脂蛋白(a)和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇诱发心血管风险的独立性:一项参与者层面的 Meta 分析。

IF 5.2 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS
Harpreet S Bhatia, Simon Wandel, Peter Willeit, Anastasia Lesogor, Keith Bailey, Paul M Ridker, Paul Nestel, John Simes, Andrew Tonkin, Gregory G Schwartz, Helen Colhoun, Christoph Wanner, Sotirios Tsimikas
{"title":"脂蛋白(a)和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇诱发心血管风险的独立性:一项参与者层面的 Meta 分析。","authors":"Harpreet S Bhatia, Simon Wandel, Peter Willeit, Anastasia Lesogor, Keith Bailey, Paul M Ridker, Paul Nestel, John Simes, Andrew Tonkin, Gregory G Schwartz, Helen Colhoun, Christoph Wanner, Sotirios Tsimikas","doi":"10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.069556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels are independently associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, the relationship between Lp(a) level, LDL-C level, and ASCVD risk at different thresholds is not well defined.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A participant-level meta-analysis of 27 658 participants enrolled in 6 placebo-controlled statin trials was performed to assess the association of LDL-C and Lp(a) levels with risk of fatal or nonfatal coronary heart disease events, stroke, or any coronary or carotid revascularization (ASCVD). The multivariable-adjusted association between baseline Lp(a) level and ASCVD risk was modeled continuously using generalized additive models, and the association between baseline LDL-C level and ASCVD risk by baseline Lp(a) level by Cox proportional hazards models with random effects. The joint association between Lp(a) level and statin-achieved LDL-C level with ASCVD risk was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with an Lp(a) level of 5 mg/dL, increasing levels of Lp(a) were log-linearly associated with ASCVD risk in statin- and placebo-treated patients. Among statin-treated individuals, those with Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL (≈125 nmol/L) had increased risk across all quartiles of achieved LDL-C level and absolute change in LDL-C level. Even among those with the lowest quartile of achieved LDL-C level (3.1-77.0 mg/dL), those with Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL had greater ASCVD risk (hazard ratio, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.06-1.79]) than those with Lp(a) level ≤50 mg/dL. The greatest risk was observed with both Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL and LDL-C level in the fourth quartile (hazard ratio, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.46-2.48]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings demonstrate the independent and additive nature of Lp(a) and LDL-C levels for ASCVD risk, and that LDL-C lowering does not fully offset Lp(a)-mediated risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":35,"journal":{"name":"Energy & Fuels","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Independence of Lipoprotein(a) and Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol-Mediated Cardiovascular Risk: A Participant-Level Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Harpreet S Bhatia, Simon Wandel, Peter Willeit, Anastasia Lesogor, Keith Bailey, Paul M Ridker, Paul Nestel, John Simes, Andrew Tonkin, Gregory G Schwartz, Helen Colhoun, Christoph Wanner, Sotirios Tsimikas\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.069556\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels are independently associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, the relationship between Lp(a) level, LDL-C level, and ASCVD risk at different thresholds is not well defined.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A participant-level meta-analysis of 27 658 participants enrolled in 6 placebo-controlled statin trials was performed to assess the association of LDL-C and Lp(a) levels with risk of fatal or nonfatal coronary heart disease events, stroke, or any coronary or carotid revascularization (ASCVD). The multivariable-adjusted association between baseline Lp(a) level and ASCVD risk was modeled continuously using generalized additive models, and the association between baseline LDL-C level and ASCVD risk by baseline Lp(a) level by Cox proportional hazards models with random effects. The joint association between Lp(a) level and statin-achieved LDL-C level with ASCVD risk was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with an Lp(a) level of 5 mg/dL, increasing levels of Lp(a) were log-linearly associated with ASCVD risk in statin- and placebo-treated patients. Among statin-treated individuals, those with Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL (≈125 nmol/L) had increased risk across all quartiles of achieved LDL-C level and absolute change in LDL-C level. Even among those with the lowest quartile of achieved LDL-C level (3.1-77.0 mg/dL), those with Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL had greater ASCVD risk (hazard ratio, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.06-1.79]) than those with Lp(a) level ≤50 mg/dL. The greatest risk was observed with both Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL and LDL-C level in the fourth quartile (hazard ratio, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.46-2.48]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings demonstrate the independent and additive nature of Lp(a) and LDL-C levels for ASCVD risk, and that LDL-C lowering does not fully offset Lp(a)-mediated risk.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy & Fuels\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy & Fuels\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.069556\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy & Fuels","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.069556","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)和脂蛋白(a)(Lp[a])水平与动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(ASCVD)密切相关。然而,在不同阈值下,脂蛋白(a)水平、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平与 ASCVD 风险之间的关系尚未明确:对参加 6 项安慰剂对照他汀类药物试验的 27 658 名参与者进行了参与者水平的荟萃分析,以评估低密度脂蛋白胆固醇和脂蛋白(a)水平与致命或非致命冠心病事件、中风或任何冠状动脉或颈动脉血运重建(ASCVD)风险之间的关系。基线脂蛋白(a)水平与ASCVD风险之间的多变量调整关系采用广义加法模型进行连续建模,基线LDL-C水平与ASCVD风险之间的关系采用随机效应的Cox比例危险模型进行建模。使用Cox比例危险模型评估了Lp(a)水平和他汀类药物达到的LDL-C水平与ASCVD风险之间的共同关系:结果:与 5 mg/dL 的脂蛋白(a)水平相比,在他汀类药物和安慰剂治疗的患者中,脂蛋白(a)水平的升高与 ASCVD 风险呈对数线性关系。在他汀类药物治疗的患者中,Lp(a)水平>50 mg/dL(≈125 nmol/L)的患者在达到的 LDL-C 水平的所有四分位数和 LDL-C 水平的绝对变化中风险都会增加。即使在低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平达到最低四分位数(3.1-77.0 mg/dL)的人群中,脂蛋白(a)水平>50 mg/dL的人群比脂蛋白(a)水平≤50 mg/dL的人群具有更大的ASCVD风险(危险比为1.38 [95% CI, 1.06-1.79])。Lp(a)水平>50 mg/dL和LDL-C水平处于第四四分位数的风险最大(危险比为1.90 [95% CI, 1.46-2.48]):这些研究结果表明,脂蛋白(a)和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平对急性心血管疾病风险具有独立和叠加的性质,降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇并不能完全抵消脂蛋白(a)介导的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Independence of Lipoprotein(a) and Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol-Mediated Cardiovascular Risk: A Participant-Level Meta-Analysis.

Background: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels are independently associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, the relationship between Lp(a) level, LDL-C level, and ASCVD risk at different thresholds is not well defined.

Methods: A participant-level meta-analysis of 27 658 participants enrolled in 6 placebo-controlled statin trials was performed to assess the association of LDL-C and Lp(a) levels with risk of fatal or nonfatal coronary heart disease events, stroke, or any coronary or carotid revascularization (ASCVD). The multivariable-adjusted association between baseline Lp(a) level and ASCVD risk was modeled continuously using generalized additive models, and the association between baseline LDL-C level and ASCVD risk by baseline Lp(a) level by Cox proportional hazards models with random effects. The joint association between Lp(a) level and statin-achieved LDL-C level with ASCVD risk was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results: Compared with an Lp(a) level of 5 mg/dL, increasing levels of Lp(a) were log-linearly associated with ASCVD risk in statin- and placebo-treated patients. Among statin-treated individuals, those with Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL (≈125 nmol/L) had increased risk across all quartiles of achieved LDL-C level and absolute change in LDL-C level. Even among those with the lowest quartile of achieved LDL-C level (3.1-77.0 mg/dL), those with Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL had greater ASCVD risk (hazard ratio, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.06-1.79]) than those with Lp(a) level ≤50 mg/dL. The greatest risk was observed with both Lp(a) level >50 mg/dL and LDL-C level in the fourth quartile (hazard ratio, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.46-2.48]).

Conclusions: These findings demonstrate the independent and additive nature of Lp(a) and LDL-C levels for ASCVD risk, and that LDL-C lowering does not fully offset Lp(a)-mediated risk.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Energy & Fuels
Energy & Fuels 工程技术-工程:化工
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
13.20%
发文量
1101
审稿时长
2.1 months
期刊介绍: Energy & Fuels publishes reports of research in the technical area defined by the intersection of the disciplines of chemistry and chemical engineering and the application domain of non-nuclear energy and fuels. This includes research directed at the formation of, exploration for, and production of fossil fuels and biomass; the properties and structure or molecular composition of both raw fuels and refined products; the chemistry involved in the processing and utilization of fuels; fuel cells and their applications; and the analytical and instrumental techniques used in investigations of the foregoing areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信