4.7 Article

A polymorphism of the cholesteryl ester transfer protein gene predicts cardiovascular events in non-smokers in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 24, Issue 20, Pages 1833-1842

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.ehj.2003.07.001

Keywords

atherosclerosis; enzymes; genetics; lipoproteins; CETP; WOSCOPS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim The association of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) gene polymorphisms with risk of a cardiovascular event and whether any association was explained by an influence on high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels or tow-density lipoprotein (LDL) size was tested in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS). Gene-smoking and gene-treatment interactions were investigated. Methods and results Cases (n=498) and controls (n=1108) were typed for TaqlB, C(-631)A, C(-629)A, 1405V and D442G CETP polymorphisms. Homozygotes for the TaqlB2 allele (B2B2) had a 30% reduced risk of a cardiovascular event (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, CI95, 0.51-0.96, P=0.03) compared to B1B1 homozygotes. Inclusion of HDL or LDL diameter in multivariate analysis only marginally attenuated the relationships. Non-smokers, but not smokers, showed a dose-dependent association of risk with TdqlB genotype. Treatment benefit was not significantly different in B1B1 (OR 0.71, pravastatin vs placebo), B1B2 (OR 0.68) and B2B2 (OR 0.61) individuals. The other CETP polymorphisms studied had no significant association with cardiovascular risk. Haplotype analysis did not add to the information given by the individual polymorphisms. Conclusion The association between CETP TaqlB genotype and cardiovascular risk is primarily in non-smokers, is not fully explained by effects on HDL levels or LDL size, and the benefit of pravastatin treatment was not influenced by this polymorphism. (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The European Society of Cardiology.

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