4.7 Article

Polymorphism in APOB associated with increased low-density lipoprotein levels in both genders in the general population

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Volume 90, Issue 10, Pages 5797-5803

Publisher

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2005-0974

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context: Rare mutations in APOB cause hypercholesterolemia. Whether common polymorphisms in APOB have similar effects remains controversial. Objective: We tested the hypothesis that the APOB 7673C > T polymorphism (T2488T) is associated with variation in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels and with risk of ischemic heart disease (IHD), ischemic cerebrovascular disease (ICVD), and total mortality in the general population. Design: The design was a cohort study with 22-yr follow-up ( 166,232 person years) and two case-control studies, The Copenhagen City Heart Study. Settings: The study was performed within the Danish general population and at a university hospital. Participants: The study was comprised of 9185 individuals from the general population, 2157 patients with IHD, and 378 patients with ICVD. Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measures were lipids, lipoproteins, apolipoproteins (apo), IHD, ICVD, and total mortality. Results: Genotype was associated with increases in total cholesterol (women/men), LDL cholesterol, and apoB of 0.20/0.26 mmol/liter (3.3%/4.4%), 0.22/0.28 mmol/liter (5.9%/7.8%), and 5.0/5.6 mg/dl (5.9%/6.7%) in TT vs. CC homozygotes, respectively. These results were consistent over time. Despite this, the 7673C > T polymorphism was not associated with risk of IHD, ICVD, or total mortality prospectively or in case-control studies. Conclusion: The APOB 7673C > T polymorphism is associated with moderate increases in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and apoB in both genders in the general population, but not with risk of IHD, ICVD, or total mortality.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available