| 1. |
- Willeit, Peter, et al.
(author)
-
Baseline and on-statin treatment lipoprotein(a) levels for prediction of cardiovascular events: individual patient-data meta-analysis of statin outcome trials
- 2018
-
In: The Lancet. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 392:10155, s. 1311-1320
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Elevated lipoprotein(a) is a genetic risk factor for cardiovascular disease in general population studies. However, its contribution to risk for cardiovascular events in patients with established cardiovascular disease or on statin therapy is uncertain. Methods Patient-level data from seven randomised, placebo-controlled, statin outcomes trials were collated and harmonised to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for cardiovascular events, defined as fatal or non-fatal coronary heart disease, stroke, or revascularisation procedures. HRs for cardiovascular events were estimated within each trial across predefined lipoprotein(a) groups (15 to amp;lt;30 mg/dL, 30 to amp;lt;50 mg/dL, and amp;gt;= 50 mg/dL, vs amp;lt;15 mg/dL), before pooling estimates using multivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Findings Analyses included data for 29 069 patients with repeat lipoprotein(a) measurements (mean age 62 years [SD 8]; 8064 [28%] women; 5751 events during 95 576 person-years at risk). Initiation of statin therapy reduced LDL cholesterol (mean change -39% [95% CI -43 to -35]) without a significant change in lipoprotein(a). Associations of baseline and on-statin treatment lipoprotein(a) with cardiovascular disease risk were approximately linear, with increased risk at lipoprotein(a) values of 30 mg/dL or greater for baseline lipoprotein(a) and 50 mg/dL or greater for on-statin lipoprotein(a). For baseline lipoprotein(a), HRs adjusted for age and sex (vs amp;lt;15 mg/dL) were 1.04 (95% CI 0.91-1.18) for 15 mg/dL to less than 30 mg/dL, 1.11 (1.00-1.22) for 30 mg/dL to less than 50 mg/dL, and 1.31 (1.08-1.58) for 50 mg/dL or higher; respective HRs for on-statin lipoprotein(a) were 0.94 (0.81-1.10), 1.06 (0. 94-1.21), and 1.43 (1.15-1.76). HRs were almost identical after further adjustment for previous cardiovascular disease, diabetes, smoking, systolic blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, and HDL cholesterol. The association of on-statin lipoprotein(a) with cardiovascular disease risk was stronger than for on-placebo lipoprotein(a) (interaction p=0.010) and was more pronounced at younger ages (interaction p=0.008) without effect-modification by any other patient-level or study-level characteristics. Interpretation In this individual-patient data meta-analysis of statin-treated patients, elevated baseline and on-statin lipoprotein(a) showed an independent approximately linear relation with cardiovascular disease risk. This study provides a rationale for testing the lipoprotein(a) lowering hypothesis in cardiovascular disease outcomes trials. Copyright (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
- Astrup, Arne, et al.
(author)
-
The role of reducing intakes of saturated fat in the prevention of cardiovascular disease : where does the evidence stand in 2010?
- 2011
-
In: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-9165 .- 1938-3207. ; 93:4, s. 684-688
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Current dietary recommendations advise reducing the intake of saturated fatty acids (SFAs) to reduce coronary heart disease (CHD) risk, but recent findings question the role of SFAs. This expert panel reviewed the evidence and reached the following conclusions: the evidence from epidemiologic, clinical, and mechanistic studies is consistent in finding that the risk of CHD is reduced when SFAs are replaced with polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs). In populations who consume a Western diet, the replacement of 1% of energy from SFAs with PUFAs lowers LDL cholesterol and is likely to produce a reduction in CHD incidence of >= 2-3%. No clear benefit of substituting carbohydrates for SFAs has been shown, although there might be a benefit if the carbohydrate is unrefined and has a low glycemic index. Insufficient evidence exists to judge the effect on CHD risk of replacing SFAs with MUFAs. No clear association between SFA intake relative to refined carbohydrates and the risk of insulin resistance and diabetes has been shown. The effect of diet on a single biomarker is insufficient evidence to assess CHD risk. The combination of multiple biomarkers and the use of clinical end-points could help substantiate the effects on CHD. Furthermore, the effect of particular foods on CHD cannot be predicted solely by their content of total SFAs because individual SFAs may have different cardiovascular effects and major SFA food sources contain other constituents that could influence CHD risk. Research is needed to clarify the role of SFAs compared with specific forms of carbohydrates in CHD risk and to compare specific foods with appropriate alternatives.
|
|
