1.
Apolipoprotein B discordance with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in relation to coronary artery calcification in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA).
Cao, J, Nomura, SO, Steffen, BT, Guan, W, Remaley, AT, Karger, AB, Ouyang, P, Michos, ED, Tsai, MY
Journal of clinical lipidology. 2020;(1):109-121.e5
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Discordant levels of apolipoprotein B (apo B) relative to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) may be associated with subclinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). OBJECTIVE The present study investigated whether discordance between apo B and LDL-C or non-HDL-C levels was associated with subclinical ASCVD measured by coronary artery calcium (CAC). METHODS This study was conducted in a subpopulation of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) cohort, aged 45 to 84 years, free of ASCVD, and not taking lipid-lowering medications at the baseline (2000-2002) (prevalence analytic N = 4623; incidence analytic N = 2216; progression analytic N = 3947). Apo B discordance relative to LDL-C and non-HDL-C was defined using residuals and percentile rankings (>5/10/15 percentile). Associations with prevalent and incident CAC (CAC > 0 vs CAC = 0) were assessed using prevalence ratio/relative risk regression and CAC progression (absolute increase/year) using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS Higher apo B levels were associated with CAC prevalence, incidence, and progression. Apo B discordance relative to LDL-C or non-HDL-C was inconsistently associated with CAC prevalence and progression. Discordantly high apo B relative to LDL-C and non-HDL-C was associated with CAC progression. Associations for apo B discordance with non-HDL-C remained after further adjustment for metabolic syndrome components. CONCLUSION Apo B was associated with CAC among adults aged ≥45 years not taking statins, but provided only modest additional predictive value of apo B for CAC prevalence, incidence, or progression beyond LDL-C or non-HDL-C. Apo B discordance may still be important for ASCVD risk assessment and further research is needed to confirm findings.
2.
Effect of alirocumab on lipids and lipoproteins in individuals with metabolic syndrome without diabetes: Pooled data from 10 phase 3 trials.
Henry, RR, Müller-Wieland, D, Taub, PR, Bujas-Bobanovic, M, Louie, MJ, Letierce, A, Ginsberg, HN
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(7):1632-1641
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIMS: This analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor, in patients with or without metabolic syndrome (MetS) using pooled data from 10 phase 3 ODYSSEY trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data from 4983 randomized patients (1940 with MetS; 1642 with diabetes excluded) were assessed in subgroups by MetS status. Efficacy data were analysed in 4 pools per study design: 2 placebo-controlled pools (1 using alirocumab 150 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W], 1 using 75/150 mg Q2W) with background statin, and 2 ezetimibe-controlled pools (both alirocumab 75/150 mg Q2W), 1 with and 1 without background statin. Alirocumab 75/150 mg indicates possible dose increase from 75 to 150 mg at Week 12 based on Week 8 LDL-C. RESULTS LDL-C percentage reduction from baseline at Week 24 with alirocumab was 63.9% (MetS) and 56.8% (non-MetS) in the pool of alirocumab 150 mg Q2W, and 42.2% to 52.2% (MetS) and 45.0% to 52.6% (non-MetS) in 3 pools using 75/150 mg Q2W. Levels of other lipid and lipoprotein parameters were also improved with alirocumab treatment, including apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), lipoprotein(a) and HDL-C. Overall, the percentage change at Week 24 in LDL-C and other lipids and lipoproteins did not vary by MetS status. Adverse event rates were generally similar between treatment groups, regardless of MetS status; injection-site reactions occurred more frequently in alirocumab vs control groups. CONCLUSIONS Across study pools, alirocumab-associated reductions in LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, and non-HDL-C were significant vs control, and did not vary by MetS status.
3.
Impact of Novel Low-Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol Assessment on the Utility of Secondary Non-High-Density Lipoprotein-C and Apolipoprotein B Targets in Selected Worldwide Dyslipidemia Guidelines.
Sathiyakumar, V, Park, J, Quispe, R, Elshazly, MB, Michos, ED, Banach, M, Toth, PP, Whelton, SP, Blumenthal, RS, Jones, SR, et al
Circulation. 2018;(3):244-254
Abstract
BACKGROUND Selected dyslipidemia guidelines recommend non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (apoB) as secondary targets to the primary target of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C). After considering 2 LDL-C estimates that differ in accuracy, we examined: (1) how frequently non-HDL-C guideline targets could change management; and (2) the utility of apoB targets after meeting LDL-C and non-HDL-C targets. METHODS We analyzed 2518 adults representative of the US population from the 2011 to 2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and 126 092 patients from the Very Large Database of Lipids study with apoB. We identified all individuals as well as those with high-risk clinical features, including coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, and metabolic syndrome who met very high- and high-risk guideline targets of LDL-C <70 and <100 mg/dL using Friedewald estimation (LDL-CF) and a novel, more accurate method (LDL-CN). Next, we examined those not meeting non-HDL-C (<100, <130 mg/dL) and apoB (<80, <100 mg/dL) guideline targets. In those meeting dual LDL-C and non-HDL-C targets (<70 and <100 mg/dL, respectively, or <100 and <130 mg/dL, respectively), we determined the proportion of individuals who did not meet guideline apoB targets (<80 or <100 mg/dL). RESULTS A total of 7% to 9% and 31% to 36% of individuals had LDL-C <70 and <100 mg/dL, respectively. Among those with LDL-CF<70 mg/dL, 14% to 15% had non-HDL-C ≥100 mg/dL, and 7% to 8% had apoB ≥80 mg/dL. Among those with LDL-CF<100 mg/dL, 8% to 10% had non-HDL-C ≥130 mg/dL and 2% to 3% had apoB ≥100 mg/dL. In comparison, among those with LDL-CN<70 or 100 mg/dL, only ≈2% and ≈1% of individuals, respectively, had non-HDL-C and apoB values above guideline targets. Similar trends were upheld among those with high-risk clinical features: ≈0% to 3% of individuals with LDL-CN<70 mg/dL had non-HDL-C ≥100 mg/dL or apoB ≥80 mg/dL compared with 13% to 38% and 9% to 25%, respectively, in those with LDL-CF<70 mg/dL. With LDL-CF or LDL-CN<70 mg/dL and non-HDL-C <100 mg/dL, 0% to 1% had apoB ≥80 mg/dL. Among all dual LDL-CF or LDL-CN<100 mg/dL and non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL individuals, 0% to 0.4% had apoB ≥100 mg/dL. These findings were robust to sex, fasting status, and lipid-lowering therapy status. CONCLUSIONS After more accurately estimating LDL-C, guideline-suggested non-HDL-C targets could alter management in only a small fraction of individuals, including those with coronary artery disease and other high-risk clinical features. Furthermore, current guideline-suggested apoB targets provide modest utility after meeting cholesterol targets. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01698489.