@article {1198, title = {Triglyceride-mediated pathways and coronary disease: collaborative analysis of 101 studies.}, journal = {Lancet}, volume = {375}, year = {2010}, month = {2010 May 08}, pages = {1634-9}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Whether triglyceride-mediated pathways are causally relevant to coronary heart disease is uncertain. We studied a genetic variant that regulates triglyceride concentration to help judge likelihood of causality.

METHODS: We assessed the -1131T>C (rs662799) promoter polymorphism of the apolipoprotein A5 (APOA5) gene in relation to triglyceride concentration, several other risk factors, and risk of coronary heart disease. We compared disease risk for genetically-raised triglyceride concentration (20,842 patients with coronary heart disease, 35,206 controls) with that recorded for equivalent differences in circulating triglyceride concentration in prospective studies (302 430 participants with no history of cardiovascular disease; 12,785 incident cases of coronary heart disease during 2.79 million person-years at risk). We analysed -1131T>C in 1795 people without a history of cardiovascular disease who had information about lipoprotein concentration and diameter obtained by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

FINDINGS: The minor allele frequency of -1131T>C was 8\% (95\% CI 7-9). -1131T>C was not significantly associated with several non-lipid risk factors or LDL cholesterol, and it was modestly associated with lower HDL cholesterol (mean difference per C allele 3.5\% [95\% CI 2.6-4.6]; 0.053 mmol/L [0.039-0.068]), lower apolipoprotein AI (1.3\% [0.3-2.3]; 0.023 g/L [0.005-0.041]), and higher apolipoprotein B (3.2\% [1.3-5.1]; 0.027 g/L [0.011-0.043]). By contrast, for every C allele inherited, mean triglyceride concentration was 16.0\% (95\% CI 12.9-18.7), or 0.25 mmol/L (0.20-0.29), higher (p=4.4x10(-24)). The odds ratio for coronary heart disease was 1.18 (95\% CI 1.11-1.26; p=2.6x10(-7)) per C allele, which was concordant with the hazard ratio of 1.10 (95\% CI 1.08-1.12) per 16\% higher triglyceride concentration recorded in prospective studies. -1131T>C was significantly associated with higher VLDL particle concentration (mean difference per C allele 12.2 nmol/L [95\% CI 7.7-16.7]; p=9.3x10(-8)) and smaller HDL particle size (0.14 nm [0.08-0.20]; p=7.0x10(-5)), factors that could mediate the effects of triglyceride.

INTERPRETATION: These data are consistent with a causal association between triglyceride-mediated pathways and coronary heart disease.

FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, Novartis.

}, keywords = {Apolipoprotein A-V, Apolipoproteins, Apolipoproteins A, Coronary Disease, Gene Frequency, Genotype, Humans, Lipids, Lipoproteins, HDL, Lipoproteins, LDL, Lipoproteins, VLDL, Mendelian Randomization Analysis, Particle Size, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Promoter Regions, Genetic, Risk Factors, Triglycerides}, issn = {1474-547X}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60545-4}, author = {Sarwar, Nadeem and Sandhu, Manjinder S and Ricketts, Sally L and Butterworth, Adam S and Di Angelantonio, Emanuele and Boekholdt, S Matthijs and Ouwehand, Willem and Watkins, Hugh and Samani, Nilesh J and Saleheen, Danish and Lawlor, Debbie and Reilly, Muredach P and Hingorani, Aroon D and Talmud, Philippa J and Danesh, John} } @article {1272, title = {Diabetes mellitus, fasting glucose, and risk of cause-specific death.}, journal = {N Engl J Med}, volume = {364}, year = {2011}, month = {2011 Mar 03}, pages = {829-841}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: The extent to which diabetes mellitus or hyperglycemia is related to risk of death from cancer or other nonvascular conditions is uncertain.

METHODS: We calculated hazard ratios for cause-specific death, according to baseline diabetes status or fasting glucose level, from individual-participant data on 123,205 deaths among 820,900 people in 97 prospective studies.

RESULTS: After adjustment for age, sex, smoking status, and body-mass index, hazard ratios among persons with diabetes as compared with persons without diabetes were as follows: 1.80 (95\% confidence interval [CI], 1.71 to 1.90) for death from any cause, 1.25 (95\% CI, 1.19 to 1.31) for death from cancer, 2.32 (95\% CI, 2.11 to 2.56) for death from vascular causes, and 1.73 (95\% CI, 1.62 to 1.85) for death from other causes. Diabetes (vs. no diabetes) was moderately associated with death from cancers of the liver, pancreas, ovary, colorectum, lung, bladder, and breast. Aside from cancer and vascular disease, diabetes (vs. no diabetes) was also associated with death from renal disease, liver disease, pneumonia and other infectious diseases, mental disorders, nonhepatic digestive diseases, external causes, intentional self-harm, nervous-system disorders, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Hazard ratios were appreciably reduced after further adjustment for glycemia measures, but not after adjustment for systolic blood pressure, lipid levels, inflammation or renal markers. Fasting glucose levels exceeding 100 mg per deciliter (5.6 mmol per liter), but not levels of 70 to 100 mg per deciliter (3.9 to 5.6 mmol per liter), were associated with death. A 50-year-old with diabetes died, on average, 6 years earlier than a counterpart without diabetes, with about 40\% of the difference in survival attributable to excess nonvascular deaths.

CONCLUSIONS: In addition to vascular disease, diabetes is associated with substantial premature death from several cancers, infectious diseases, external causes, intentional self-harm, and degenerative disorders, independent of several major risk factors. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation and others.).

}, keywords = {Blood Glucose, Cause of Death, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Humans, Hyperglycemia, Life Expectancy, Male, Middle Aged, Risk, Survival Analysis}, issn = {1533-4406}, doi = {10.1056/NEJMoa1008862}, author = {Rao Kondapally Seshasai, Sreenivasa and Kaptoge, Stephen and Thompson, Alexander and Di Angelantonio, Emanuele and Gao, Pei and Sarwar, Nadeem and Whincup, Peter H and Mukamal, Kenneth J and Gillum, Richard F and Holme, Ingar and Nj{\o}lstad, Inger and Fletcher, Astrid and Nilsson, Peter and Lewington, Sarah and Collins, Rory and Gudnason, Vilmundur and Thompson, Simon G and Sattar, Naveed and Selvin, Elizabeth and Hu, Frank B and Danesh, John} } @article {1563, title = {Separate and combined associations of body-mass index and abdominal adiposity with cardiovascular disease: collaborative analysis of 58 prospective studies.}, journal = {Lancet}, volume = {377}, year = {2011}, month = {2011 Mar 26}, pages = {1085-95}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Guidelines differ about the value of assessment of adiposity measures for cardiovascular disease risk prediction when information is available for other risk factors. We studied the separate and combined associations of body-mass index (BMI), waist circumference, and waist-to-hip ratio with risk of first-onset cardiovascular disease.

METHODS: We used individual records from 58 cohorts to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) per 1 SD higher baseline values (4.56 kg/m(2) higher BMI, 12.6 cm higher waist circumference, and 0.083 higher waist-to-hip ratio) and measures of risk discrimination and reclassification. Serial adiposity assessments were used to calculate regression dilution ratios.

RESULTS: Individual records were available for 221,934 people in 17 countries (14,297 incident cardiovascular disease outcomes; 1.87 million person-years at risk). Serial adiposity assessments were made in up to 63,821 people (mean interval 5.7 years [SD 3.9]). In people with BMI of 20 kg/m(2) or higher, HRs for cardiovascular disease were 1.23 (95\% CI 1.17-1.29) with BMI, 1.27 (1.20-1.33) with waist circumference, and 1.25 (1.19-1.31) with waist-to-hip ratio, after adjustment for age, sex, and smoking status. After further adjustment for baseline systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, and total and HDL cholesterol, corresponding HRs were 1.07 (1.03-1.11) with BMI, 1.10 (1.05-1.14) with waist circumference, and 1.12 (1.08-1.15) with waist-to-hip ratio. Addition of information on BMI, waist circumference, or waist-to-hip ratio to a cardiovascular disease risk prediction model containing conventional risk factors did not importantly improve risk discrimination (C-index changes of -0.0001, -0.0001, and 0.0008, respectively), nor classification of participants to categories of predicted 10-year risk (net reclassification improvement -0.19\%, -0.05\%, and -0.05\%, respectively). Findings were similar when adiposity measures were considered in combination. Reproducibility was greater for BMI (regression dilution ratio 0.95, 95\% CI 0.93-0.97) than for waist circumference (0.86, 0.83-0.89) or waist-to-hip ratio (0.63, 0.57-0.70).

INTERPRETATION: BMI, waist circumference, and waist-to-hip ratio, whether assessed singly or in combination, do not importantly improve cardiovascular disease risk prediction in people in developed countries when additional information is available for systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, and lipids.

FUNDING: British Heart Foundation and UK Medical Research Council.

}, keywords = {Age Factors, Blood Pressure, Body Mass Index, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cholesterol, Cholesterol, HDL, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Abdominal, Proportional Hazards Models, Prospective Studies, Risk Assessment, Sex Factors, Smoking, Systole, Waist Circumference, Waist-Hip Ratio}, issn = {1474-547X}, doi = {10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60105-0}, author = {Wormser, David and Kaptoge, Stephen and Di Angelantonio, Emanuele and Wood, Angela M and Pennells, Lisa and Thompson, Alex and Sarwar, Nadeem and Kizer, Jorge R and Lawlor, Debbie A and Nordestgaard, B{\o}rge G and Ridker, Paul and Salomaa, Veikko and Stevens, June and Woodward, Mark and Sattar, Naveed and Collins, Rory and Thompson, Simon G and Whitlock, Gary and Danesh, John} } @article {1399, title = {Lipid-related markers and cardiovascular disease prediction.}, journal = {JAMA}, volume = {307}, year = {2012}, month = {2012 Jun 20}, pages = {2499-506}, abstract = {

CONTEXT: The value of assessing various emerging lipid-related markers for prediction of first cardiovascular events is debated.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adding information on apolipoprotein B and apolipoprotein A-I, lipoprotein(a), or lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 to total cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) improves cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual records were available for 165,544 participants without baseline CVD in 37 prospective cohorts (calendar years of recruitment: 1968-2007) with up to 15,126 incident fatal or nonfatal CVD outcomes (10,132 CHD and 4994 stroke outcomes) during a median follow-up of 10.4 years (interquartile range, 7.6-14 years).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discrimination of CVD outcomes and reclassification of participants across predicted 10-year risk categories of low (<10\%), intermediate (10\%-<20\%), and high (>=20\%) risk.

RESULTS: The addition of information on various lipid-related markers to total cholesterol, HDL-C, and other conventional risk factors yielded improvement in the model{\textquoteright}s discrimination: C-index change, 0.0006 (95\% CI, 0.0002-0.0009) for the combination of apolipoprotein B and A-I; 0.0016 (95\% CI, 0.0009-0.0023) for lipoprotein(a); and 0.0018 (95\% CI, 0.0010-0.0026) for lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 mass. Net reclassification improvements were less than 1\% with the addition of each of these markers to risk scores containing conventional risk factors. We estimated that for 100,000 adults aged 40 years or older, 15,436 would be initially classified at intermediate risk using conventional risk factors alone. Additional testing with a combination of apolipoprotein B and A-I would reclassify 1.1\%; lipoprotein(a), 4.1\%; and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 mass, 2.7\% of people to a 20\% or higher predicted CVD risk category and, therefore, in need of statin treatment under Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines.

CONCLUSION: In a study of individuals without known CVD, the addition of information on the combination of apolipoprotein B and A-I, lipoprotein(a), or lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 mass to risk scores containing total cholesterol and HDL-C led to slight improvement in CVD prediction.

}, keywords = {Aged, Biomarkers, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cholesterol, HDL, Cohort Studies, Female, Humans, Lipoproteins, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Assessment}, issn = {1538-3598}, doi = {10.1001/jama.2012.6571}, author = {Di Angelantonio, Emanuele and Gao, Pei and Pennells, Lisa and Kaptoge, Stephen and Caslake, Muriel and Thompson, Alexander and Butterworth, Adam S and Sarwar, Nadeem and Wormser, David and Saleheen, Danish and Ballantyne, Christie M and Psaty, Bruce M and Sundstr{\"o}m, Johan and Ridker, Paul M and Nagel, Dorothea and Gillum, Richard F and Ford, Ian and Ducimetiere, Pierre and Kiechl, Stefan and Koenig, Wolfgang and Dullaart, Robin P F and Assmann, Gerd and D{\textquoteright}Agostino, Ralph B and Dagenais, Gilles R and Cooper, Jackie A and Kromhout, Daan and Onat, Altan and Tipping, Robert W and G{\'o}mez-de-la-C{\'a}mara, Agust{\'\i}n and Rosengren, Annika and Sutherland, Susan E and Gallacher, John and Fowkes, F Gerry R and Casiglia, Edoardo and Hofman, Albert and Salomaa, Veikko and Barrett-Connor, Elizabeth and Clarke, Robert and Brunner, Eric and Jukema, J Wouter and Simons, Leon A and Sandhu, Manjinder and Wareham, Nicholas J and Khaw, Kay-Tee and Kauhanen, Jussi and Salonen, Jukka T and Howard, William J and Nordestgaard, B{\o}rge G and Wood, Angela M and Thompson, Simon G and Boekholdt, S Matthijs and Sattar, Naveed and Packard, Chris and Gudnason, Vilmundur and Danesh, John} } @article {6559, title = {Glycated hemoglobin measurement and prediction of cardiovascular disease.}, journal = {JAMA}, volume = {311}, year = {2014}, month = {2014 Mar 26}, pages = {1225-33}, abstract = {

IMPORTANCE: The value of measuring levels of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) for the prediction of first cardiovascular events is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adding information on HbA1c values to conventional cardiovascular risk factors is associated with improvement in prediction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Analysis of individual-participant data available from 73 prospective studies involving 294,998 participants without a known history of diabetes mellitus or CVD at the baseline assessment.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Measures of risk discrimination for CVD outcomes (eg, C-index) and reclassification (eg, net reclassification improvement) of participants across predicted 10-year risk categories of low (<5\%), intermediate (5\% to <7.5\%), and high (>= 7.5\%) risk.

RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 9.9 (interquartile range, 7.6-13.2) years, 20,840 incident fatal and nonfatal CVD outcomes (13,237 coronary heart disease and 7603 stroke outcomes) were recorded. In analyses adjusted for several conventional cardiovascular risk factors, there was an approximately J-shaped association between HbA1c values and CVD risk. The association between HbA1c values and CVD risk changed only slightly after adjustment for total cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations or estimated glomerular filtration rate, but this association attenuated somewhat after adjustment for concentrations of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and C-reactive protein. The C-index for a CVD risk prediction model containing conventional cardiovascular risk factors alone was 0.7434 (95\% CI, 0.7350 to 0.7517). The addition of information on HbA1c was associated with a C-index change of 0.0018 (0.0003 to 0.0033) and a net reclassification improvement of 0.42 (-0.63 to 1.48) for the categories of predicted 10-year CVD risk. The improvement provided by HbA1c assessment in prediction of CVD risk was equal to or better than estimated improvements for measurement of fasting, random, or postload plasma glucose levels.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a study of individuals without known CVD or diabetes, additional assessment of HbA1c values in the context of CVD risk assessment provided little incremental benefit for prediction of CVD risk.

}, keywords = {Aged, C-Reactive Protein, Cholesterol, HDL, Coronary Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin A, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Prospective Studies, Risk Assessment, Stroke}, issn = {1538-3598}, doi = {10.1001/jama.2014.1873}, author = {Di Angelantonio, Emanuele and Gao, Pei and Khan, Hassan and Butterworth, Adam S and Wormser, David and Kaptoge, Stephen and Kondapally Seshasai, Sreenivasa Rao and Thompson, Alex and Sarwar, Nadeem and Willeit, Peter and Ridker, Paul M and Barr, Elizabeth L M and Khaw, Kay-Tee and Psaty, Bruce M and Brenner, Hermann and Balkau, Beverley and Dekker, Jacqueline M and Lawlor, Debbie A and Daimon, Makoto and Willeit, Johann and Nj{\o}lstad, Inger and Nissinen, Aulikki and Brunner, Eric J and Kuller, Lewis H and Price, Jackie F and Sundstr{\"o}m, Johan and Knuiman, Matthew W and Feskens, Edith J M and Verschuren, W M M and Wald, Nicholas and Bakker, Stephan J L and Whincup, Peter H and Ford, Ian and Goldbourt, Uri and G{\'o}mez-de-la-C{\'a}mara, Agust{\'\i}n and Gallacher, John and Simons, Leon A and Rosengren, Annika and Sutherland, Susan E and Bj{\"o}rkelund, Cecilia and Blazer, Dan G and Wassertheil-Smoller, Sylvia and Onat, Altan and Mar{\'\i}n Iba{\~n}ez, Alejandro and Casiglia, Edoardo and Jukema, J Wouter and Simpson, Lara M and Giampaoli, Simona and Nordestgaard, B{\o}rge G and Selmer, Randi and Wennberg, Patrik and Kauhanen, Jussi and Salonen, Jukka T and Dankner, Rachel and Barrett-Connor, Elizabeth and Kavousi, Maryam and Gudnason, Vilmundur and Evans, Denis and Wallace, Robert B and Cushman, Mary and D{\textquoteright}Agostino, Ralph B and Umans, Jason G and Kiyohara, Yutaka and Nakagawa, Hidaeki and Sato, Shinichi and Gillum, Richard F and Folsom, Aaron R and van der Schouw, Yvonne T and Moons, Karel G and Griffin, Simon J and Sattar, Naveed and Wareham, Nicholas J and Selvin, Elizabeth and Thompson, Simon G and Danesh, John} }