4.5 Article

The association of high-sensitivity c-reactive protein and other biomarkers with cardiovascular disease in patients treated for HIV: a nested case-control study

Journal

BMC INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 13, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-13-414

Keywords

Biomarkers; Cardiovascular disease; HIV; hsCRP

Funding

  1. Abbvie
  2. Bristol-Myers-Squibb
  3. Gilead
  4. ViiV Healthcare
  5. Janssen
  6. Merck Sharp
  7. Dohme

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the general population, but its role as a predictive marker in HIV-positive patients remains unclear. Aim of the study was to evaluate whether hsCRP or other biomarkers are independent predictors of CVD risk in HIV-infected patients. Methods: Retrospective, nested case-control study. HIV-positive men and women (35-69 years of age) receiving combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) were included. Cases (n = 35) had a major CVD event. Controls (n = 74) free from CVD events for at least 5 years from starting ART were matched on diabetes and smoking. HsCRP, D-dimer, P-selectin, interleukin-6 (IL-6), tissue plasminogen activator, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 levels were measured. Results: High hsCRP was associated with CVD risk, independently of traditional cardiovascular risk factors, HIV replication and the type of ART received at the time of sampling (adjusted odds ratio 8.00 [1.23-51.94] comparing >3.3 mg/L with <0.9 mg/L; P = 0.03). Higher IL-6 and P-selectin levels were also independently associated with increased CVD risk, although the association was weaker than for hsCRP. Higher total cholesterol and lower HDL cholesterol increased CVD risk, independent of hsCRP. Conclusion: hsCRP may be a useful additional biomarker to predict CVD risk in HIV-infected patients receiving cART.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available