Key result
Statin therapy links CACS progression to decreased non-calcified plaque volume.
Why the study?
Coronary artery calcium score predicts MACE, but statins reduce MACE risk while increasing CACS, raising questions about whether CACS progression reflects compositional plaque volume progression differently based on statin use.
Does statin use alter the association between coronary artery calcium score progression and compositional plaque volume progression in patients undergoing serial CCTA?
Cohort (n=654)
Yes
Does statin use alter the association between coronary artery calcium score progression and compositional plaque volume progression in patients undergoing serial CCTA?
Effect estimate: β = -0.194
p-value: p=0.026
CACS progression in statin users reflects calcified plaque progression and a reduction in non-calcified plaque, whereas in non-statin users it reflects progression of both calcified and non-calcified plaque.
CACS progression interpretation on serial CCTA requires statin adjustment; supports differential plaque remodeling but remains hypothesis-generating.
AIMS: Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) is a strong predictor of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Conversely, statins, which markedly reduce MACE risk, increase CACS. We explored whether CACS progression represents compositional plaque volume (PV) progression differently according to statin use. METHODS AND RESULTS: From a prospective multinational registry of consecutive patients (n = 2252) who underwent serial coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) at a ≥ 2-year interval, 654 patients (61 ± 10 years, 56% men, inter-scan interval 3.9 ± 1.5 years) with information regarding the use of statins and having a serial CACS were included. Patients were divided into non-statin (n = 246) and statin-taking (n = 408) groups. Coronary PVs (total, calcified, and non-calcified; sum of fibrous, fibro-fatty, and lipid-rich) were quantitatively analysed, and CACS was measured from both CCTAs. Multivariate linear regression models were constructed for both statin-taking and non-statin group to assess the association between compositional PV change and change in CACS. In multivariate linear regression analysis, in the non-statin group, CACS increase was positively associated with both non-calcified (β = 0.369, P = 0.004) and calcified PV increase (β = 1.579, P < 0.001). However, in the statin-taking group, CACS increase was positively associated with calcified PV change (β = 0.756, P < 0.001) but was negatively associated with non-calcified PV change (β = -0.194, P = 0.026). CONCLUSION: In the non-statin group, CACS progression indicates the progression of both non-calcified and calcified PV progression. However, under the effect of statins, CACS progression indicates only calcified PV progression, but not non-calcified PV progression. Thus, the result of serial CACS should be differently interpreted according to the use of statins.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Patients undergoing serial coronary computed tomography angiography (n=654). Statin use vs. Non-statin use was evaluated on Association between CACS increase and non-calcified plaque volume change (β = -0.194, p=0.026). Statin use altered the interpretation of coronary artery calcium score progression, which was negatively associated with non-calcified plaque volume change in statin users (β = -0.194, P=0.026).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: