TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison between Gradient Gel Electrophoresis and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy in Estimating Coronary Heart Disease Risk Associated with LDL and HDL Particle Size
AU - Arsenault, Benoit J.
AU - Lemieux, Isabelle
AU - Després, Jean-Pierre
AU - Wareham, Nicholas J.
AU - Stroes, Erik S. G.
AU - Kastelein, John J. P.
AU - Khaw, Kay-Tee
AU - Boekholdt, S. Matthijs
PY - 2010
Y1 - 2010
N2 - BACKGROUND: Gradient gel electrophoresis (GGE) and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy are both widely accepted methods for measuring LDL and HDL particle size. However, whether or not GGE- or NMR-measured LDL or HDL particle size predicts coronary heart disease (CHD) risk to a similar extent is currently unknown. METHODS: We used GGE and NMR to measure LDL and HDL particle size in a nested case-control study of 1025 incident cases of CHD and 1915 controls from the EPIC (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition)-Norfolk study. The study sample included apparently healthy men and women age 45-79 years followed for an average of 6 years. RESULTS: Pearson correlation coefficients showed that the overall agreement between NMR and GGE was better for the measurement of HDL size (r = 0.78) than for LDL size (r = 0.47). The odds ratio for future CHD among participants in the bottom tertile of LDL size (smallest LDL particles) was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.12-1.63) for GGE and 1.74 (1.41-2.15) for NMR. For HDL size, these respective odds ratios were 1.41 (1.16-1.72) and 1.85 (1.47-2.32). After adjustment for potential confounders, the relationship between small LDL or HDL particles and CHD was no longer significant, irrespective of the method. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective population study, we found that the relationships between NMR-measured LDL and HDL sizes and CHD risk were slightly higher than those obtained with GGE. (C) 2010 American Association for Clinical Chemistry
AB - BACKGROUND: Gradient gel electrophoresis (GGE) and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy are both widely accepted methods for measuring LDL and HDL particle size. However, whether or not GGE- or NMR-measured LDL or HDL particle size predicts coronary heart disease (CHD) risk to a similar extent is currently unknown. METHODS: We used GGE and NMR to measure LDL and HDL particle size in a nested case-control study of 1025 incident cases of CHD and 1915 controls from the EPIC (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition)-Norfolk study. The study sample included apparently healthy men and women age 45-79 years followed for an average of 6 years. RESULTS: Pearson correlation coefficients showed that the overall agreement between NMR and GGE was better for the measurement of HDL size (r = 0.78) than for LDL size (r = 0.47). The odds ratio for future CHD among participants in the bottom tertile of LDL size (smallest LDL particles) was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.12-1.63) for GGE and 1.74 (1.41-2.15) for NMR. For HDL size, these respective odds ratios were 1.41 (1.16-1.72) and 1.85 (1.47-2.32). After adjustment for potential confounders, the relationship between small LDL or HDL particles and CHD was no longer significant, irrespective of the method. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective population study, we found that the relationships between NMR-measured LDL and HDL sizes and CHD risk were slightly higher than those obtained with GGE. (C) 2010 American Association for Clinical Chemistry
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2009.140939
DO - https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2009.140939
M3 - Article
C2 - 20348400
SN - 0009-9147
VL - 56
SP - 789
EP - 798
JO - Clinical Chemistry
JF - Clinical Chemistry
IS - 5
ER -