A VOYAGER Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Statin Therapy on Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Triglyceride Levels in Patients With Hypertriglyceridemia

2016 ◽  
Vol 117 (9) ◽  
pp. 1444-1448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Björn W. Karlson ◽  
Michael K. Palmer ◽  
Stephen J. Nicholls ◽  
Pia Lundman ◽  
Philip J. Barter
Keyword(s):  
Statin Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Biphasic Regulation of Lipid Metabolism: A Meta-Analysis of Icodextrin in Peritoneal Dialysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan-Feng Huang ◽  
Da-Jian Zhu ◽  
Xiao-Wu Chen ◽  
Man-Zhao Ouyang ◽  
Wei-Jie Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Metabolism ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
The Impact

Objectives. The objective of this systematic meta-analysis was to study the impact of icodextrin (ICO) on lipid profiles.Methods. MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Chinese Biomedical Literature, and the Cochrane Library and Reference lists were searched (last search September 2014) in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Results. Searches identified 13 eligible trials with a total of 850 patients. The differentials of total cholesterol (TC) and free fatty acid (FFA) in the ICO group were greater than those in the GLU group. Metaregression analysis showed that TC levels positively correlated with its baseline levels. In the subgroup of patients with dialysis duration more than 6 months, TC and TG in the ICO group were less. In pooled data from cross-sectional studies, differential of TG in the ICO group was less. In the subgroup of patients with diabetes (Martikainen et al., 2005, Sniderman et al., 2014, and Takatori et al., 2011), differential of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in the ICO group was less. There was no significant effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C), or lipoprotein(a).Conclusions. ICO may be beneficial to lipid metabolism, especially for its biphasic regulation of plasma TC levels.

Abstract 14430: Effect Modification of Statin Therapy on the Relationship of Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol With Incident CKD in Us Veterans

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jui-Ting Hsiung ◽  
Maria Marroquin ◽  
Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Us Veterans ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Statin Use

Background: Studies suggests that in the general population, hyperlipidemia may confer higher risk of developing chronic kidney disease (CKD). But, there is conflicting data as to whether statins can protect renal function or slow renal degradation. We sought to examine the impact of statins on the association of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) and risk of incident CKD. Methods: Our cohort included 1,439,756 US veterans without chronic kidney disease (CKD), but with LDL measured between 2004-2006, who were followed until 2014. Incident CKD was defined as over 3 estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) measurements <60 mL/min/1.73m 2 at least 90 days apart. Patients with a statin prescription at the time of LDL measurement were identified. Cox models were used to estimate the associations between LDL with incident CKD. Model adjustments include demographics, comorbidities, smoking status, prescription of fibrate or niacin, body mass index, albumin, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. Results: The cohort included 5% females, 16% African Americans, 26% diabetics, and 30% statin-users, with a mean age of 60±13 years. The median [IQR] of LDL and eGFR were 109 [88,133] mg/dL and 83 [72,94] mL/min/1.73m 2 , respectively. A J-shaped association between LDL and incident CKD were observed in both those on statin and not on a statin after adjustment. Low LDL (<70 mg/dL) was associated with a higher risk of incident CKD compared to the reference (LDL 70-<100 mg/dL) regardless of statin use. High LDL ≥160 mg/dL was associated with the highest of risks of incident CKD (HR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.13, and HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.12, for statin use and no statin use, respectively). Conclusion: Both high and low LDL were associated with higher incident CKD risk independent of statin use in this US veteran cohort. Further studies are needed to understand how to manage cardiovascular disease risk by lowering LDL while simultaneously reducing risk of CKD.

scholarly journals Low‐Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Corrected for Lipoprotein(a) Cholesterol, Risk Thresholds, and Cardiovascular Events

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (23) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Willeit ◽  
Calvin Yeang ◽  
Patrick M. Moriarty ◽  
Lena Tschiderer ◽  
Stephen A. Varvel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Cholesterol Content ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
The Impact

Background Conventional "low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C)" assays measure cholesterol content in both low‐density lipoprotein and lipoprotein(a) particles. To clarify the consequences of this methodological limitation for clinical care, our study aimed to compare associations of “LDL‐C” and corrected LDL‐C with risk of cardiovascular disease and to assess the impact of this correction on the classification of patients into guideline‐recommended LDL‐C categories. Methods and Results Lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was estimated as 30% of lipoprotein(a) mass and subtracted from “LDL‐C” to obtain corrected LDL‐C values (LDL‐C corr30 ). Hazard ratios for cardiovascular disease (defined as coronary heart disease, stroke, or coronary revascularization) were quantified by individual‐patient‐data meta‐analysis of 5 statin landmark trials from the Lipoprotein(a) Studies Collaboration (18 043 patients; 5390 events; 4.7 years median follow‐up). When comparing top versus bottom quartiles, the multivariable‐adjusted hazard ratio for cardiovascular disease was significant for “LDL‐C” (1.17; 95% CI, 1.05–1.31; P =0.005) but not for LDL‐C corr30 (1.07; 95% CI, 0.93–1.22; P =0.362). In a routine laboratory database involving 531 144 patients, reclassification of patients across guideline‐recommended LDL‐C categories when using LDL‐C corr30 was assessed. In “LDL‐C” categories of 70 to <100, 100 to <130, 130 to <190, and ≥190 mg/dL, significant proportions (95% CI) of participants were reassigned to lower LDL‐C categories when LDL‐C corr30 was used: 30.2% (30.0%–30.4%), 35.1% (34.9%–35.4%), 32.9% (32.6%–33.1%), and 41.1% (40.0%–42.2%), respectively. Conclusions “ LDL‐C” was associated with incident cardiovascular disease only when lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was included in its measurement. Refinement in techniques to accurately measure LDL‐C, particularly in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, is warranted to assign risk to the responsible lipoproteins.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document