal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol but increased C-reactive protein levels. In total, 314 cases of incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) (myocardial infarction, unstable angina, arterial revascularization, stroke, or cardiovascular death) were compared to age- and gender-matched controls. Conditional logistic regression models adjusting for risk factors evaluated associations between HDL-related biomarkers and incident CVD. RESULTS:Cholesterol efflux capacity was moderately correlated with HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein A-I, and HDL particle number (Spearman r= 0.39, 0.48, and 0.39 respectively; P<0.001). Baseline HDL particle number was inversely associated with incident CVD (adjusted odds ratio per SD increment [OR/SD], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.86; P<0.001), whereas no significant association was found for baseline cholesterol efflux capacity (OR/SD, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72-1.10; P=0.28), HDL cholesterol (OR/SD, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.02; P=0.08), or apolipoprotein A-I (OR/SD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.67-1.03; P=0.08). Twelve months of rosuvastatin (20 mg/day) did not change cholesterol efflux capacity (average percentage change -1.5%, 95% CI, -13.3 to +10.2; P=0.80), but increased HDL cholesterol (+7.7%), apolipoprotein A-I (+4.3%), and HDL particle number (+5.2%). On-statin cholesterol efflux capacity was inversely associated with incident CVD (OR/SD, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.92; P=0.02), although HDL particle number again emerged as the strongest predictor (OR/SD, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.33-0.77; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In JUPITER, cholesterol efflux capacity was associated with incident CVD in individuals on potent statin therapy but not at baseline. For both baseline and on-statin analyses, HDL particle number was the strongest of 4 HDL-related biomarkers as an inverse predictor of incident events and biomarker of residual risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00239681.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent failures of drugs that raised high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels to reduce cardiovascular events in clinical trials have led to increased interest in alternative indices of HDL quality, such as cholesterol efflux capacity, and HDL quantity, such as HDL particle number. However, no studies have directly compared these metrics in a contemporary population that includes potent statin therapy and low low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. METHODS: HDL cholesterol levels, apolipoprotein A-I, cholesterol efflux capacity, and HDL particle number were assessed at baseline and 12 months in a nested case-control study of the JUPITER trial (Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: An Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin), a randomized primary prevention trial that compared rosuvastatin treatment to placebo in individuals with normal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol but increased C-reactive protein levels. In total, 314 cases of incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) (myocardial infarction, unstable angina, arterial revascularization, stroke, or cardiovascular death) were compared to age- and gender-matched controls. Conditional logistic regression models adjusting for risk factors evaluated associations between HDL-related biomarkers and incident CVD. RESULTS:Cholesterol efflux capacity was moderately correlated with HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein A-I, and HDL particle number (Spearman r= 0.39, 0.48, and 0.39 respectively; P<0.001). Baseline HDL particle number was inversely associated with incident CVD (adjusted odds ratio per SD increment [OR/SD], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.86; P<0.001), whereas no significant association was found for baseline cholesterol efflux capacity (OR/SD, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72-1.10; P=0.28), HDL cholesterol (OR/SD, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.02; P=0.08), or apolipoprotein A-I (OR/SD, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.67-1.03; P=0.08). Twelve months of rosuvastatin (20 mg/day) did not change cholesterol efflux capacity (average percentage change -1.5%, 95% CI, -13.3 to +10.2; P=0.80), but increased HDL cholesterol (+7.7%), apolipoprotein A-I (+4.3%), and HDL particle number (+5.2%). On-statin cholesterol efflux capacity was inversely associated with incident CVD (OR/SD, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.92; P=0.02), although HDL particle number again emerged as the strongest predictor (OR/SD, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.33-0.77; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In JUPITER, cholesterol efflux capacity was associated with incident CVD in individuals on potent statin therapy but not at baseline. For both baseline and on-statin analyses, HDL particle number was the strongest of 4 HDL-related biomarkers as an inverse predictor of incident events and biomarker of residual risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00239681.
Authors: David C Goff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Glen Bennett; Sean Coady; Ralph B D'Agostino; Raymond Gibbons; Philip Greenland; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Jennifer G Robinson; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Paul Sorlie; Neil J Stone; Peter W F Wilson; Harmon S Jordan; Lev Nevo; Janusz Wnek; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; Sidney C Smith; Gordon F Tomaselli Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Bernd Hewing; Saj Parathath; Tessa Barrett; Wing Ki Kellie Chung; Yaritzy M Astudillo; Tadateru Hamada; Bhama Ramkhelawon; Thomas C Tallant; Mohamed Shaif S Yusufishaq; Joseph A Didonato; Ying Huang; Jennifer Buffa; Stela Z Berisha; Jonathan D Smith; Stanley L Hazen; Edward A Fisher Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Rachel H Mackey; Philip Greenland; David C Goff; Donald Lloyd-Jones; Christopher T Sibley; Samia Mora Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Anand Rohatgi; Amit Khera; Jarett D Berry; Edward G Givens; Colby R Ayers; Kyle E Wedin; Ian J Neeland; Ivan S Yuhanna; Daniel R Rader; James A de Lemos; Philip W Shaul Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-11-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: William E Boden; Jeffrey L Probstfield; Todd Anderson; Bernard R Chaitman; Patrice Desvignes-Nickens; Kent Koprowicz; Ruth McBride; Koon Teo; William Weintraub Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Samia Mora; Robert J Glynn; S Matthijs Boekholdt; Børge G Nordestgaard; John J P Kastelein; Paul M Ridker Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jeffrey S Monette; Patrick M Hutchins; Graziella E Ronsein; Jake Wimberger; Angela D Irwin; Chongren Tang; Jaskanwal D Sara; Baohai Shao; Tomas Vaisar; Amir Lerman; Jay W Heinecke Journal: Circ Res Date: 2016-04-25 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: Alvin Chandra; Ian J Neeland; Sandeep R Das; Amit Khera; Aslan T Turer; Colby R Ayers; Darren K McGuire; Anand Rohatgi Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2015-01-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Francesca Zimetti; Wladimir M Freitas; Alessandra M Campos; Mauricio Daher; Maria Pia Adorni; Franco Bernini; Andrei C Sposito; Ilaria Zanotti Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2018-02-07 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Mark A Sarzynski; Jonathan J Ruiz-Ramie; Jacob L Barber; Cris A Slentz; John W Apolzan; Robert W McGarrah; Melissa N Harris; Timothy S Church; Mark S Borja; Yumin He; Michael N Oda; Corby K Martin; William E Kraus; Anand Rohatgi Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 8.311