Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading?
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Some patients administered cholesterol-lowering therapies may experience an increase in the proportion of small LDL particles, which may be misinterpreted as a worsening of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk. This study asse...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2010-11-01
|
Series: | Lipids in Health and Disease |
Online Access: | http://www.lipidworld.com/content/9/1/136 |
id |
doaj-8452b25e81fb4f71b9b5260bd0be55fa |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-8452b25e81fb4f71b9b5260bd0be55fa2020-11-24T21:00:31ZengBMCLipids in Health and Disease1476-511X2010-11-019113610.1186/1476-511X-9-136Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading?Hanson Mary EJensen ErinBird StevenLeiter Lawrence AConard ScottBays HaroldShah ArvindTershakovec Andrew M<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Some patients administered cholesterol-lowering therapies may experience an increase in the proportion of small LDL particles, which may be misinterpreted as a worsening of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk. This study assessed the lipid effects of adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin or doubling the atorvastatin dose on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (and the cholesterol content of LDL subclasses), LDL particle number (approximated by apolipoprotein B), and LDL particle size. This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study of hypercholesterolemic, high atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk patients. After stabilization of atorvastatin 40 mg, 579 patients with LDL-C >70 mg/dL were randomized to 6 weeks of ezetimibe + atorvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg. Efficacy parameters included changes from baseline in LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and lipoprotein subclasses (Vertical Auto Profile II) and pattern for the overall population, as well as patient subgroups with baseline triglyceride levels <150 mg/dL or ≥150 mg/dL.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Both treatments significantly reduced LDL-C (and the cholesterol content of most LDL subfractions [LDL<sub>1-4</sub>]) apolipoprotein B, non-HDL-C levels, but did not reduce the proportion of smaller, more dense LDL particles; in fact, the proportion of Pattern B was numerically increased. Results were generally similar in patients with triglyceride levels <150 or ≥150 mg/dL.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>When assessing the effects of escalating cholesterol-lowering therapy, effects upon Pattern B alone to assess coronary heart disease risk may be misleading when interpreted without considerations of other lipid effects, such as reductions in LDL-C, atherogenic lipoprotein particle concentration, and non-HDL-C levels.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>(Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: Clinical trial # NCT00276484)</p> http://www.lipidworld.com/content/9/1/136 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Hanson Mary E Jensen Erin Bird Steven Leiter Lawrence A Conard Scott Bays Harold Shah Arvind Tershakovec Andrew M |
spellingShingle |
Hanson Mary E Jensen Erin Bird Steven Leiter Lawrence A Conard Scott Bays Harold Shah Arvind Tershakovec Andrew M Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading? Lipids in Health and Disease |
author_facet |
Hanson Mary E Jensen Erin Bird Steven Leiter Lawrence A Conard Scott Bays Harold Shah Arvind Tershakovec Andrew M |
author_sort |
Hanson Mary E |
title |
Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading? |
title_short |
Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading? |
title_full |
Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading? |
title_fullStr |
Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading? |
title_sort |
are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading? |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
Lipids in Health and Disease |
issn |
1476-511X |
publishDate |
2010-11-01 |
description |
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Some patients administered cholesterol-lowering therapies may experience an increase in the proportion of small LDL particles, which may be misinterpreted as a worsening of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk. This study assessed the lipid effects of adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin or doubling the atorvastatin dose on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (and the cholesterol content of LDL subclasses), LDL particle number (approximated by apolipoprotein B), and LDL particle size. This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study of hypercholesterolemic, high atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk patients. After stabilization of atorvastatin 40 mg, 579 patients with LDL-C >70 mg/dL were randomized to 6 weeks of ezetimibe + atorvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg. Efficacy parameters included changes from baseline in LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and lipoprotein subclasses (Vertical Auto Profile II) and pattern for the overall population, as well as patient subgroups with baseline triglyceride levels <150 mg/dL or ≥150 mg/dL.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Both treatments significantly reduced LDL-C (and the cholesterol content of most LDL subfractions [LDL<sub>1-4</sub>]) apolipoprotein B, non-HDL-C levels, but did not reduce the proportion of smaller, more dense LDL particles; in fact, the proportion of Pattern B was numerically increased. Results were generally similar in patients with triglyceride levels <150 or ≥150 mg/dL.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>When assessing the effects of escalating cholesterol-lowering therapy, effects upon Pattern B alone to assess coronary heart disease risk may be misleading when interpreted without considerations of other lipid effects, such as reductions in LDL-C, atherogenic lipoprotein particle concentration, and non-HDL-C levels.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>(Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: Clinical trial # NCT00276484)</p> |
url |
http://www.lipidworld.com/content/9/1/136 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT hansonmarye areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading AT jensenerin areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading AT birdsteven areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading AT leiterlawrencea areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading AT conardscott areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading AT baysharold areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading AT shaharvind areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading AT tershakovecandrewm areposttreatmentlowdensitylipoproteinsubclasspatternanalysespotentiallymisleading |
_version_ |
1716779530563092480 |