Key result
Estimated sdLDLC linked to ~21% higher CAD risk per 10 mg/dL, even with normal LDL-C.
Why the study?
Small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol has been suggested to be more harmful for cardiovascular outcomes than total LDLC, but the prognostic significance of estimated sdLDLC for CAD incidence required clarification.
Does higher estimated small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (sdLDLC) predict the incidence of coronary artery disease in Japanese adults?
Cohort (n=365,083)
Does higher estimated small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (sdLDLC) predict the incidence of coronary artery disease in Japanese adults?
Hazard Ratio: 1.21
p-value: p=<0.001
Estimated sdLDLC may identify residual CAD risk despite normal LDLC; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
AIMS: Small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (sdLDLC) has been suggested to be more harmful for cardiovascular outcomes than total LDLC. This study aimed to clarify the prognostic significance of the estimated sdLDLC for the incidence of coronary artery diseases (CAD). METHODS: We analyzed the clinical information obtained at an annual health checkup of 365,083 adults aged 40-74 years enrolled in the National Health Insurance system in Japan. The incidence of CAD was determined using the health insurance claims data. Additionally, we calculated Japanese-specific coefficients of the sdLDLC estimation equation using general population data, where the measured sdLDLC value was available (n = 9,558). RESULTS: The estimated sdLDLC level calculated from the total LDLC and triglyceride levels was correlated with the measured sdLDLC level (coefficient of determination = 0.768) and it was significantly associated with the CAD incidence (hazard ratio per 10 mg/dL = 1.21, p<0.001). Although the total LDLC showed a similar association, the estimated sdLDLC ≥ 30 mg/dL (hazard ratio = 1.97, p = 0.016) and ≥ 40 mg/dL (hazard ratio = 2.57, p = 0.001) were significantly associated with CAD, even in participants with normal LDLC levels (<120 mg/dL). The cross-sectional association of the measured sdLDLC with the pulse wave velocity of the large artery (β = 0.034, p<0.001) was significant, while that of the estimated sdLDLC (β = 0.014, p = 0.057) was not. CONCLUSION: The estimated sdLDLC may be a straightforward and cost-effective marker for identifying individuals with normal LDLC levels at risk of CAD. However, the measured sdLDLC may be a more favorable marker than the estimated sdLDLC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
TABARA et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease risk (n=365,083). Estimated small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (sdLDLC) vs. Lower levels of estimated sdLDLC was evaluated on Incidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) (HR 1.21, p=<0.001). Estimated small dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was significantly associated with the incidence of coronary artery disease (HR 1.21 per 10 mg/dL, p<0.001), even in individuals with normal LDLC levels.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: