Why the study?
Do emerging risk markers like Lp-PLA2 and CIMT identify elevated coronary heart disease risk in individuals classified as low-risk by the Framingham Risk Score?
Do emerging risk markers like Lp-PLA2 and CIMT identify elevated coronary heart disease risk in individuals classified as low-risk by the Framingham Risk Score?
A significant proportion of individuals classified as low-risk by the Framingham Risk Score exhibit elevated levels of emerging risk markers like Lp-PLA2 and CIMT, suggesting potential underestimation of subclinical atherosclerosis risk.
BACKGROUND: The Framingham risk score (FRS) has long been used as a global tool to estimate coronary heart disease (CHD) risk, but data has shown that subclinical CHD may exist in those classified as low risk by FRS, and as a result, there is potential for misclassification. Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) and carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) are two emerging risk markers that are predictive of future CHD events. PURPOSE: To examine Lp-PLA2 and CIMT values in low risk individuals, and to explore the relationship between Lp-PLA2 and CIMT. METHODS: A total of 229 men and women (age =53±7 years) underwent body composition analysis, objective physical activity measurement, fasting blood draw to determine standard lipid values and Lp-PLA2 mass, and CIMT measurement through ultrasound. RESULTS: For all subjects, mean CIMT was 0.61±0.1 mm, mean Lp-PLA2 mass was 197±45 ng/dL. A total of 19.5% and 34.6% of women and 4.6% and 73.8% of men were considered at elevated risk for CHD by CIMT (>75(th) percentile for age) and Lp-PLA2 mass (>200 ng/dL) standards, respectively. Both CIMT and Lp-PLA2 mass were significant independent predictors of each other, whereas traditional risk markers (lipids, glucose) were not. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that in those classified as low risk by FRS, evidence of increased CHD risk may exist through the use of newer risk markers like CIMT and Lp-PLA2. These emerging markers may aid in the earlier detection and intervention of subclinical CHD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hargens et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: