Eric P Cantey1, John T Wilkins2. 1. Department of Medicine. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine and Medicine (Cardiology), Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Ilinois, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The cholesterol content within atherogenic apolipoprotein-B (apoB) containing lipid particles is the center of consensus guidelines and clinicians' focus whenever evaluating a patient's risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The pathobiology of atherosclerosis requires the retention of lipoprotein particles within the vascular intima over time followed by maladaptive inflammation resulting in plaque formation and rupture in some. The cholesterol content is widely variable within each particle creating either cholesterol-deplete or cholesterol-enriched particles. This variance in particle cholesterol content varies within and between individuals. Discordance analysis exploits this difference in cholesterol content of particles to demonstrate the differential significance of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-HDL-C from measures of lipoprotein particle number in terms of assessing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risks. RECENT FINDINGS: Three studies have added to the growing body of literature of discordance analysis. Despite wide variability of discordance cutoffs, baseline risk of atherosclerotic disease, and populations sampled, the conclusion remains the same: risk of atherosclerotic disease follows apoB lipid particle concentration rather than cholesterol content of lipid particles. SUMMARY: In addition to traditional lipid fractions, assessments of atherogenic particle number should be strongly considered whenever assessing CVD risk in nontreated and treated individuals. There is a need for clinical trials that focus not only on the reduction in LDL-C but apoB, as well.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The cholesterol content within atherogenic apolipoprotein-B (apoB) containing lipid particles is the center of consensus guidelines and clinicians' focus whenever evaluating a patient's risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The pathobiology of atherosclerosis requires the retention of lipoprotein particles within the vascular intima over time followed by maladaptive inflammation resulting in plaque formation and rupture in some. The cholesterol content is widely variable within each particle creating either cholesterol-deplete or cholesterol-enriched particles. This variance in particle cholesterol content varies within and between individuals. Discordance analysis exploits this difference in cholesterol content of particles to demonstrate the differential significance of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-HDL-C from measures of lipoprotein particle number in terms of assessing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risks. RECENT FINDINGS: Three studies have added to the growing body of literature of discordance analysis. Despite wide variability of discordance cutoffs, baseline risk of atherosclerotic disease, and populations sampled, the conclusion remains the same: risk of atherosclerotic disease follows apoBlipid particle concentration rather than cholesterol content of lipid particles. SUMMARY: In addition to traditional lipid fractions, assessments of atherogenic particle number should be strongly considered whenever assessing CVD risk in nontreated and treated individuals. There is a need for clinical trials that focus not only on the reduction in LDL-C but apoB, as well.
Authors: Renato Quispe; Mohamed B Elshazly; Di Zhao; Peter P Toth; Rishi Puri; Salim S Virani; Roger S Blumenthal; Seth S Martin; Steven R Jones; Erin D Michos Journal: Eur J Prev Cardiol Date: 2019-07-10 Impact factor: 7.804
Authors: Karol M Pencina; George Thanassoulis; John T Wilkins; Ramachandran S Vasan; Ann Marie Navar; Eric D Peterson; Michael J Pencina; Allan D Sniderman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Allan D Sniderman; Patrick Couture; Seth S Martin; Jacqueline DeGraaf; Patrick R Lawler; William C Cromwell; John T Wilkins; George Thanassoulis Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2018-05-16 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Maureen Sampson; Clarence Ling; Qian Sun; Roa Harb; Mohmed Ashmaig; Russell Warnick; Amar Sethi; James K Fleming; James D Otvos; Jeff W Meeusen; Sarah R Delaney; Allan S Jaffe; Robert Shamburek; Marcelo Amar; Alan T Remaley Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Claire Welsh; Carlos A Celis-Morales; Rosemary Brown; Daniel F Mackay; James Lewsey; Patrick B Mark; Stuart R Gray; Lyn D Ferguson; Jana J Anderson; Donald M Lyall; John G Cleland; Pardeep S Jhund; Jason M R Gill; Jill P Pell; Naveed Sattar; Paul Welsh Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Emil Hagström; P Gabriel Steg; Michael Szarek; Deepak L Bhatt; Vera A Bittner; Nicolas Danchin; Rafael Diaz; Shaun G Goodman; Robert A Harrington; J Wouter Jukema; Evangelos Liberopoulos; Nikolaus Marx; Jennifer McGinniss; Garen Manvelian; Robert Pordy; Michel Scemama; Harvey D White; Andreas M Zeiher; Gregory G Schwartz Journal: Circulation Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 39.918
Authors: Harold E Bays; Pam R Taub; Elizabeth Epstein; Erin D Michos; Richard A Ferraro; Alison L Bailey; Heval M Kelli; Keith C Ferdinand; Melvin R Echols; Howard Weintraub; John Bostrom; Heather M Johnson; Kara K Hoppe; Michael D Shapiro; Charles A German; Salim S Virani; Aliza Hussain; Christie M Ballantyne; Ali M Agha; Peter P Toth Journal: Am J Prev Cardiol Date: 2021-01-23