4.4 Article

Non-high-density lipoprotein and very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and their risk predictive values in coronary heart disease

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 98, Issue 10, Pages 1363-1368

Publisher

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.06.032

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To determine if non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol is a more useful predictor of coronary heart disease (CHD) risk than low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and if very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) cholesterol is an independent predictor of CHD risk, data from the Framingham Heart Study (2,693 men, 3,101 women) were used for this analysis. All subjects were aged >= 30 years and free of CHD at baseline, and incident CHD was the end point (618 men, 372 women). Cox proportional-hazards models were used to assess the risk for CHD (relative risks and 95% confidence intervals) on the basis of the joint distribution of LDL cholesterol and non-HDL cholesterol (in milligrams per deciliter), as well as LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and VLDL cholesterol as continuous variables. After multivariate adjustment, within non-HDL cholesterol level, no association was found between LDL cholesterol and the risk for CHD, whereas within LDL cholesterol levels, a strong positive and graded association between non-HDL cholesterol and risk for CHD was observed. When the analysis was repeated within triglyceride levels (< 200 vs 2:200 mg/dl), the risk pattern did not change significantly. Also, VLDL cholesterol was found to be a significant predictor of CHD risk after adjusting for LDL cholesterol at triglyceride levels of < 200 or < 200 mg/dI. In conclusion, these results suggest that nonHDL cholesterol level is a stronger predictor of CHD risk than LDL cholesterol; that is, VLDL cholesterol may play a critical role in the development of CHD. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available