Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Advertise | Login 
 
Search Article 
  
Advanced search 
  Users Online: 235 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  

 
Table of Contents
EDITORIAL
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 418-428

Triglyceride and cardiovascular risk: A critical appraisal


Department of Endocrinology, GD Hospital and Diabetes Institute, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Date of Web Publication3-Jun-2016

Correspondence Address:
Awadhesh Kumar Singh
GD Hospital and Diabetes Institute, Kolkata, West Bengal
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2230-8210.183460

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Singh AK, Singh R. Triglyceride and cardiovascular risk: A critical appraisal. Indian J Endocr Metab 2016;20:418-28

How to cite this URL:
Singh AK, Singh R. Triglyceride and cardiovascular risk: A critical appraisal. Indian J Endocr Metab [serial online] 2016 [cited 2021 Feb 27];20:418-28. Available from: https://www.ijem.in/text.asp?2016/20/4/418/183460



Triglyceride (TG) in lipidology has been mired with several issues including its measurement, role in inducing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), disconnect in outcome between epidemiological and genetic studies, and the discordant findings in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) versus subgroup analysis. [Table 1] summarizes some of these controversies.
Table 1: Controversies and consensus on triglyceride

Click here to view


First, the measurement of TG in the evaluation of cardiovascular (CV) risk has long been associated with multiple issues. This include skewed distribution that necessitates categorical definitions or log transformations, increasing variability with rising TG levels, inverse association with high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)/apolipoprotein (Apo) AI and finally its way of measurement fasting versus nonfasting.[1],[2] Further compounding to already existing problem could be an elevated TG level to be a simple epiphenomenon of insulin resistance or the metabolic syndrome or diabetes, and thus elevated TG may represent only a biomarker of risk, rather than a cause. In addition, many subjects with high-TG levels and impaired glucose who subsequently develop type 2 diabetes mellitus are not usually adjusted in multivariate analysis and thus could not measure the actual risk perfectly and independently.[3],[4]

Second, the role of TG in inducing ASCVD has been controversial and not as robust as the role of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Although Zilversmit's hypothesized in 1979 that atherogenesis is related to the postprandially raised concentrations of TG and TG-rich (remnant) lipoproteins (TGRLP),[5] the independent relationships of elevated TG to the risk of future CV events or in other words the extent to which TG directly promote CVD, still appears to remain contentious. Individuals with very high TG, so-called chylomicronemia syndrome, do not develop ASCVD and that further led to scepticism about TG relation to CVD.[6] It should be noted that although the very high TG or TGRLP are too large to penetrate arterial intima and unlikely to cause ASCVD, mild-to-moderately raised TG/TGRLP is small enough to enter into intima and may potentiate a cascade of inflammation and therefore have potential to promote atherosclerosis.[7]


   Evidence for Causality between Triglyceride and Cardiovascular Disease Top


In 1980, Hulley et al. trying to associate a causal relation of TG with CV disease (CVD) concluded that “widespread screening and treatment of healthy persons for hypertriglyceridemia be abandoned until more persuasive evidence becomes available.”[8] Despite three decades of several additional researches, the controversy regarding the relation between TG and CVD still persists. This perhaps could be due to the conflicting results in the studies performed or in part due to the modest effect size.

Population-based prospective studies and meta-analysis

While several of the earlier cohort studies have found a univariate association of TG to CVD, this association has become insignificant after adjustment for either total cholesterol (TC) or LDL-C. Moreover, many of these studies did not measure HDL-C and thus, relations of TG to CVD still remain unclear.

Nonetheless, many large studies have found a significant association. [Table 2] summarizes those studies. In addition, some studies also found nonfasting TG associated with even further increase in CV risk. [Table 3] summarizes those studies. While these studies support the hypothesis that nonfasting TG may be another important predictor of CVD risk than fasting levels, the lack of standardization, and reference levels impedes a general implementation.[9] Thus, currently, the diagnosis of hypertriglyceridemia is still based on 12 h fasting levels.
Table 2: TG and cardiovascular risk in cohort studies

Click here to view
Table 3: TG and cardiovascular risk: Fasting versus non-fasting

Click here to view


Interestingly, the measurement of fasting TG is currently recommended in most of the countries except Denmark, where nonfasting TG is a standard practice since 2009. In Denmark when nonfasting TG is >4 mmol/L, only then a fasting TG can be requested by the attending physician.[10] This could be due to some advantage with nonfasting TG. A simple advantage of nonfasting over fasting lipid measurements is its ease for patients, physician, and laboratory. As most people eat regularly throughout the day, nonfasting lipid might be a better indicator of average lipid concentrations in the blood. This also has the potential of increased compliance for regular monitoring. Moreover, TG on average increase only by 0.2–0.4 mmol/L after eating normal meals over the next 2–6 h.[11] However, the measurement of fasting TG may have certain advantage. First, TG concentrations are more stable in the fasting than nonfasting state (it is believed, although no evidence suggests so). Second, LDL-C measured by original Friedewald equation is designed for fasting TG and thus easier, although directly measured and calculated LDL-C values are highly correlated with each other, both in fasting and nonfasting state. Finally, the lack of standardization and reference value for nonfasting TG impedes generalized implementation unlike fasting TG, although modified Friedewald equations are also available for more accurate LDL-C calculations.[12]

Taken together, majority of the cohort studies largely support TG as a CV risk factor. Ironically, the results from the largest Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration which assessed over 300,000 participants from 68 prospective studies found a CAD hazard ratio (HR) of 1.37 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.31–1.42) with increased TG, which attenuated to an insignificant hazard of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.94–1.05) after adjustment for HDL-C and non-HDL-C. This largest epidemiological study thus concluded that “for population-wide assessment of vascular risk, TG measurement provides no additional information about vascular risk with given knowledge of HDL-C and TC levels, although there may be separate reasons to measure TG concentration (e.g., prevention of pancreatitis).”[13]

Genetic studies

While genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have found a causal association between raised TG and CVD, the functions of many GWAS-identified genetic variants are largely unknown. A Mendelian randomization candidate gene approach has suggested that the around 30 genes variants or more, in association to lifestyle factors and obesity, can modestly increase TG. Of these, mutations in at least six different genes such as lower plateau limit (LPL), APOC2, APOA5, LMF1, GPIHBP1, and GPD1A can increase TG substantially and are identified as monogenic disorders. A number of these studies have clearly linked high TG with increased CV risk. [Table 4] summarizes the CVD risk with high TG in those genetic studies.
Table 4: Genetic studies linking TG with cardiovascular risk

Click here to view


Interestingly, a significantly reduced risk of ischemic CVD has also been found with genetically reduced TG. Since LPL is the principal TG-metabolizing enzyme and apo's C3 and A5 modulates LPL function as well as modulate liver uptake of remnant cholesterol, targeting these three important proteins may yield reduced CV risk.

In this regard, some studies have found a 24% and a 46% relative risk reduction, in ischemic CVD for APOA5 and LPL, respectively (with corresponding reduction in nonfasting TG by 35–36%), compared with non-TG reducing alleles.[14],[15],[16],[17] In Copenhagen general population, a 41% ischemic CVD reduction was seen with APOC3 loss-of-function heterozygosity (along with the corresponding reduction in nonfasting TG by 44%).[18] Another study from 18 different cohorts found a 40% reduction in CHD observed with 39% corresponding reduction in TG.[19] Recently, angiopoietin-like 3 and 4 (ANGPTL3 and ANGPTL4) mutations have also been found to cause reduced TG and LDL-C, making this protein an another new drug target.[20]

Taken together, it is increasingly appearing through genetic studies that high concentrations of TG-rich lipoproteins or remnant cholesterol are causal risk factors for CVD and all-cause mortality.

Clinical intervention trial

The effect of lowering TG to CVD risk reduction has been complicated by some major issues. First, although a number of trials of statin or fibrate monotherapy have examined the potential role of baseline TG with or without HDL-C level on CVD risk, most clinical trials have excluded the patient with high TG of >400 mg/dL. Thus, it is yet unknown whether reducing TG and TGRLP provides CV benefit. Second, no large-scale randomized trials have directly examined the effect of reducing TG on CVD risk, in people with raised TG. Thus, only the secondary subgroup analyses from these trials have been left out to assess the CVD risk in patient with high TG, with or without low HDL.

The major CV outcome trials of statin and fibrates as a monotherapy or combination therapy, in order of their publication, have been cited as a timeline in [Figure 1]. Overall statin therapy has been associated with significant reduction in almost all the CV outcomes, irrespective of severity of baseline risk, gender, with or without background diabetes, and intensive statin therapy additionally lowered the risk by ~15–16%.[21],[22],[23],[24],[25],[26] Nevertheless, a significant amount of residual risk still appears to remain. [Figure 2] and [Figure 3] depict the residual risk in major statin trials. [Figure 4] depicts the relative risk reduction with conventional versus intensive statin therapy. [Figure 5] depicts the residual risk with intensive statin therapy. [Figure 6] summarizes the outcome with statins in patient with diabetes versus no diabetes. [Figure 7] depicts residual CV risk with statins in patients with diabetes versus no diabetes. These findings clearly suggest that additional agents are required to reduce remaining CV residual risk with statins. The big question is, does lowering of TG reduce CV risk in clinical trials?
Figure 1: Major statin and fibrates trials in order of their publication

Click here to view
Figure 2: Residual cardiovascular risk in major statin trials (statin vs. control)

Click here to view
Figure 3: Residual risk still persisting with statins in major statin trials

Click here to view
Figure 4: Risk reduction with conventional versus intensive statin therapy

Click here to view
Figure 5: Residual cardiovascular risk after intensive statin therapy

Click here to view
Figure 6: Outcomes with statins in diabetes versus no diabetes

Click here to view
Figure 7: Residual risk with statins in diabetes versus no diabetes

Click here to view


Although several statin trials such as Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S), the cholesterol and recurrent events (CARE) trial, the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS), the Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TexCAPS), and the treating to new targets (TNT) study found increased CV risk with higher baseline TG. Only 4S and CARE found a greater CVD risk reduction in high TG subgroup with statin therapy. Interestingly, in the Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID), the Heart Protection Study and WOSCOPS, CVD reductions were similar across all baselines of TG. Intriguingly, the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcome Trial found higher CVD reduction in those without having the feature of metabolic syndrome. Taken together, these perhaps suggest that statin therapy could be beneficial in subgroups with or without high TG.[27],[28],[29],[30],[31],[32],[33],[34],[35],[36]

Some statin trials have also assessed the potential effect of on-treatment TG levels on CVD risk, mainly in the secondary analyses and found mixed results. AFCAPS/TexCAPS found no association of on-treatment TG level to CVD risk, similar in line to Veterans Affairs HDL Intervention Trial (VA-HIT) where TG level was not predictive of CVD event, despite significant benefit observed in CV outcome in these trials.[37],[38] In contrast, the LIPID study found 11% decrease in CVD risk (14% after adjustment for other risk factors) with each 1 mmol/L decrease in TG with pravastatin, despite no association of baseline TG level to CVD risk in the placebo arm. It should be noted, however, that in LIPID trial, the lipids subtype most strongly associated with CVD risk were apo-B, LDL-C, and the ratio of TC to HDL-C.[39] Similarly, in the pravastatin or atorvastatin evaluation and infection therapy-thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (PROVE IT-TIMI) trial each 10 mg/dL decrease in on-treatment TG level was associated with 1.8% CVD risk reduction (1.4% after adjustment for other risk factors). Beside, reduction of on-treatment TG to <150 mg/dL was associated with a 27% reduction in CVD risk. Interestingly, a combined data (post hoc) from the Incremental Decrease in Endpoints through Aggressive Lipid Lowering study and TNT, also found ~ 30% higher CVD risk with on-treatment TG of >150 mg/dL although after adjustment for all confounders there found to be no association.[40]

These findings collectively suggest that statin-treated patients with high TG may exhibit an increased risk for CVD. However, these patients also displayed several other metabolic abnormalities including high non-HDL-C and Apo-B. Thus, the predictive effect of TG to CV risk still remains unknown.

The results from TG lowering trials with fibrates are another conflicting area. The first trial with gemfibrozil monotherapy in primary prevention of the Helsinki Heart Study (HHS) and subsequent trial of gemfibrozil monotherapy in the secondary prevention of VA-HIT found a significant benefit in CV outcome.[41],[42] However, subsequent studies with other fibrates failed to demonstrate any benefit. Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention (BIP) study failed to show any significant benefit in CV reduction in secondary prevention trial in monotherapy.[43] Two studies with fenofibrate in combination to statin, the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study and Action to Control CV Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD-LIPID) trial also failed to demonstrate any significant CV benefit.[44],[45] While gemfibrozil demonstrated a reduction in CV risk across all the categories of baseline TG in VA-HIT, benefit was only observed in subgroups with increased baseline TG level, with or without low HDL in HHS, BIP, FIELD, and ACCORD-LIPID study. [Table 5] shows the results from these fibrates trial. A meta-analysis from 18 trials (n = 45058) with fibrate therapy with or without atherogenic dyslipidemia found 13% relative risk reduction for any CV events (P < 0·0001) although no benefit on stroke, CV mortality, and risk of all-cause mortality was noted and significant increase in serum creatinine was also observed (HR: 1·99, 95% CI: 1·46–2·70; P < 0·0001). This reflects a blend of effects.[46] However, a random-effect meta-analysis from 5 fibrate study [Figure 8] from subgroups with atherogenic dyslipidemia (n = 4726) found a 35% relative risk reduction in CV events as compared to insignificant 6% reduction in those without atherogenic dyslipidemia (high TG with low HDL-C).[47] Similarly, a recent meta-analysis also found 28% relative risk reduction in CV events in subgroups with atherogenic dyslipidemia.[48] It is worthwhile to note that median TG and HDL level were modestly high and low, respectively, across these trials, and thus, the effect of lowering moderately high TG to CV risk reduction is truly unknown [Table 6] at this point of time. [Figure 9] demonstrates the difference in TG lowering and HDL raising properties of different fibrates across the trial.
Table 5: Outcome in major fibrate (except clofibrate) trials

Click here to view
Figure 8: Cardiovascular risk reduction in different subgroups across fibrate trials

Click here to view
Table 6: Median TG and HDL level in fibrates trial and other important outcomes

Click here to view
Figure 9: Difference in triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein with different fibrates

Click here to view


Other TG lowering medications such as omega-3 fatty acids have minimal beneficial evidence with regards to CVD risk reduction. This could be either due to the lack of efficacy or benefit that is not mediated directly to TG reduction but by other unidentified mechanisms. For example, the Japan eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) Lipid Intervention Study (JELIS) found no benefit in CVD risk reduction in relation to baseline TG. However, subgroup analysis found that combination therapy with statin plus EPA (up to 1.8 g/d) reduced CVD risk by 53% (compared to statin monotherapy), in patients with baseline TG ≥150 mg/dL and HDL-C <40 mg/dL. Interestingly, this CV benefit in JELIS was not attributed to TG lowering (difference in TG reduction was only 5% between groups).[49] REDUCE-IT (clinical trials number NCT01492361) and STRENGTH (clinical trials number NCT02104817) are two large-scale, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of purified n-3 fatty acids along with statins which are currently undergoing with expected result in 2016 and 2019, respectively.

Several other newer drugs are also in a clinical development program that has TG-lowering properties. This includes proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type-9 inhibitors, microsomal TG protein inhibitors (lomitapide), antisense oligonucleotides (mipomersen), antisense therapies targeting Apo-B - Apo-C, cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor agonists, and diacylglycerol O-acyltransferase-1 inhibitors. However, currently, their role in treating high TG is unclear.

Taken together, it is still unclear whether lowering of TG reduces CV risk unlike statin and this can be further perceived by discordant stance by different international guidelines summarized in [Table 7].
Table 7: Major world guidelines on treating elevated triglyceride

Click here to view


Only nonstatin drugs which have shown any significant benefit in CV outcome along with statins is ezetimibe. The Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial, which compared ezetimibe plus simvastatin combination therapy, to simvastatin monotherapy, in patients with recently hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome (n = 18,144) found a 6.4% (95% CI: 1–11%) proportional reduction in the major CV events during a median follow-up 6 years.[50]


   Evidence for Causality between Nonhigh-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Cardiovascular Disease Top


Non-HDL-C implies TC minus HDL-C. Non-HDL encompasses all cholesterol present in potentially atherogenic lipoprotein particles that include VLDL-C, IDL-C, Lp(a), and LDL-C. Thus, it is sometimes considered even a better marker than LDL-C as there is no need to measure Apo-B (considered a surrogate for Apo-B). Potential advantage of non-HDL are measurement of non-HDL need not require fasting, it is more practical, reliable, and inexpensive and thus non-HDL could be an important risk factor in the presence of high TG and appears more relevant in patients with diabetes.

In 1998, Frost and Havel first proposed the value of non-HDL-C in CVD risk assessment.[51] Since then several studies including Lipid Research Clinics Follow-up Study, the Pathobiological Determinants of Atherosclerosis in Youth Study, Diabetes Epidemiology: Collaborative analysis of Diagnostic criteria in Europe study, Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation, and PROVE IT-TIMI 22 have recognized as well as demonstrated its relationship to CV risk.[52],[53],[54],[55],[56],[57],[58],[59] Liu et al. in the analyses from Framingham study cohort found a strong association between non-HDL-C and CV risk within all strata of LDL-C values. Moreover, interestingly non-HDL-C is appearing to be a stronger predictor of CV risk compared to LDL-C, irrespective of TG level.[56]

The earlier ATP III guidelines did recommend that non-HDL-C should serve as a secondary target once LDL-C target levels have been achieved but TG still remained >200 mg/dL. Moreover, non-HDL-C target was set at 30 mg/dL higher than LDL-C (based on the fact that a TG level of 150 mg/dL corresponds to a VLDL-C of 30 mg/dL).[60] A meta-analysis of clinical trial data supports a 1:1 relationship between the percent of non-HDL-C lowering and the percent of CV reduction.[61] However, no dedicated trial has directly examined the effect of non-HDL to CV risk and thus cannot be recommended over LDL-C reduction.


   Conclusion Top


Statins are standard of care for virtually all high-risk patients. Intensive statin therapy further lowers the risk by additional ~15%. However, a considerable amount of residual CV risk still remains. To further lower the residual risk although several other approaches have been tried, no substantial success is seen with nonstatin agents. Human genetic studies manipulated to increase HDL-C and HDL-C raising drugs such as niacin and CETP inhibitors have measurably failed so far in RCTs. This apparently suggests that the role of increasing HDL-C to reduce CVD is negligible at this point of time.

TG lowering with fibrates has shown somewhat mixed results. While human genetic studies strongly implicate TGRLP to be associated with increased CVD, RCTs with TG-lowering therapies have been clearly inconsistent. Similarly, TG lowering drugs have not been associated with improved CV outcome along with statins although some subgroups of patient (those with atherogenic dyslipidemia, metabolic syndrome, and perhaps diabetes) did appear to benefit. These mixed results could have happened at least due to two important reasons. First, none of these trials have specifically targeted individuals with sufficiently high TG. Second, fibrates may not be optimal agent to lower TG. To answer these burning questions, currently two studies such as REDUCE-IT and STRENGTH are currently ongoing. These studies with the newer generation of fish oils in patients with high TG may answer and enlighten about TG reduction to CV events. Moreover, several new targets that have been identified through genetic studies such as APOC3, APOA5, and ANGPTL for lowering TRLP are also being actively pursued, which will further enhance the knowledge and importance of TG-lowering.

Thus, only nonstatin drug which has currently found to be associated with any significant benefit in CV reduction to date along with statins is ezetimibe (primarily lowers LDL-C with only modest effect on TG). The role of fibrates in reducing CV risk is currently unsettled although some patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia and metabolic syndrome may benefit from these combinations.

 
   References Top

1.
Jacobs DR Jr., Barrett-Connor E. Retest reliability of plasma cholesterol and triglyceride. The Lipid Research Clinics Prevalence Study. Am J Epidemiol 1982;116:878-85.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Criqui MH, Heiss G, Cohn R, Cowan LD, Suchindran CM, Bangdiwala S, et al. Plasma triglyceride level and mortality from coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1220-5.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
West KM, Ahuja MM, Bennett PH, Czyzyk A, De Acosta OM, Fuller JH, et al. The role of circulating glucose and triglyceride concentrations and their interactions with other “risk factors” as determinants of arterial disease in nine diabetic population samples from the WHO multinational study. Diabetes Care 1983;6:361-9.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]    
4.
National Cholesterol Education Program (U.S.). Working Group on Lipoprotein Measurement. Recommendations on Lipoprotein Measurement. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, NIH publication No. 95-3044; 1995.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Zilversmit DB. Atherogenesis: A postprandial phenomenon. Circulation 1979;60:473-85.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    
6.
Brunzell JD, Deeb SS. Familial lipoprotein lipase deficiency, Apo-C-II deficiency, and hepatic lipase deficiency. In: Scriver CR, Beaudet AL, Sly WS, Valle D, editors. The Metabolic & Molecular Bases of Inherited Disease. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2001. p. 2789-816.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Shaikh M, Wootton R, Nordestgaard BG, Baskerville P, Lumley JS, La Ville AE, et al. Quantitative studies of transfer in vivo of low density, Sf 12-60, and Sf 60-400 lipoproteins between plasma and arterial intima in humans. Arterioscler Thromb 1991;11:569-77.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Hulley SB, Rosenman RH, Bawol RD, Brand RJ. Epidemiology as a guide to clinical decisions. The association between triglyceride and coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 1980;302:1383-9.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.
Ridker PM. Fasting versus nonfasting triglycerides and the prediction of cardiovascular risk: Do we need to revisit the oral triglyceride tolerance test? Clin Chem 2008;54:11-3.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Nordestgaard BG, Hilsted L, Stender S. Plasma lipids in non-fasting patients and signal values of laboratory results. Ugeskr Laeger 2009;171:1093.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Langsted A, Nordestgaard BG. Nonfasting lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins in individuals with and without diabetes: 58 434 individuals from the Copenhagen general population study. Clin Chem 2011;57:482-9.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Mora S, Rifai N, Buring JE, Ridker PM. Comparison of LDL cholesterol concentrations by Friedewald calculation and direct measurement in relation to cardiovascular events in 27,331 women. Clin Chem 2009;55:888-94.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Di Angelantonio E, Sarwar N, Perry P, Kaptoge S, Ray KK, et al. Major lipids, apolipoproteins, and risk of vascular disease. JAMA 2009;302:1993-2000.  Back to cited text no. 13
[PUBMED]    
14.
Varbo A, Benn M, Tybjærg-Hansen A, Jørgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, Nordestgaard BG. Remnant cholesterol as a causal risk factor for ischemic heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:427-36.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Jørgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, West AS, Grande P, Nordestgaard BG, Tybjærg-Hansen A. Genetically elevated non-fasting triglycerides and calculated remnant cholesterol as causal risk factors for myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2013;34:1826-33.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Triglyceride Coronary Disease Genetics Consortium and Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Sarwar N, Sandhu MS, Ricketts SL, Butterworth AS, Di Angelantonio E, et al. Triglyceride-mediated pathways and coronary disease: Collaborative analysis of 101 studies. Lancet 2010;375:1634-9.  Back to cited text no. 16
[PUBMED]    
17.
Thomsen M, Varbo A, Tybjærg-Hansen A, Nordestgaard BG. Low nonfasting triglycerides and reduced all-cause mortality: A mendelian randomization study. Clin Chem 2014;60:737-46.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Jørgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, Nordestgaard BG, Tybjærg-Hansen A. Loss-of-function mutations in APOC3 and risk of ischemic vascular disease. N Engl J Med 2014;371:32-41.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
TG and HDL Working Group of the Exome Sequencing Project, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Crosby J, Peloso GM, Auer PL, Crosslin DR, Stitziel NO, et al. Loss-of-function mutations in APOC3, triglycerides, and coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2014;371:22-31.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]    
20.
Musunuru K, Pirruccello JP, Do R, Peloso GM, Guiducci C, Sougnez C, et al. Exome sequencing, ANGPTL3 mutations, and familial combined hypolipidemia. N Engl J Med 2010;363:2220-7.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM, Blackwell L, Buck G, Pollicino C, et al. Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: Prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet 2005;366:1267-78.  Back to cited text no. 21
[PUBMED]    
22.
Cannon CP, Steinberg BA, Murphy SA, Mega JL, Braunwald E. Meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcomes trials comparing intensive versus moderate statin therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:438-45.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaborators, Kearney PM, Blackwell L, Collins R, Keech A, Simes J, et al. Efficacy of cholesterol-lowering therapy in 18,686 people with diabetes in 14 randomised trials of statins: A meta-analysis. Lancet 2008;371:117-25.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration, Baigent C, Blackwell L, Emberson J, Holland LE, Reith C, et al. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: A meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet 2010;376:1670-81.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaborators, Mihaylova B, Emberson J, Blackwell L, Keech A, Simes J, et al. The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: Meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised trials. Lancet 2012;380:581-90.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration, Fulcher J, O'Connell R, Voysey M, Emberson J, Blackwell L, et al. Efficacy and safety of LDL-lowering therapy among men and women: Meta-analysis of individual data from 174,000 participants in 27 randomised trials. Lancet 2015;385:1397-405.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Pyorälä K, Pedersen TR, Kjekshus J, Faergeman O, Olsson AG, Thorgeirsson G. Cholesterol lowering with simvastatin improves prognosis of diabetic patients with coronary heart disease. A subgroup analysis of the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Diabetes Care 1997;20:614-20.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Girman CJ, Rhodes T, Mercuri M, Pyörälä K, Kjekshus J, Pedersen TR, et al. The metabolic syndrome and risk of major coronary events in the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) and the Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TexCAPS). Am J Cardiol 2004;93:136-41.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Sacks FM, Alaupovic P, Moye LA, Cole TG, Sussex B, Stampfer MJ, et al. VLDL, apolipoproteins B, CIII, and E, and risk of recurrent coronary events in the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) trial. Circulation 2000;102:1886-92.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Sattar N, Gaw A, Scherbakova O, Ford I, O'Reilly DS, Haffner SM, et al. Metabolic syndrome with and without C-reactive protein as a predictor of coronary heart disease and diabetes in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. Circulation 2003;108:414-9.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Deedwania P, Barter P, Carmena R, Fruchart JC, Grundy SM, Haffner S, et al. Reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients with coronary heart disease and metabolic syndrome: Analysis of the Treating to New Targets study. Lancet 2006;368:919-28.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Pfeffer MA, Sacks FM, Moyé LA, East C, Goldman S, Nash DT, et al. Influence of baseline lipids on effectiveness of pravastatin in the CARE trial. Cholesterol and recurrent events. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:125-30.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. The Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) Study Group. N Engl J Med 1998;339:1349-57.  Back to cited text no. 33
[PUBMED]    
34.
Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF heart protection study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: A randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:7-22.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, Isles CG, Lorimer AR, MacFarlane PW, et al. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1301-7.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Sever PS, Dahlöf B, Poulter NR, Wedel H, Beevers G, Caulfield M, et al. Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hypertensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial – Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): A multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003;361:1149-58.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Gotto AM Jr., Whitney E, Stein EA, Shapiro DR, Clearfield M, Weis S, et al. Relation between baseline and on-treatment lipid parameters and first acute major coronary events in the Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TexCAPS). Circulation 2000;101:477-84.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Robins SJ, Collins D, Wittes JT, Papademetriou V, Deedwania PC, Schaefer EJ, et al. Relation of gemfibrozil treatment and lipid levels with major coronary events: VA-HIT: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2001;285:1585-91.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Simes RJ, Marschner IC, Hunt D, Colquhoun D, Sullivan D, Stewart RA, et al. Relationship between lipid levels and clinical outcomes in the long-term intervention with pravastatin in ischemic disease (LIPID) trial: To what extent is the reduction in coronary events with pravastatin explained by on-study lipid levels? Circulation 2002;105:1162-9.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Faergeman O, Holme I, Fayyad R, Bhatia S, Grundy SM, Kastelein JJ, et al. Plasma triglycerides and cardiovascular events in the treating to new targets and incremental decrease in end-points through aggressive lipid lowering trials of statins in patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 2009;104:459-63.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Manninen V, Tenkanen L, Koskinen P, Huttunen JK, Mänttäri M, Heinonen OP, et al. Joint effects of serum triglyceride and LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol concentrations on coronary heart disease risk in the Helsinki Heart Study. Implications for treatment. Circulation 1992;85:37-45.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Rubins HB, Robins SJ, Collins D, Fye CL, Anderson JW, Elam MB, et al. Gemfibrozil for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in men with low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Veterans Affairs High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Intervention Trial Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999;341:410-8.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention (BIP) Study. Secondary prevention by raising HDL cholesterol and reducing triglycerides in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 2000;102:21-7.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Keech A, Simes RJ, Barter P, Best J, Scott R, Taskinen MR, et al. Effects of long-term fenofibrate therapy on cardiovascular events in 9795 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the FIELD study): Randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005;366:1849-61.  Back to cited text no. 44
[PUBMED]    
45.
ACCORD Study Group, Ginsberg HN, Elam MB, Lovato LC, Crouse JR 3rd, Leiter LA, et al. Effects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1563-74.  Back to cited text no. 45
[PUBMED]    
46.
Jun M, Foote C, Lv J, Neal B, Patel A, Nicholls SJ, et al. Effects of fibrates on cardiovascular outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2010;375:1875-84.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.
Sacks FM, Carey VJ, Fruchart JC. Combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2010;363:692-4.  Back to cited text no. 47
[PUBMED]    
48.
Bruckert E, Labreuche J, Deplanque D, Touboul PJ, Amarenco P. Fibrates effect on cardiovascular risk is greater in patients with high triglyceride levels or atherogenic dyslipidemia profile: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 2011;57:267-72.  Back to cited text no. 48
    
49.
Yokoyama M, Origasa H, Matsuzaki M, Matsuzawa Y, Saito Y, Ishikawa Y, et al. Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid on major coronary events in hypercholesterolaemic patients (JELIS): A randomised open-label, blinded endpoint analysis. Lancet 2007;369:1090-8.  Back to cited text no. 49
    
50.
Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Giugliano RP, McCagg A, White JA, Theroux P, et al. Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2387-97.  Back to cited text no. 50
[PUBMED]    
51.
Frost PH, Havel RJ. Rationale for use of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol rather than low-density lipoprotein cholesterol as a tool for lipoprotein cholesterol screening and assessment of risk and therapy. Am J Cardiol 1998;81:26B-31B.  Back to cited text no. 51
    
52.
Rainwater DL, McMahan CA, Malcom GT, Scheer WD, Roheim PS, McGill HC Jr., et al. Lipid and apolipoprotein predictors of atherosclerosis in youth: Apolipoprotein concentrations do not materially improve prediction of arterial lesions in PDAY subjects. The PDAY Research Group. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1999;19:753-61.  Back to cited text no. 52
    
53.
Cui Y, Blumenthal RS, Flaws JA, Whiteman MK, Langenberg P, Bachorik PS, et al. Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level as a predictor of cardiovascular disease mortality. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:1413-9.  Back to cited text no. 53
    
54.
Bittner V, Hardison R, Kelsey SF, Weiner BH, Jacobs AK, Sopko G; Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation. Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels predict five-year outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Circulation 2002;106:2537-42.  Back to cited text no. 54
    
55.
Lu W, Resnick HE, Jablonski KA, Jones KL, Jain AK, Howard WJ, et al. Non-HDL cholesterol as a predictor of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: The strong heart study. Diabetes Care 2003;26:16-23.  Back to cited text no. 55
    
56.
Liu J, Sempos CT, Donahue RP, Dorn J, Trevisan M, Grundy SM. Non-high-density lipoprotein and very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and their risk predictive values in coronary heart disease. Am J Cardiol 2006;98:1363-8.  Back to cited text no. 56
    
57.
Ray KK, Cannon CP, Cairns R, Morrow DA, Ridker PM, Braunwald E. Prognostic utility of apoB/AI, total cholesterol/HDL, non-HDL cholesterol, or hs-CRP as predictors of clinical risk in patients receiving statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes: Results from PROVE IT-TIMI 22. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2009;29:424-30.  Back to cited text no. 57
    
58.
Zhang L, Qiao Q, Tuomilehto J, Hammar N, Ruotolo G, Stehouwer CD, et al. The impact of dyslipidaemia on cardiovascular mortality in individuals without a prior history of diabetes in the DECODE study. Atherosclerosis 2009;206:298-302.  Back to cited text no. 58
    
59.
Holme I, Aastveit AH, Hammar N, Jungner I, Walldius G. Relationships between lipoprotein components and risk of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in the Apolipoprotein MOrtality RISk study (AMORIS). J Intern Med 2009;265:275-87.  Back to cited text no. 59
    
60.
National Cholesterol Education Program (U.S.). Expert Panel on Detection Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III): Final Report. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, NIH Publication No. 02-5215; 2002.  Back to cited text no. 60
    
61.
Robinson JG, Wang S, Smith BJ, Jacobson TA. Meta-analysis of the relationship between non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction and coronary heart disease risk. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:316-22.  Back to cited text no. 61
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7]


This article has been cited by
1 Apolipoprotein C-III and cardiovascular diseases: when genetics meet molecular pathologies
Israa Dib,Alia Khalil,Racha Chouaib,Yolla El-Makhour,Hiba Noureddine
Molecular Biology Reports. 2021;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 A 28-Day Carbohydrate-Restricted Diet Improves Markers of Cardiovascular Disease in Professional Firefighters
Hunter S. Waldman,JohnEric W. Smith,John Lamberth,Brent J. Fountain,Richard J. Bloomer,Matthew B. Butawan,Matthew J. McAllister
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2020; 34(10): 2785
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Impact of MTHFR C677T and A1298C gene polymorphisms on MTX drug toxicity and efficacy profile of RA patients in North India
Anamika Dwivedi,Abhimanyu Kumar Jha,Varsha Gupta
Meta Gene. 2020; : 100705
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 A Pilot Study of a Natural Food Supplement as New Possible Therapeutic Approach in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients
Annalisa Noce,Alessio Bocedi,Margherita Campo,Giulia Marrone,Manuela Di Lauro,Giada Cattani,Nicola Di Daniele,Annalisa Romani
Pharmaceuticals. 2020; 13(7): 148
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Is Raising Your Grandchild Bad for Your Health? The Association Between Custodial Grandparent Status and Health Biomarkers in Taiwanese Grandparents
Zoe Fokakis,Danielle Nadorff,Ian McKay
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(5): 1753
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 An iterative approach to detect pleiotropy and perform Mendelian Randomization analysis using GWAS summary statistics
Xiaofeng Zhu,Xiaoyin Li,Rong Xu,Tao Wang,Russell Schwartz
Bioinformatics. 2020;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
7 Does lowering triglycerides reduce cardiovascular risk?
José Pereira de Moura
Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia. 2019;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
8 Does lowering triglycerides reduce cardiovascular risk?
José Pereira de Moura
Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia (English Edition). 2019; 38(8): 543
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
9 Cardiovascular adaptations associated with exercise in patients on hemodialysis
Matthew P.M. Graham-Brown,Meg J. Jardine,James O. Burton
Seminars in Dialysis. 2019;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
10 Control del perfil lipídico global
Mariano Blasco,Juan F. Ascaso
Clínica e Investigación en Arteriosclerosis. 2019;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
11 Efficacy and Safety of Omega-3 Fatty Acids in Patients Treated with Statins for Residual Hypertriglyceridemia: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
Ji Eun Jun,In-Kyung Jeong,Jae Myung Yu,Sung Rae Kim,In Kye Lee,Kyung-Ah Han,Sung Hee Choi,Soo-Kyung Kim,Hyeong Kyu Park,Ji-Oh Mok,Yong-ho Lee,Hyuk-Sang Kwon,So Hun Kim,Ho-Cheol Kang,Sang Ah Lee,Chang Beom Lee,Kyung Mook Choi,Sung-Ho Her,Won Yong Shin,Mi-Seung Shin,Hyo-Suk Ahn,Seung Ho Kang,Jin-Man Cho,Sang-Ho Jo,Tae-Joon Cha,Seok Yeon Kim,Kyung Heon Won,Dong-Bin Kim,Jae Hyuk Lee,Moon-Kyu Lee
Diabetes & Metabolism Journal. 2019; 43
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
12 Adaptation of 2016 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society guideline for lipid management to Indian patients – A consensus document
Saumitra Ray,J.P.S. Sawhney,M.K. Das,Jyoti Deb,Peeyush Jain,Sivakadaksham Natarajan,K.K. Sinha
Indian Heart Journal. 2018;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
13 Hypertriglyceridemia in Diabetes Mellitus: Implications for Pediatric Care
Jacob C Hartz,Sarah de Ferranti,Samuel Gidding
Journal of the Endocrine Society. 2018; 2(6): 497
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
14 Metabolic status is related to the effects of adding of sacha inchi (Plukenetia volubilis L .) oil on postprandial inflammation and lipid profile: Randomized, crossover clinical trial
Alicia Norma Alayón,José Guillermo Ortega Ávila,Isabella Echeverri Jiménez
Journal of Food Biochemistry. 2018; : e12703
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
15 Long-term outcome and risk assessment in premature acute myocardial infarction: A 10-year follow-up study
Max-Paul Winter,Hermann Blessberger,Arman Alimohammadi,Noemi Pavo,Kurt Huber,Johann Wojta,Irene M. Lang,Franz Wiesbauer,Georg Goliasch
International Journal of Cardiology. 2017;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
16 Inclusion of Hass avocado-oil improves postprandial metabolic responses to a hypercaloric-hyperlipidic meal in overweight subjects
Cibele Priscila Busch Furlan,Sandra Costa Valle,Elin Östman,Mário Roberto Maróstica,Juscelino Tovar
Journal of Functional Foods. 2017; 38: 349
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
17 Detection of Lipid and Amphiphilic Biomarkers for Disease Diagnostics
Jessica Kubicek-Sutherland,Dung Vu,Heather Mendez,Shailja Jakhar,Harshini Mukundan
Biosensors. 2017; 7(3): 25
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
18 Impacto metabólico e inflamatorio de una comida rica en grasas saturadas y su relación con la obesidad abdominal
Alicia Norma Alayón,Ana Patricia Rivadeneira,Carlos Herrera,Heidy Guzmán,Dioneris Arellano,Isabella Echeverri
Biomédica. 2017; 38: 100
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

   Evidence for Cau... Evidence for Cau... Conclusion Article Figures Article Tables
  In this article
 References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3943    
    Printed40    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded1075    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 18    

Recommend this journal