35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Low LDL cholesterol, PCSK9 and HMGCR genetic variation, and risk of Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease: Mendelian randomisation study

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective To test the hypothesis that low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol due to genetic variation in the genes responsible for LDL cholesterol metabolism and biosynthesis( PCSK9 and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase ( HMGCR), respectively) is associated with a high risk of Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia, any dementia, and Parkinson’s disease in the general population.

          Design Mendelian randomisation study.

          Setting Copenhagen General Population Study and Copenhagen City Heart Study.

          Participants 111 194 individuals from the Danish general population.

          Main outcome measures Risk of Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia, all dementia, and Parkinson’s disease.

          Results In observational analyses, the multifactorially adjusted hazard ratio for Parkinson’s disease in participants with an LDL cholesterol level <1.8 mmol/L versus ≥4.0 mmol/L was 1.70 (95% confidence interval 1.03 to 2.79), whereas the corresponding hazard ratios for Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia, or any dementia did not differ from 1.0. PCSK9 and HMGCR variants combined were associated with a 9.3% lower LDL cholesterol level. In genetic, causal analyses adjusted for age, sex, and year of birth, the risk ratios for a lifelong 1 mmol/L lower LDL cholesterol level were 0.57 (0.27 to 1.17) for Alzheimer’s disease, 0.81 (0.34 to 1.89) for vascular dementia, 0.66 (0.34 to 1.26) for any dementia, and 1.02 (0.26 to 4.00) for Parkinson’s disease. Summary level data from the International Genomics of Alzheimer’s Project using Egger Mendelian randomisation analysis gave a risk ratio for Alzheimer’s disease of 0.24 (0.02 to 2.79) for 26 PCSK9 and HMGCR variants, and of 0.64 (0.52 to 0.79) for 380 variants of LDL cholesterol level lowering.

          Conclusion Low LDL cholesterol levels due to PCSK9 and HMGCR variants had no causal effect on high risk of Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementia, any dementia, or Parkinson’s disease; however, low LDL cholesterol levels may have a causal effect in reducing the risk of Alzheimer’s disease.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          'Mendelian randomization': can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease?

          Associations between modifiable exposures and disease seen in observational epidemiology are sometimes confounded and thus misleading, despite our best efforts to improve the design and analysis of studies. Mendelian randomization-the random assortment of genes from parents to offspring that occurs during gamete formation and conception-provides one method for assessing the causal nature of some environmental exposures. The association between a disease and a polymorphism that mimics the biological link between a proposed exposure and disease is not generally susceptible to the reverse causation or confounding that may distort interpretations of conventional observational studies. Several examples where the phenotypic effects of polymorphisms are well documented provide encouraging evidence of the explanatory power of Mendelian randomization and are described. The limitations of the approach include confounding by polymorphisms in linkage disequilibrium with the polymorphism under study, that polymorphisms may have several phenotypic effects associated with disease, the lack of suitable polymorphisms for studying modifiable exposures of interest, and canalization-the buffering of the effects of genetic variation during development. Nevertheless, Mendelian randomization provides new opportunities to test causality and demonstrates how investment in the human genome project may contribute to understanding and preventing the adverse effects on human health of modifiable exposures.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            2003 World Health Organization (WHO)/International Society of Hypertension (ISH) statement on management of hypertension.

            Hypertension is estimated to cause 4.5% of current global disease burden and is as prevalent in many developing countries, as in the developed world. Blood pressure-induced cardiovascular risk rises continuously across the whole blood pressure range. Countries vary widely in capacity for management of hypertension, but worldwide the majority of diagnosed hypertensives are inadequately controlled. This statement addresses the ascertainment of overall cardiovascular risk to establish thresholds for initiation and goals of treatment, appropriate treatment strategies for non-drug and drug therapies, and cost-effectiveness of treatment. Since publication of the WHO/ISH Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension in 1999, more evidence has become available to support a systolic blood pressure threshold of 140 mmHg for even 'low-risk' patients. In high-risk patients there is evidence for lower thresholds. Lifestyle modification is recommended for all individuals. There is evidence that specific agents have benefits for patients with particular compelling indications, and that monotherapy is inadequate for the majority of patients. For patients without a compelling indication for a particular drug class, on the basis of comparative trial data, availability, and cost, a low dose of diuretic should be considered for initiation of therapy. In most places a thiazide diuretic is the cheapest option and thus most cost effective, but for compelling indications where other classes provide additional benefits, even if more expensive, they may be more cost effective. In high-risk patients who attain large benefits from treatment, expensive drugs may be cost effective, but in low-risk patients treatment may not be cost-effective unless the drugs are cheap.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR* Trial).

              The primary objective of this 6-week, parallel-group, open-label, randomized, multicenter trial was to compare rosuvastatin with atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin across dose ranges for reduction of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. Secondary objectives included comparing rosuvastatin with comparators for other lipid modifications and achievement of National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and Joint European Task Force LDL cholesterol goals. After a dietary lead-in period, 2,431 adults with hypercholesterolemia (LDL cholesterol > or =160 and <250 mg/dl; triglycerides <400 mg/dl) were randomized to treatment with rosuvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; simvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; or pravastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg. At 6 weeks, across-dose analyses showed that rosuvastatin 10 to 80 mg reduced LDL cholesterol by a mean of 8.2% more than atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg, 26% more than pravastatin 10 to 40 mg, and 12% to 18% more than simvastatin 10 to 80 mg (all p <0.001). Mean percent changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the rosuvastatin groups were +7.7% to +9.6% compared with +2.1% to +6.8% in all other groups. Across dose ranges, rosuvastatin reduced total cholesterol significantly more (p <0.001) than all comparators and triglycerides significantly more (p <0.001) than simvastatin and pravastatin. Adult Treatment Panel III LDL cholesterol goals were achieved by 82% to 89% of patients treated with rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg compared with 69% to 85% of patients treated with atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg; the European LDL cholesterol goal of <3.0 mmol/L was achieved by 79% to 92% in rosuvastatin groups compared with 52% to 81% in atorvastatin groups. Drug tolerability was similar across treatments.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: associate professorRole: chief physician
                Role: professorRole: chief physician
                Role: associate professorRole: chief physician
                Role: professorRole: chief physician
                Journal
                BMJ
                BMJ
                bmj
                The BMJ
                BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
                0959-8138
                1756-1833
                2017
                24 April 2017
                : 357
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Blegdamsvej 3, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
                [2 ]The Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark
                [3 ]Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
                [4 ]Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark
                [5 ]The Copenhagen City Heart Study, Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: M Benn Marianne.benn@ 123456regionh.dk
                Article
                benm033277
                10.1136/bmj.j1648
                5421439
                28438747
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                Product
                Categories
                Research

                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article