The Helsinki Heart Study: coronary heart disease incidence during an extended follow-up

LDL-apheresis: technical and clinical aspects

The prognosis of patients suffering from severe hyperlipidemia, sometimes combined with elevated lipoprotein (a) levels, and coronary heart disease refractory to diet and lipid-lowering drugs is poor. For such patients, regular treatment with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis is the therapeutic option. Today, there are five different LDL-apheresis systems available: cascade filtration or lipid filtration, immunoadsorption, heparin-induced LDL precipitation, dextran sulfate LDL adsorption, and the LDL hemoperfusion. There is a strong correlation between hyperlipidemia and atherosclerosis. Besides the elimination of other risk factors, in severe hyperlipidemia therapeutic strategies should focus on a drastic reduction of serum lipoproteins. Despite maximum conventional therapy with a combination of different kinds of lipid-lowering drugs, sometimes the goal of therapy cannot be reached. Hence, in such patients, treatment with LDL-apheresis is indicated. Technical and clinical aspects of these five different LDL-apheresis methods are shown here. There were no significant differences with respect to or concerning all cholesterols, or triglycerides observed. With respect to elevated lipoprotein (a) levels, however, the immunoadsorption method seems to be most effective. The different published data clearly demonstrate that treatment with LDL-apheresis in patients suffering from severe hyperlipidemia refractory to maximum conservative therapy is effective and safe in long-term application.

Update on PPAR agonists: The clinical significance of FIELD and PROACTIVE

The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) family of genes plays a major role in metabolic regulation. Unfortunately, the results of two recent, large event trials of PPAR agonists have been mixed. High rates of crossover to statin use confound the interpretation of the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) trial, which found a less than expected reduction in coronary and stroke events with fenofibrate. Of concern, nonsignificant increases in coronary and sudden deaths, thrombotic events, and pancreatitis occurred in the fenofibrate group. The PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events (PROACTIVE) also found a reduction in coronary and stroke events with pioglitazone compared with placebo in a population with diabetes and cardiovascular disease, but this benefit was counterbalanced by an increase in congestive heart failure as well as symptomatic edema. Further research is needed to determine the role of PPAR agonists in the prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Micronized fenofibrate: a useful choice for the correction of dyslipidemia in metabolic syndrome and Type 2 diabetes

Cardiovascular disease is the principal cause of illness and disability in patients with diabetes, and is also the most common cause of death worldwide in adults. Fenofibrate, a member of the fibrate class of lipid-modifying drugs, is a potent triglyceride-lowering and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol-raising agent and has a variable effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Fenofibrate administration also leads to a modified, less atherogenic low-density lipoprotein profile, with a consistent effect toward increased low-density lipoprotein particle size and a reduction in the low-density lipoprotein particle density. Maximal clinical efficacy in fibrates has been demonstrated in subjects with dyslipidemia, particularly in populations with features of the metabolic syndrome and in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Angiographic data from the Diabetes Atherosclerosis Intervention Study (DAIS) support a similar effect of fenofibrate. However, in the recent Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes trial (FIELD; 9795 patients with Type 2 diabetes), the rate of nonfatal macrovascular events, after adjustment for the use of other lipid-lowering agents and significant reductions in microvascular complications, was lower for the fenofibrate treatment group. These results and those from a current large trial, ACtion to COntrol cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD), will provide valuable evidence for the likely future use of this drug in combination with statins for reducing cardiovascular disease risk in the metabolic syndrome and in Type 2 diabetes.

Statins and fibrates for preventing melanoma

BACKGROUND

Effective treatment for advanced melanoma is lacking. While no drug therapy currently exists for prevention of melanoma, in vitro, case-control, and animal model evidence suggest that lipid-lowering medications, commonly taken for high cholesterol, might prevent melanoma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of statin or fibrate lipid-lowering medications on melanoma outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (February 2003), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2005), MEDLINE (to March 2003), EMBASE (to September 2003), CANCERLIT (to October 2002), Web of Science (to May 2003), and reference lists of articles. We approached study investigators and pharmaceutical companies for additional information (published or unpublished studies).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials involving random allocation of study participants, where experimental groups used statins or fibrates and participants were enrolled for at least four years of therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors screened 109 abstracts of articles with titles of possible relevance. We then thoroughly examined the full text of 72 potentially relevant articles. We requested unpublished melanoma outcomes data from the corresponding author of each qualifying trial.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 16 qualifying randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (seven statin, nine fibrate). Thirteen of these trials (involving 62,197 participants) provided data on incident melanomas (six statin, seven fibrate). A total of 66 melanomas were reported in groups receiving the experimental drug and 86 in groups receiving placebo or other control therapies. For statin trials this translated to an odds ratio of 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.56 to 1.44) and for fibrate trials an odds ratio of 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.19 to 1.82). Subgroup analyses failed to show statistically significant differences in melanoma outcomes by gender, melanoma occurrence after two years of participation in trial, stage or histology, or trial funding. Subgroup analysis by type of fibrate or statin also failed to show statistically significant differences, except for the statin subgroup analysis which showed reduced melanoma incidence for lovastatin, based on one trial only (odds ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.99).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The melanoma outcomes data collected in this review of RCTs of statins and fibrates does not exclude the possibility that these drugs prevent melanoma. There was a 10% and 42% reduction for participants on statins and fibrates, respectively, however these results were not statistically significant. Until further evidence is established, limiting exposure to ultraviolet radiation remains the most effective way to reduce the risk of melanoma.

Lipid-lowering therapies in development

Lipid lowering is established as a proven intervention to reduce atherosclerosis and its complications. This article summarises novel developments in the lipid-altering therapies under development, including combination therapies, squalene synthase inhibitors, microsomal transfer protein inhibitors, acyl-cholesterol acyl transferase inhibitors, cholesterol ester transfer protein antagonists, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor agonists, high-density lipoprotein-derived peptides and inflammation inhibitors, which have at least reached trials in animal models. Lipid-altering drugs are likely to to be a fast-developing area for novel treatments as possible synergies exist between new and established compounds for the treatment of atherosclerosis. New agents will have to show significant advantage in tolerability or efficacy over existing agents and have the potential to be used in combination therapy as is well established for bile acid sequestrants, nicotinic acid or fibrates and statins. Any new drugs will also have to be assessed in clinical end-point trials against current compounds with proven outcome benefits.

Low-density lipoprotein apheresis: an overview

Atherosclerosis with myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral cellular disease still maintains its position at the top of morbidity and mortality statistics in industrialized nations. Established risk factors widely accepted are smoking, arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and central obesity. Furthermore, there is a strong correlation between hyperlipidemia and atherosclerosis. The prognosis of patients suffering from severe hyperlipidemia, sometimes combined with elevated lipoprotein (a) (Lpa) levels, and coronary heart disease (CHD) refractory to diet and lipid-lowering drugs is poor. For such patients, regular treatment with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis is the therapeutic option. Today, there are four different LDL apheresis systems available: immunoadsorption, heparin-induced extracorporeal LDL/fibrinogen precipitation, dextran sulfate LDL adsorption and LDL hemoperfusion. Regarding the different LDL apheresis systems used, there is no significant difference with respect to the clinical outcome or concerning total cholesterol, LDL, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), or triglyceride concentrations. With respect to elevated Lpa levels, however, the immunoadsorption method seems to be the most effective. In 45 patients (25 women, 20 men) suffering from familial hypercholesterolemia resistant to diet and lipid lowering drugs, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis was performed over 95.6 +/- 44.7 months. Four different systems (Liposorber, 32 of 45, Kaneka, Osaka, Japan; Therasorb, 6 of 45, Baxter, Munich, Germany; Lipopak, 2 of 45, Pocard, Moscow, Russia; and Dali, 5 of 45, Fresenius, St. Wendel, Germany) were used. With all methods, average reductions of 57% for total cholesterol, 55.9% for LDL, 75.8% for lipoprotein a (Lpa), and 45.9% for triglycerides, and an average increase of 14.3% for HDL were reached. Severe side-effects such as shock or allergic reactions were very rare (0.3%) in all methods. In the course of treatment, an improvement in general well-being and increased performance were experienced by 44 of 45 patients. The present data demonstrate that treatment with LDL apheresis of patients suffering from familial hypercholesterolemia resistant to maximum conservative therapy is very effective and safe even in long-term application.

Synergistic effect of persistent Chlamydia pneumoniae infection, autoimmunity, and inflammation on coronary risk

BACKGROUND

Given the role of chronic infections, autoimmunity, and inflammation in atherosclerosis, we studied the joint effect of chronic Chlamydia pneumoniae infection, persistently elevated human heat-shock protein 60 (hHsp60) antibodies, and C-reactive protein (CRP) on coronary risk.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The participants for this prospective nested case-control study were obtained from the Helsinki Heart Study, during which 241 nonfatal myocardial infarctions or coronary deaths occurred among 4081 dyslipidemic middle-aged men. Serum samples taken at baseline and 3 to 6 months before the coronary events that occurred during the 8.5-year period were analyzed for antibodies to C pneumoniae and hHsp60 and the CRP concentration. Compared with persistently low levels, the risk of coronary events was 2-fold for persistently elevated immunocomplex (IC)-bound and/or serum IgA antibodies to C pneumoniae (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.36) and also for serum IgA antibodies to hHsp60 (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.08 to 4.13). The risks associated with elevated antibodies were much higher when CRP was also elevated. Compared with low or transiently elevated levels, the risk of coronary events, with adjustment for age and smoking, was 4.5-fold for persistently elevated CRP and C pneumoniae IC/IgA antibodies together (OR, 4.47; 95% CI, 1.84 to 10.83) and was similar for CRP and hHsp60 IgA antibodies together (OR, 4.36; 95% CI, 1.53 to 12.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Persistently but not transiently elevated C pneumoniae IC/IgA and hHsp60 IgA antibodies, especially when present together with an elevated CRP level, predicted coronary events.

Autoimmunity to human heat shock protein 60, Chlamydia pneumoniae infection, and inflammation in predicting coronary risk

Heat shock protein 60 (Hsp60) and Chlamydia pneumoniae infection have both been associated with cardiovascular diseases. Our aim was to study the role of Hsp60 antibodies as coronary risk predictors and their association with C pneumoniae infection and inflammation. This was a prospective, nested, case-control study. The cases consisted of 239 middle-aged Finnish men who developed myocardial infarction or coronary death during the follow-up. Baseline levels of IgA and IgG antibodies to human-specific and C pneumoniae-specific Hsp60 were measured by enzyme immunoassay. Human Hsp60 IgA, but not IgG or C pneumoniae Hsp60, antibodies were a significant risk factor for coronary events (odds ratio 2.0, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.6, when the fourth and first quartiles are compared). When an elevated human Hsp60 IgA antibody level (above the second quartile) was present simultaneously with a high C pneumoniae IgA antibody level (the third quartile) and an elevated C-reactive protein level (the second quartile), compared with all factors at low levels, the risk was 7.0 (95% CI 2.6 to 19.1) without adjustment and 5.0 (95% CI 1.8 to 14.2) when adjustment was made for age and smoking. In conclusion, an elevated human Hsp60 IgA antibody level was a risk factor for coronary events, especially when it was present together with C pneumoniae infection and inflammation.

A comparison of clinical outcome studies among cholesterol-lowering agents

OBJECTIVE

To review and compare clinical trials of cholesterol-lowering agents that evaluated clinical end points as the primary outcome measure; specifically, to determine whether all agents that decrease cholesterol impact clinical outcomes similarly.

DATA SOURCES

Primary articles were identified through a MEDLINE search (1966-February 2001) and through secondary sources.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All of the articles identified from the data sources were evaluated. Articles that included clinical end points as the primary outcome measure were included in this review.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Clinical trials were assessed according to study population (primary vs. secondary prevention of coronary artery disease), baseline and follow-up lipid profiles, and clinical outcome data. Both cardiac and noncardiac morbidity and mortality were evaluated. The differences in study populations, study methods, and changes in lipid values were compared and contrasted between trials to evaluate their effect on outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Niacin and bile acid sequestrants should be considered as add-on therapy when therapeutic goals cannot be attained with a hydroxymethyl glutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitor (stain). Estrogen therapy cannot be recommended solely for cardioprotection. Fibrates are most effective in patients with high baseline triglycerides, low baseline high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and low to average low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL). Statins are considered first line for the treatment of elevated LDL in both the primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. They are well tolerated, have the strongest data to support their use, and have been shown to decrease total mortality.

Current topics on low-density lipoprotein apheresis

The prognosis of patients suffering from severe hyperlipidemia, sometimes combined with elevated lipoprotein (a) (Lp[a]) levels, and coronary heart disease (CHD) refractory to diet and lipid-lowering drugs is poor. For such patients, regular treatment with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis is the therapeutic option. Today, there are four different LDL-apheresis systems available: immunoadsorption, heparin-induced extracorporeal LDL/fibrinogen precipitation, dextran sulfate LDL-adsorption, and LDL-hemoperfusion. Despite substantial progress in diagnostics, drug therapy, and cardiosurgical procedures, atherosclerosis with myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral cellular disease still maintains its position at the top of morbidity and mortality statistics in industrialized nations. Established risk factors widely accepted are smoking, arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and central obesity. Furthermore, there is a strong correlation between hyperlipidemia and atherosclerosis. Besides the elimination of other risk factors, in severe hyperlipidemia (HLP) therapeutic strategies should focus on a drastic reduction of serum lipoproteins. Despite maximum conventional therapy with a combination of different kinds of lipid-lowering drugs, however, sometimes the goal of therapy cannot be reached. Mostly, the prognosis of patients suffering from severe HLP, sometimes combined with elevated Lp(a) levels and CHD refractory to diet and lipid-lowering drugs is poor. Hence, in such patients, treatment with LDL-apheresis can be useful. Regarding the different LDL-apheresis systems used, there were no significant differences with respect to the clinical outcome or concerning total cholesterol, LDL, high-density lipoprotein, or triglyceride concentrations. With respect to elevated Lp(a) levels, however, the immunoadsorption method seems to be the most effective. The published data clearly demonstrate that treatment with LDL-apheresis in patients suffering from severe hyperlipidemia refractory to maximum conservative therapy is effective and safe in long-term application.

Joint effects of C-reactive protein and other risk factors on acute coronary events

BACKGROUND

Elevated serum C-reactive protein (CRP) is a predictor of coronary heart disease in population samples. We studied the contribution of the simultaneous presence (joint effects) of elevated CRP and the classic as well as some new risk factors on acute coronary events.

METHODS

With a nested case-control design and logistic regression analyses, we measured baseline and pre-event CRP levels in patients who had myocardial infarction or coronary death (cases) during an 8.5-year follow-up in the Helsinki Heart Study, a coronary primary prevention trial in dyslipidemic middle-aged men. The control patients were participants remaining free of coronary events.

RESULTS

Baseline and pre-event CRP levels were higher in cases than in control patients (4.4 vs 2.0 mg/L, P <.001 and 6.0 vs 3.6 mg/L, P <.001). The relative risk attributed to elevated CRP was 40% higher with chronic elevation (odds ratio [OR], 3.34) compared with high baseline (OR, 2.24) or pre-event (OR, 2.26) level only. Hypertension, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high leukocyte count increased the risk only marginally without simultaneous occurrence of high CRP, whereas the joint effects of CRP and these classic risk factors suggested additive effects on coronary risk. In contrast, high levels of immunoglobulin G-class antibodies to oxidized low-density lipoprotein and antiprothrombin antibodies as well as high total immunoglobulin G level increased the risk irrespective of CRP.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated CRP enhances the risks attributed to classic coronary risk factors.

Focus on HDL: a new treatment paradigm for athero-thrombotic vascular disease

Atherosclerotic vascular disease is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in much of the Western world. Although advances in lifestyle and risk factor modification, pharmacotherapy, endovascular interventions and surgery have considerably improved clinical outcome, 40 - 50% of adverse cardiovascular events continue to occur despite current strategies. A number of new targets for therapeutic exploitation are currently being investigated that include, among others, apolipoprotein A-I, the major structural component of high density lipoprotein (HDL) particle. The strong negative relationship between HDL-cholesterol levels and coronary heart disease in epidemiological studies, as well as data from experimental models suggest that HDL-based therapies could be an important new paradigm for prevention, treatment and reversal of atherosclerotic vascular disease.

Low density lipoprotein apheresis in treatment of hyperlipidemia: experience with four different technologies

The prognosis of patients suffering from severe hyperlipidaemia (HLP), sometimes combined with elevated lipoprotein (a) levels, and coronary heart disease (CHD) refractory to diet and lipid lowering drugs is poor. A new therapeutic option for such patients is regular treatment with low density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis. In total 33 patients (16 males, 17 female, aged 43.8+/-14.3 years), suffering from severe HLP resistant to diet and lipid lowering drugs, were treated for 62.3+/-21.3 (range, 1-113) months with LDL-apheresis. Four different LDL-apheresis systems were used: the dextran sulfate adsorption for 28 of 33 (Liposorber, Kaneka, Japan), immunoadsorption for 2 of 33 (Therasorb, Baxter, Germany), LDL-hemoperfusion for 2 of 33 (Dali, Fresenius, Germany), and the immunoadsorption system with special antilipoprotein (a) columns for 1 of 33 patients (Lipopak, Pocard, Russia). Before applying LDL-apheresis, 27 of 33 patients suffered from CHD with severe angina pectoris symptoms, a history of myocardial infarction or coronary artery venous bypass (CAVB). With LDL-apheresis, reductions (p < 0.05) of 46% for total cholesterol, 49% for LDL, 28% for Lp(a), and 38% for triglycerides were reached. Severe side-effects, such as shock or allergic reactions, were very rare (0.5%). In the course of treatment an improvement in general well-being and increased performance were experienced in 29 of 33 patients. In 23 of 27 patients suffering from CHD, a reduction of 60 to 100% of nitrate medication was observed. Regarding the different apheresis systems used, there were no significant differences with respect to the clinical outcome and concerning total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, and triglyceride concentrations. But, in respect to elevated lipoprotein (a) levels, the immunoadsorption method using special anti-lipoprotein (a) columns seems to be the most effective (-57% versus -25% [Kaneka, p < 0.05] or -23% [Baxter, p < 0.05]). The present data clearly demonstrate that treatment with LDL-apheresis in patients suffering from severe HLP, refractory to maximum conservative therapy, is effective and safe in long-term application.

Infections, inflammation, and the risk of coronary heart disease

BACKGROUND

The role of infections and inflammation in the pathophysiology of coronary heart disease is emerging. We studied the independent and joint effects of these 2 components on coronary risk.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We measured baseline levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and antibodies to adenovirus, enterovirus, cytomegalovirus, and herpes simplex virus as well as to Chlamydia pneumoniae (Cpn) and Helicobacter pylori in 241 subjects who suffered either myocardial infarction or coronary death during the 8.5-year trial in the Helsinki Heart Study, a coronary primary prevention trial. The 241 controls in this nested case-control study were subjects who completed the study without coronary events. Antibody levels to herpes simplex type I (HSV-1) and to Cpn were higher in cases than in controls, whereas the distributions of antibodies to other infectious agents were similar. Mean CRP was higher in cases (4.4 versus 2.0 mg/L; P<0.001), and high CRP increased the risks associated with smoking and with high antimicrobial antibody levels. The odds ratios in subjects with high antibody and high CRP levels were 25.4 (95% CI 2.9-220.3) for HSV-1 and 5.4 (95% CI 2.4-12.4) for Cpn compared with subjects with low antibody levels and low CRP. High antibody levels to either HSV-1 or to Cpn increased the risk independently of the other, and their joint effect was close to additive.

CONCLUSIONS

Two chronic infections, HSV-1 and Cpn, increase the risk of coronary heart disease. The effect is emphasized in subjects with ongoing inflammation, denoted by increased CRP levels.

Dyslipidemia treatment guidelines and management systems in Kaiser Permanente

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Although risk factors contributing to the development of this disease are well known and effective interventions exist, the majority of patients eligible for pharmacotherapy are inadequately treated or not treated at all. Multiple factors contribute to this treatment gap. With respect to dyslipidemia, 2 of the major challenges facing healthcare organizations are: (1) how to ensure continued monitoring and medication adherence for patients with known atherosclerosis (secondary prevention); and (2) how to select the high-risk patients who will most benefit from treatment from the larger population of individuals who have not had a known coronary event (primary prevention). In Southern California Kaiser Permanente, 2 approaches being used to address these issues are dyslipidemia treatment guidelines and a computerized monitoring system. The guidelines stratify patients based on CAD risk and expected benefit from drug therapy. The computerized monitoring incorporates an "expert system" algorithm that facilitates patient selection in primary prevention and tracking to encourage patient compliance. This article describes these 2 approaches that attempt to maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of dyslipidemia management.

Gemfibrozil treatment of hypertriglyceridemia: improvement on fibrinolysis without change of insulin resistance

The fibrinolytic and metabolic changes associated with gemfibrozil treatment of hypertriglyceridemia were evaluated in 16 patients with type IV hyperlipidemia by criteria of triglyceride levels > 250 mg/dl and total cholesterol levels < 220 mg/dl. The plasma triglyceride level was significantly lower (323 +/- 71 vs 189 +/- 57 mg/dl; p = 0.000) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level significantly higher (33.5 +/- 4.6 vs 38.0 +/- 6.7 mg/dl; p = 0.005) after 3 to 4 months of gemfibrozil treatment. However, the glucose and insulin metabolism measured by oral glucose challenge and insulin suppression tests showed no significant changes after gemfibrozil therapy. In contrast, plasma plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 antigen (36.9 +/- 12.4 vs 27.3 +/- 11.4 ng/ml; p = 0.008) and activity (15.5 +/- 5.5 vs 11.8 +/- 3.0 IU/ml; p = 0.009) and tissue plasminogen activator antigen (13.2 +/- 4.0 vs 10.4 +/- 3.7 ng/ml; p = 0.007) were significantly depressed, and tissue plasimogen activator activity (0.57 +/- 0.31 vs 0.69 +/- 0.38 IU/ml; p = 0.015) was significantly elevated by gemfibrozil. The data indicate that lowering plasma triglyceride and raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels by gemfibrozil treatment also improved the fibrinolytic system without changes of insulin resistance and glucose intolerance in patients with isolated hypertriglyceridemia.

Antihypertensive therapy in dyslipidemic men. Effects on coronary heart disease incidence and total mortality

To investigate the influence of antihypertensive therapy and the success of blood pressure control on coronary heart disease incidence and total mortality, we studied dyslipidemic middle-aged men participating in the placebo arm of the Helsinki Heart Study, a randomized coronary primary prevention trial with gemfibrozil. Based on blood pressure level and the presence of antihypertensive therapy at study entry, the participants were classified into four categories. Relative risks of coronary heart disease (nonfatal myocardial infarction or cardiac death) and total mortality during the 5-year trial period were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. With subjects who were not using antihypertensive drugs and who had normal blood pressure (category I) as reference, the relative risks of coronary heart disease during the trial period were 2.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.3) in untreated hypertensive subjects (category II), 0.9 (95% CI, 0.2 to 3.8) in subjects with successful antihypertensive therapy (category III), and 2.0 (95% CI, 1.0 to 4.1) in subjects who remained hypertensive despite drug therapy (category IV). The relative risks of death were 1.9 (95% CI, 0.9 to 3.9) in category II and 1.0 (95% CI, 0.1 to 7.3) in category III; in category IV subjects, those with unsuccessful antihypertensive therapy, the relative risk was 4.4 (95% CI, 2.0 to 9.6). The excess mortality in this category was due to cardiovascular causes and was clustered in subjects with multiple drug therapy for hypertension control. We conclude that successful antihypertensive therapy in dyslipidemic men reduced coronary heart disease incidence despite its adverse effects on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Anti-cardiolipin antibodies and risk of myocardial infarction in a prospective cohort of middle-aged men

BACKGROUND

Data concerning the relation between antiphospholipid (aPL) antibodies and myocardial infarction in subjects without evidence of overt autoimmune disease are conflicting. All published studies have been performed on survivors of myocardial infarction or in patients with established coronary heart disease. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether the presence of aPL antibodies, namely, anti-cardiolipin (aCL) antibodies, carries a risk for myocardial infarction in a prospective cohort.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The sera to be studied were drawn at entry from middle-aged dyslipidemic men (non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, > or = 5.2 mmol/L) participating in the Helsinki Heart Study, a 5-year coronary primary prevention trial with gemfibrozil. Samples were tested for IgG-class antibodies to cardiolipin by an ELISA. The risk was estimated with logistic regression analysis using a nested case-control design with 133 patients (myocardial infarction or cardiac death) and 133 control subjects, matched for treatment (gemfibrozil/placebo) and geographical area. The aCL antibody level, as expressed in optical density units, was significantly higher in patients than in control subjects (0.417 versus 0.361; P < .005). Subjects with the antibody level in the highest quartile of distribution had a relative risk for myocardial infarction of 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 3.5) compared with the remainder of the population. This risk was independent of confounding factors, such as age, smoking, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and high-density lipoprotein. There was a correlation between the levels of aCL antibodies and antibodies to oxidized LDL (r = .40, P < .001), and their joint effect was additive for the risk.

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective cohort of healthy middle-aged men, the presence of a high aCL antibody level is an independent risk factor for myocardial infarction or cardiac death. Antibodies to cardiolipin and oxidized LDL may, at least in part, represent cross-reactive antibody populations.