-
Basic characteristics of the study population are summarized in Table [1] A total of 1455 patients were enrolled in the analyses. Among these, 561 (38.6%) patients had been determined to have MetS, while the remaining 894 patients did not have MetS. According to the presence of metabolic components (overweight/obesity, hypertension, hypertriglyc eridemia and/or hypo HDL cholesterolemia, hyperglycemia), we found only 82 patients (5.6%) who were free of any metabolic disorders.
Patients with MetS were older than those without (56.6 ± 9.9 vs. 54.2 ± 11.7 years, P < 0.001) and 64.7% and 56.6% of patients with and without MetS, respectively, were men (P = 0.002). Additionally, the rates of the presence of each MetS risk component, in turn, were hypo HDL cholesterolemia (58.0%), hypertension (53.7%), overweight/obesity (52.8%), hypertriglyceridemia (42.0%), and hyperglycemia (25.0%) in the total population; and hypertension (89.7%), overweight/obesity (86.3%), hypo HDL cholesterolemia (73.4%), hypertriglyceridemia (53.5%), and hyperglycemia (53.5%) in patients with MetS.
Table 1. Baseline Characteristics in Patients with or without MetS
Characteristics All Patients (n = 1455) With MetS (n = 561) Without MetS ( n = 894) P-value Age (years) 55.1 ± 11.1 56.6 ± 9.9 54.2 ± 11.7 < 0.001 Gender, men% (n) 59.7 (869) 64.7 (363) 56.6 (506) 0.002 Overweight/obesity, % (n) 52.8 (769) 86.3 (484) 31.9 (285) < 0.001 Hypertension, % (n) 53.7 (781) 89.7 (503) 31.1 (278) < 0.001 Hypertriglyceridemia, % (n) 42.0 (610) 53.5 (300) 34.7 (310) < 0.001 HypoHDL cholesterolemia, % (n) 58.0 (844) 73.4 (412) 48.3 (432) < 0.001 Hyperglycemia, % (n) 25.0 (364) 53.5 (300) 7.2 (64) < 0.001 BMI (kg/m2) 25.4 ± 3.5 27.5 ± 3.1 24.1 ± 3.0 < 0.001 SBP (mmHg) 129 ± 17 135±17 125±16 < 0.001 DBP (mmHg) 80 ± 11 85 ± 12 78 ± 10 < 0.001 TG (mmol/L) 1.6 (1.1-2.2) 1.9 (1.4-2.6) 1.4 (1.0-2.0) < 0.001 TC (mmol/L) 4.9 ± 1.1 5.0 ± 1.1 4.9 ± 1.1 0.112 HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.1 ± 0.3 1.0 ± 0.3 1.2 ± 0.4 < 0.001 LDL-C (mmol/L) 3.2 ± 1.0 3.3 ± 0.9 3.2 ± 1.0 0.006 Non-HDL-C (mmol/L) 3.8 ± 1.0 3.9 ± 1.0 3.7 ± 1.0 < 0.001 apoA1 (g/L) 1.4 ± 0.3 1.3 ± 0.3 1.4 ± 0.3 < 0.001 apoB (g/L) 1.1 ± 0.3 1.1 ± 0.3 1.0 ± 0.3 < 0.001 Glucose (mmol/L) 5.6 ± 1.6 6.2 ± 2.1 5.2 ± 1.0 < 0.001 HbA1C (%) 6.0 ± 1.0 6.4 ± 1.2 5.7 ± 0.7 < 0.001 hs-CRP (mg/L) 1.2 (0.6 - 2.6) 1.7 (0.8 - 3.4) 1.1 (0.5 - 2.2) < 0.001 WBC count (×109/L) 6.25 ± 1.68 6.48 ± 1.68 6.11 ± 1.67 < 0.001 apoCIII (μg/mL) 86.8 (64.0 - 121.8) 95.1 (73.1 - 131.4) 81.7 (58.6 - 112.4) < 0.001 Note. Data shown are mean ± SD, median (Q1-Q3 quartiles), or % (n). The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. BMI, body mass index; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; TG, triglyceride; TC, total cholesterol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein cholesterol; Non-HDL-C, non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol; apo, apolipoprotein; HbA1C, hemoglobin A1C; hs-CRP, high sensitivity C-reactive protein; WBC, white blood cell. -
Patients with MetS showed higher levels of apoCIII than those without [apoCIII 95.1 (73.1-131.4) vs. 81.7 (58.6-112.4) μg/mL, P < 0.001] (Table 1). As shown in Figure 1: according to the number of MetS risk components (overweight/obesity, hyperglycemia, hypo HDL cholesterolemia and/or hypertriglyceridemia, hypertension), patients were divided into five groups: patients with 0 risk components (n = 82), 1 component (n = 355), 2 components (n = 457), 3 components (n = 412) and 4 components (n = 149). We found that apoCIII levels increased with the number of MetS risk components [60.0 (42.9-78.2) vs. 76.6 (57.7-102.2) vs. 87.6 (63.8-125.9) vs. 91.2 (71.1-125.6) vs. 115.4 (82.2-144.9) μg/mL, P for trend < 0.001]. The logistic regression analyses showed that compared to patients with 0 risk components of MetS, the ORs (95% CIs) of apoCIII levels for patients with 1: 2: 3: and 4 components were 1.016 (1.003-1.028), 1.022 (1.010-1.035), 1.024 (1.012-1.037), and 1.030 (1.017-1.042), respectively (Table 2).
Table 2. The Regression Analysis Regarding the Association of apoCIII, hs-CRP, and WBC with Number of MetS Factors
Number of Mets Factors apoCIII (μg/mL) hs-CRP (mg/mL) WBC (×109/L) OR (95% CI) P-value OR (95% CI) P-value OR (95% CI) P-value 0 1 (reference) - 1 (reference) - 1 (reference) - 1 1.016 (1.003-1.028) 0.014 1.185 (1.023-1.372) 0.023 1.054 (0.989-1.159) 0.082 2 1.022 (1.010-1.035) < 0.001 1.207 (1.045-1.395) 0.011 1.157 (1.001-1.314) 0.041 3 1.024 (1.012-1.037) < 0.001 1.299 (1.126-1.501) < 0.001 1.243 (1.055-1.465) 0.009 4 1.030 (1.017-1.042) < 0.001 1.350 (1.164-1.566) < 0.001 1.302 (1.088-1.558) 0.004 Note. The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. Figure 1. The associations of plasma apoCIII and inflammatory markers with the number of MetS risk components. Both levels of apoCIII (A) and inflammatory makers including hs-CRP (B), and WBC (C) increased with the number of MetS components (all P for trend < 0.001).
We additionally divided the patients according to the quartiles of apoCIII values to examine the presence of MetS in each metabolic disorder. As shown in Table 3: the prevalence of MetS rose in each MetS risk component as the levels of apoCIII increased (all P < 0.05). For example, in patients with overweight/obesity, patients who had higher apoCIII levels experienced a higher prevalence of MetS (Q1 vs. Q2 vs. Q3 vs. Q4: 53.8% vs. 59.4% vs. 66.0% vs. 70.7%, respectively, P for trend = 0.008). The same findings were also observed for apoCIII in patients with hypertension (48.9% vs. 58.2% vs. 71.5% vs. 75.7%, P for trend < 0.001), hypertriglyceridemia (17.7% vs. 37.5 vs. 51.6 vs. 55.4%, P for trend < 0.001), hypo HDL cholesterolemia (44.0% vs. 44.1% vs. 49.1% vs. 57.7%, P for trend = 0.034) and hyperglycemia (70.8% vs. 78.2% vs. 83.7% vs. 91.2%, P for trend = 0.01).
Table 3. Prevalence of MetS in Patients with Each MetS Factor according to ApoCIII Quartiles
Item Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 P for Trend Total (N) 363 364 364 364 MetS, % (n) 27.8 (101) 36.3 (132) 42.3 (154) 47.8 (174) < 0.001 Overweight/obese (N) 173 187 194 215 MetS, % (n) 53.8 (93) 59.4 (111) 66.0 (128) 70.7 (152) 0.008 Hypertension (N) 176 184 207 214 MetS, % (n) 48.9 (86) 58.2 (107) 71.5 (148) 75.7 (162) < 0.001 Hypertriglyceridemia (N) 24 120 186 280 MetS, % (n) 17.7 (4) 37.5 (45) 51.6 (96) 55.4 (155) < 0.001 Hypo HDL cholesterolemia (N) 193 211 218 222 MetS, % (n) 44.0 (85) 44.1 (93) 49.1 (106) 57.7 (128) 0.034 Hyperglycemia (N) 65 87 98 114 MetS, % (n) 70.8 (46) 78.2 (68) 83.7 (82) 91.2 (104) 0.01 Note. The differences in prevalence between groups were analyzed using χ2-tests. Data shown are % (n). The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. MetS, metabolic syndrome; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; apo, apolipoprotein. In addition, we also found significant associations of apoCIII levels with virtually all MetS risk factors including BMI, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), TG, total cholesterol (TC), LDL-C, non-HDL-C, apoA1: apoB, fasting glucose (FG), and hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) (all P < 0.01) (Table 4).
Table 4. Correlations of apoCIII with Metabolic and Inflammatory Parameters
Variables Crude Coefficients P-value Adjusted Coefficients P-value BMI (kg/m2) 0.135 < 0.001 0.132 < 0.001 SBP (mmHg) 0.084 0.007 0.100 0.003 DBP (mmHg) 0.089 0.005 0.086 0.011 TG (mmol/L) 0.701 < 0.001 0.700 < 0.001 TC (mmol/L) 0.411 < 0.001 0.394 < 0.001 HDL-C (mmol/L) 0.015 0.569 0.012 0.624 LDL-C (mmol/L) 0.175 < 0.001 0.153 < 0.001 Non-HDL-C (mmol/L) 0.446 < 0.001 0.429 < 0.001 apoA1 (g/L) 0.160 < 0.001 0.135 < 0.001 apoB (g/L) 0.342 < 0.001 0.315 < 0.001 Glucose (mmol/L) 0.109 < 0.001 0.119 < 0.001 HbA1C (%) 0.151 < 0.001 0.134 < 0.001 WBC (×109/L) 0.100 < 0.001 0.085 0.011 hs-CRP (mg/L) 0.116 < 0.001 0.112 < 0.001 Note. The Pearson correlation coefficients are shown. Log-transformed TG, hs-CRP, and apoCIII levels were used in the analysis. The adjusted coefficients were adjusted for age and gender. The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. BMI, body mass index; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; TG, triglyceride; TC, total cholesterol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein cholesterol; Non-HDL-C, non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol; apo, apolipoprotein; HbA1C, hemoglobin A1C; hs-CRP, high sensitivity C-reactive protein; WBC, white blood cell. Finally, regression analyses were performed according to apoCIII levels and each MetS component to determine the extent to which apoCIII levels affected the association of MetS risk components with MetS development (Figure 2). We considered patients with levels of apoCIII ≤ 86.8 μg/mL (the median of the study population) as the low apoCIII group, and patients with levels > 86.8 μg/mL as the high apoCIII group. Patients who had low apoCIII and no MetS components were regarded as the reference group (OR = 1). Our data revealed that there were significant interactions between apoCIII levels and each MetS component in the development of MetS, since elevated risks of developing MetS were observed with high apoCIII in patients with each metabolic component. The adjusted ORs of high apoCIII (vs. low apoCIII) in overweight/obese, hypertensive, hypertriglycerid- emic, hypo HDL cholesterolemic and hyperglycemic subjects for MetS were 27.2 (vs. 14.6), 51.6 (vs. 28.1), 2.6 (vs. 1.7), 5.4 (vs. 3.9), and 29.6 (vs. 10.0), respectively.
Figure 2. The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for MetS incidence by difference status of MetS risk components and apoCIII levels [overweight/obesity (A), hypertension (HT) (B), hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) (C), hypo HDL cholesterolemia (D), hyperglycemia (E)], (low apoCIII ≤ 86.8 μg/mL; high apoCIII > 86.8 μg/mL).
-
Consistent with the findings of previous studies [13], our data also showed that the markers of inflammation including levels of white blood cells (WBC) and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) were significantly and positively correlated with the presence of MetS (Table 1), and levels of both hs-CRP and WBC were increased with the number of risk components (Figure 1). The patterns of findings in univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses, with adjustment for age and gender, were essentially unchanged from their correlations, suggesting that WBC and hs-CRP levels were significant predictors of MetS (data not shown in Table).
Furthermore, as shown in Table 4: the levels of apoCIII were significantly and positively correlated with the inflammatory markers (WBC r = 0.100: P < 0.001, hs-CRP r = 0.116: P < 0.001, respectively). The correlations remained significant after adjustment for age and gender (WBC r = 0.085: P = 0.011, hs-CRP r = 0.112: P < 0.001, respectively).
Finally, in a model with MetS as the dependent variable, WBC or hs-CRP level as the independent variable, and apoCIII level as the mediator variable, with age, sex, and TG as covariates, the role of apoCIII level in the association of inflammation with MetS was evaluated (Table 5). Data from mediation analyses indicated that there was a 12.5% difference in MetS susceptibility that was attributed to the different hs-CRP levels (P < 0.001) and that 26.4% of this difference was mediated by increased apoCIII level (3.3% of the difference in MetS susceptibility was mediated by apoCIII level; P < 0.001 for the mediation effect). The apoCIII level had a similar mediation effect on the association between WBC and MetS incidence, and the effect size was 9.8%.
Table 5. The Role of apoCIII Level in the Association between Inflammation and MetS Development Evaluated by Mediation Analyses
Mediator Models Parameters Effect Size for MetS P-value apoCIII hs-CRP Total effect of inflammation 0.125 < 0.001 Effect not mediated by apoCIII 0.092 0.005 Effect mediated by apoCIII 0.033 < 0.001 Proportion of inflammation effect mediated by apoCIII 26.4 apoCIII WBC Total effect of inflammation 0.088 0.002 Effect not mediated by apoCIII 0.082 0.015 Effect mediated by apoCIII 0.006 0.021 Proportion of inflammation effect mediated by apoCIII 6.8 Note. Mediation analyses with apoCIII as a mediator for the associations of inflammation with MetS development were performed. The analysis is shown after adjustment for age, gender, and TG. The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. apoCIII, apolipoprotein CIII; MetS, metabolic syndrome; hs-CRP, high sensitivity C-reactive protein; WBC, white blood cell.
doi: 10.3967/bes2017.001
Plasma apoCIII Levels in Relation to Inflammatory Traits and Metabolic Syndrome in Patients not Treated with Lipid-lowering Drugs Undergoing Coronary Angiography
-
Abstract:
Objective Assessment of the comprehensive relationship among apolipoprotein CIII (apoCIII) levels, inflammation, and metabolic disorders is rare. Methods A total of 1455 consecutive patients not treated with lipid-lowering drugs and undergoing coronary angiography were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. A mediation analysis was used to detect the underlying role of apoCIII in the association of inflammation with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Results Patients with MetS showed higher levels of apoCIII[95.1 (73.1-131.4) vs. 81.7 (58.6-112.4) μg/mL, P<0.001] and inflammatory markers[high sensitivity C-reactive protein, 1.7 (0.8-3.4) vs. 1.1 (0.5-2.2) mg/L; white blood cell count, (6.48±1.68) vs. (6.11±1.67)×109/L]. The levels of apoCIII and inflammatory markers increased with the number of metabolic risk components (all P<0.001). Furthermore, apoCIII levels were associated with virtually all individual MetS risk factors and inflammatory markers (all P<0.05). Importantly, the prevalence of MetS in each metabolic disorder rose as apoCIII levels increased (all P<0.05). Mediation analysis showed that apoCIII partially mediated the effect of inflammation on MetS independently from triglycerides. Conclusion Plasma apoCIII levels were significantly associated with the development and severity of MetS, and a role of apoCIII in the effect of inflammation on the development of MetS was identified. -
Key words:
- Apolipoprotein CIII /
- Inflammation /
- Metabolic syndrome
-
Figure 2. The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for MetS incidence by difference status of MetS risk components and apoCIII levels [overweight/obesity (A), hypertension (HT) (B), hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) (C), hypo HDL cholesterolemia (D), hyperglycemia (E)], (low apoCIII ≤ 86.8 μg/mL; high apoCIII > 86.8 μg/mL).
Table 1. Baseline Characteristics in Patients with or without MetS
Characteristics All Patients (n = 1455) With MetS (n = 561) Without MetS ( n = 894) P-value Age (years) 55.1 ± 11.1 56.6 ± 9.9 54.2 ± 11.7 < 0.001 Gender, men% (n) 59.7 (869) 64.7 (363) 56.6 (506) 0.002 Overweight/obesity, % (n) 52.8 (769) 86.3 (484) 31.9 (285) < 0.001 Hypertension, % (n) 53.7 (781) 89.7 (503) 31.1 (278) < 0.001 Hypertriglyceridemia, % (n) 42.0 (610) 53.5 (300) 34.7 (310) < 0.001 HypoHDL cholesterolemia, % (n) 58.0 (844) 73.4 (412) 48.3 (432) < 0.001 Hyperglycemia, % (n) 25.0 (364) 53.5 (300) 7.2 (64) < 0.001 BMI (kg/m2) 25.4 ± 3.5 27.5 ± 3.1 24.1 ± 3.0 < 0.001 SBP (mmHg) 129 ± 17 135±17 125±16 < 0.001 DBP (mmHg) 80 ± 11 85 ± 12 78 ± 10 < 0.001 TG (mmol/L) 1.6 (1.1-2.2) 1.9 (1.4-2.6) 1.4 (1.0-2.0) < 0.001 TC (mmol/L) 4.9 ± 1.1 5.0 ± 1.1 4.9 ± 1.1 0.112 HDL-C (mmol/L) 1.1 ± 0.3 1.0 ± 0.3 1.2 ± 0.4 < 0.001 LDL-C (mmol/L) 3.2 ± 1.0 3.3 ± 0.9 3.2 ± 1.0 0.006 Non-HDL-C (mmol/L) 3.8 ± 1.0 3.9 ± 1.0 3.7 ± 1.0 < 0.001 apoA1 (g/L) 1.4 ± 0.3 1.3 ± 0.3 1.4 ± 0.3 < 0.001 apoB (g/L) 1.1 ± 0.3 1.1 ± 0.3 1.0 ± 0.3 < 0.001 Glucose (mmol/L) 5.6 ± 1.6 6.2 ± 2.1 5.2 ± 1.0 < 0.001 HbA1C (%) 6.0 ± 1.0 6.4 ± 1.2 5.7 ± 0.7 < 0.001 hs-CRP (mg/L) 1.2 (0.6 - 2.6) 1.7 (0.8 - 3.4) 1.1 (0.5 - 2.2) < 0.001 WBC count (×109/L) 6.25 ± 1.68 6.48 ± 1.68 6.11 ± 1.67 < 0.001 apoCIII (μg/mL) 86.8 (64.0 - 121.8) 95.1 (73.1 - 131.4) 81.7 (58.6 - 112.4) < 0.001 Note. Data shown are mean ± SD, median (Q1-Q3 quartiles), or % (n). The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. BMI, body mass index; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; TG, triglyceride; TC, total cholesterol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein cholesterol; Non-HDL-C, non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol; apo, apolipoprotein; HbA1C, hemoglobin A1C; hs-CRP, high sensitivity C-reactive protein; WBC, white blood cell. Table 2. The Regression Analysis Regarding the Association of apoCIII, hs-CRP, and WBC with Number of MetS Factors
Number of Mets Factors apoCIII (μg/mL) hs-CRP (mg/mL) WBC (×109/L) OR (95% CI) P-value OR (95% CI) P-value OR (95% CI) P-value 0 1 (reference) - 1 (reference) - 1 (reference) - 1 1.016 (1.003-1.028) 0.014 1.185 (1.023-1.372) 0.023 1.054 (0.989-1.159) 0.082 2 1.022 (1.010-1.035) < 0.001 1.207 (1.045-1.395) 0.011 1.157 (1.001-1.314) 0.041 3 1.024 (1.012-1.037) < 0.001 1.299 (1.126-1.501) < 0.001 1.243 (1.055-1.465) 0.009 4 1.030 (1.017-1.042) < 0.001 1.350 (1.164-1.566) < 0.001 1.302 (1.088-1.558) 0.004 Note. The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. Table 3. Prevalence of MetS in Patients with Each MetS Factor according to ApoCIII Quartiles
Item Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 P for Trend Total (N) 363 364 364 364 MetS, % (n) 27.8 (101) 36.3 (132) 42.3 (154) 47.8 (174) < 0.001 Overweight/obese (N) 173 187 194 215 MetS, % (n) 53.8 (93) 59.4 (111) 66.0 (128) 70.7 (152) 0.008 Hypertension (N) 176 184 207 214 MetS, % (n) 48.9 (86) 58.2 (107) 71.5 (148) 75.7 (162) < 0.001 Hypertriglyceridemia (N) 24 120 186 280 MetS, % (n) 17.7 (4) 37.5 (45) 51.6 (96) 55.4 (155) < 0.001 Hypo HDL cholesterolemia (N) 193 211 218 222 MetS, % (n) 44.0 (85) 44.1 (93) 49.1 (106) 57.7 (128) 0.034 Hyperglycemia (N) 65 87 98 114 MetS, % (n) 70.8 (46) 78.2 (68) 83.7 (82) 91.2 (104) 0.01 Note. The differences in prevalence between groups were analyzed using χ2-tests. Data shown are % (n). The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. MetS, metabolic syndrome; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; apo, apolipoprotein. Table 4. Correlations of apoCIII with Metabolic and Inflammatory Parameters
Variables Crude Coefficients P-value Adjusted Coefficients P-value BMI (kg/m2) 0.135 < 0.001 0.132 < 0.001 SBP (mmHg) 0.084 0.007 0.100 0.003 DBP (mmHg) 0.089 0.005 0.086 0.011 TG (mmol/L) 0.701 < 0.001 0.700 < 0.001 TC (mmol/L) 0.411 < 0.001 0.394 < 0.001 HDL-C (mmol/L) 0.015 0.569 0.012 0.624 LDL-C (mmol/L) 0.175 < 0.001 0.153 < 0.001 Non-HDL-C (mmol/L) 0.446 < 0.001 0.429 < 0.001 apoA1 (g/L) 0.160 < 0.001 0.135 < 0.001 apoB (g/L) 0.342 < 0.001 0.315 < 0.001 Glucose (mmol/L) 0.109 < 0.001 0.119 < 0.001 HbA1C (%) 0.151 < 0.001 0.134 < 0.001 WBC (×109/L) 0.100 < 0.001 0.085 0.011 hs-CRP (mg/L) 0.116 < 0.001 0.112 < 0.001 Note. The Pearson correlation coefficients are shown. Log-transformed TG, hs-CRP, and apoCIII levels were used in the analysis. The adjusted coefficients were adjusted for age and gender. The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. BMI, body mass index; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; TG, triglyceride; TC, total cholesterol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein cholesterol; Non-HDL-C, non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol; apo, apolipoprotein; HbA1C, hemoglobin A1C; hs-CRP, high sensitivity C-reactive protein; WBC, white blood cell. Table 5. The Role of apoCIII Level in the Association between Inflammation and MetS Development Evaluated by Mediation Analyses
Mediator Models Parameters Effect Size for MetS P-value apoCIII hs-CRP Total effect of inflammation 0.125 < 0.001 Effect not mediated by apoCIII 0.092 0.005 Effect mediated by apoCIII 0.033 < 0.001 Proportion of inflammation effect mediated by apoCIII 26.4 apoCIII WBC Total effect of inflammation 0.088 0.002 Effect not mediated by apoCIII 0.082 0.015 Effect mediated by apoCIII 0.006 0.021 Proportion of inflammation effect mediated by apoCIII 6.8 Note. Mediation analyses with apoCIII as a mediator for the associations of inflammation with MetS development were performed. The analysis is shown after adjustment for age, gender, and TG. The bold values indicate statistical significance and are bolded to improve the readability of the table. apoCIII, apolipoprotein CIII; MetS, metabolic syndrome; hs-CRP, high sensitivity C-reactive protein; WBC, white blood cell. -
[1] Kohan AB. Apolipoprotein C-III:a potent modulator of hypertriglyceridemia and cardiovascular disease. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes, 2015; 22, 119-25. doi: 10.1097/MED.0000000000000136 [2] Mahley RW, Innerarity TL, Rall SC Jr, et al. Plasma lipoproteins:apolipoprotein structure and function. J Lipid Res, 1984; 25, 1277-94. [3] Sundaram M, Zhong S, Bou Khalil M, et al. Expression of apolipoprotein C-III in McA-RH7777 cells enhances VLDL assembly and secretion under lipid-rich conditions. J Lipid Res, 2010; 51, 150-61. doi: 10.1194/M900346-JLR200 [4] Wang F, Kohan AB, Dong HH, et al. Overexpression of apolipoprotein C-III decreases secretion of dietary triglyceride into lymph. Physiol Rep, 2014; 2, e00247. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260532130_Overexpression_of_apolipoprotein_C-III_decreases_secretion_of_dietary_triglyceride_into_lymph [5] Kawakami A, Aikawa M, Alcaide P, et al. Apolipoprotein CIII induces expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 in vascular endothelial cells and increases adhesion of monocytic cells. Circulation, 2006; 114, 681-7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.622514 [6] Crosby J, Peloso GM, Auer PL, et al. Loss-of-function mutations in APOC3, triglycerides, and coronary disease. New Engl J Med, 2014; 371, 22-31. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1307095 [7] Qamar A, Khetarpal SA, Khera AV, et al. Plasma apolipoprotein C-III levels, triglycerides, and coronary artery calcification in type 2 diabetics. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol, 2015; 35, 1880-8. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.115.305415 [8] Hokanson JE, Kinney GL, Cheng S, et al. Susceptibility to type 1 diabetes is associated with ApoCIII gene haplotypes. Diabetes, 2006; 55, 834-8. doi: 10.2337/diabetes.55.03.06.db05-1380 [9] Caron S, Verrijken A, Mertens I, et al. Transcriptional activation of apolipoprotein CIII expression by glucose may contribute to diabetic dyslipidemia. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol, 2011; 31, 513-9. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.110.220723 [10] Holmberg R, Refai E, Hoog A, et al. Lowering apolipoprotein CIII delays onset of type 1 diabetes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2011; 108, 10685-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1019553108 [11] Li AH, Morrison AC, Kovar C, et al. Analysis of loss-of-function variants and 20 risk factor phenotypes in 8,554 individuals identifies loci influencing chronic disease. Nat Genet, 2015; 47, 640-2. doi: 10.1038/ng.3270 [12] Welty FK, Alfaddagh A, Elajami TK. Targeting inflammation in metabolic syndrome. Transl Res, 2016; 167, 257-80. doi: 10.1016/j.trsl.2015.06.017 [13] Mori N, McEvoy JP, Miller BJ. Total and differential white blood cell counts, inflammatory markers, adipokines, and the metabolic syndrome in phase 1 of the clinical antipsychotic trials of intervention effectiveness study. Schizophr Res, 2015; 169, 30-5. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2015.10.001 [14] Zimmet P, KG MMA, Serrano Rios M. A new international diabetes federation worldwide definition of the metabolic syndrome:the rationale and the results. Rev Esp Cardiol, 2005; 58, 1371-6. doi: 10.1016/S0300-8932(05)74065-3 [15] Balkau B, Eschwege E. The metabolic syndrome. Lancet, 2005; 366, 1921. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67778-1 [16] Bays HE, Jones PH, Brown WV, et al. National Lipid Association Annual Summary of Clinical Lipidology [2015] J Clin Lipidol, 2014; 8, S1-36. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Jones32/publication/295099132_National_Lipid_Association_Annual_Summary_of_Clinical_Lipidology_2016/links/56cb14ce08ae5488f0dadd34.pdf?origin=publication_detail [17] Li S, Zhang Y, Xu RX, et al. Proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 as a biomarker for the severity of coronary artery disease. Ann Med, 2015; 47, 386-93. doi: 10.3109/07853890.2015.1042908 [18] Zheng C, Azcutia V, Aikawa E, et al. Statins suppress apolipoprotein CIII-induced vascular endothelial cell activation and monocyte adhesion. Eur Heart J, 2013; 34, 615-24. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs271 [19] Liu Y, Wu M, Ling J, et al. Serum IGFBP7 levels associate with insulin resistance and the risk of metabolic syndrome in a Chinese population. Sci Rep, 2015; 5, 10227. doi: 10.1038/srep10227 [20] Solymoss BC, Bourassa MG, Campeau L, et al. Effect of increasing metabolic syndrome score on atherosclerotic risk profile and coronary artery disease angiographic severity. Am J Cardiol, 2004; 93, 159-64. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2003.09.032 [21] Eberly LE, Prineas R, Cohen JD, et al. Metabolic syndrome:risk factor distribution and 18-year mortality in the multiple risk factor intervention trial. Diabetes Care, 2006; 29, 123-30. doi: 10.2337/diacare.29.01.06.dc05-1320 [22] Wang CS, McConathy WJ, Kloer HU, et al. Modulation of lipoprotein lipase activity by apolipoproteins. Effect of apolipoprotein C-III. J Clin Invest, 1985; 75, 384-90. doi: 10.1172/JCI111711 [23] Meikle PJ, Christopher MJ. Lipidomics is providing new insight into the metabolic syndrome and its sequelae. Curr Opin Lipidol, 2011; 22, 210-5. doi: 10.1097/MOL.0b013e3283453dbe [24] Stefan N, Haring HU, Hu FB, et al. Metabolically healthy obesity:epidemiology, mechanisms, and clinical implications. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2013; 1, 152-62. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70062-7