2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Significance of LDL and HDL subclasses characterization in the assessment of risk for colorectal cancer development

      research-article

      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

          Introduction

          Dyslipidaemia contributes to the occurrence of colorectal cancer (CRC). We hypothesized that qualitative changes of lipoproteins are associated with the risk for CRC development. This study analyses low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) diameters, as well as distribution of LDL and HDL subclasses in patients with CRC, with an aim to determine whether advanced lipid testing might be useful in predicting the risk for the onset of this malignancy.

          Materials and methods

          This case-control study included 84 patients with newly diagnosed CRC and 92 controls. Gradient gel electrophoresis was applied for separation of lipoprotein subclasses and for LDL and HDL diameters determination. Lipid parameters were measured using routine enzymatic methods.

          Results

          Total cholesterol, HDL and LDL-cholesterol were significantly lower in CRC patients compared to controls (4.47 mmol/L vs. 5.63 mmol/L; 0.99 mmol/L vs. 1.27 mmol/L; 2.90 mmol/L vs. 3.66 mmol/L; P < 0.001, respectively). Patients had significantly smaller LDL (25.14 nm vs. 26.92 nm; P < 0.001) and HDL diameters (8.76 nm vs. 10.17 nm; P < 0.001) and greater proportion of small, dense LDL particles (54.0% vs. 52.9%; P = 0.044) than controls. Decreased LDL and HDL diameters were independent predictors of CRC (OR = 0.5, P = 0.001 and OR = 0.5, P = 0.008, respectively), and alongside with age and HDL-cholesterol concentrations formed the optimal cost-effective model, providing adequate discriminative abilities for CRC (AUC = 0.89) and correct patients classification (81%).

          Conclusions

          Patients with CRC have decreased LDL and HDL diameters and increased proportion of smaller particles. LDL and HDL diameters determination could be useful in assessing the risk for CRC development.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

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

          Obesity and risk of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of 31 studies with 70,000 events.

          Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of death and illness in developed countries. Previous reviews have suggested that obesity may be associated with 30% to 60% greater risk of colorectal cancer, but little consideration was given to the possible effect of publication bias on the reported association. Relevant studies were identified through EMBASE and MEDLINE. Studies were included if they had published quantitative estimates of the association between general obesity [defined here as body mass index (BMI) > or = 30 kg/m(2)] and central obesity (measured using waist circumference) and colorectal cancer. Random-effects meta-analyses were done, involving 70,000 cases of incident colorectal cancer from 31 studies, of which 23 were cohort studies and 8 were case-control studies. After pooling and correcting for publication bias, the estimated relative risk of colorectal cancer was 1.19 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.11-1.29], comparing obese (BMI > or = 30 kg/m(2)) with normal weight (BMI <25 kg/m(2)) people; and 1.45 (95% CI, 1.31-1.61), comparing those with the highest, to the lowest, level of central obesity. After correcting for publication bias, the risk of colorectal cancer was 1.41 (95% CI, 1.30-1.54) in men compared with 1.08 (95% CI, 0.98-1.18) for women (P(heterogeneity) <0.001). There was evidence of a dose-response relationship between BMI and colorectal cancer: for a 2 kg/m(2) increase in BMI, the risk of colorectal cancer increased by 7% (4-10%). For a 2-cm increase in waist circumference, the risk increased by 4% (2-5%). Obesity has a direct and independent relationship with colorectal cancer, although the strength of the association with general obesity is smaller than previously reported.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Primary prevention of colorectal cancer.

            Colorectal cancer has been strongly associated with a Western lifestyle. In the past several decades, much has been learned about the dietary, lifestyle, and medication risk factors for this malignancy. Although there is controversy about the role of specific nutritional factors, consideration of dietary pattern as a whole appears useful for formulating recommendations. For example, several studies have shown that high intake of red and processed meats, highly refined grains and starches, and sugars is related to increased risk of colorectal cancer. Replacing these factors with poultry, fish, and plant sources as the primary source of protein; unsaturated fats as the primary source of fat; and unrefined grains, legumes and fruits as the primary source of carbohydrates is likely to lower risk of colorectal cancer. Although a role for supplements, including vitamin D, folate, and vitamin B6, remains uncertain, calcium supplementation is likely to be at least modestly beneficial. With respect to lifestyle, compelling evidence indicates that avoidance of smoking and heavy alcohol use, prevention of weight gain, and maintenance of a reasonable level of physical activity are associated with markedly lower risks of colorectal cancer. Medications such as aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and postmenopausal hormones for women are associated with substantial reductions in colorectal cancer risk, though their utility is affected by associated risks. Taken together, modifications in diet and lifestyle should substantially reduce the risk of colorectal cancer and could complement screening in reducing colorectal cancer incidence.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model.

              Current models for assessing breast cancer risk are complex and do not include breast density, a strong risk factor for breast cancer that is routinely reported with mammography. To develop and validate an easy-to-use breast cancer risk prediction model that includes breast density. Empirical model based on Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results incidence, and relative hazards from a prospective cohort. Screening mammography sites participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. 1,095,484 women undergoing mammography who had no previous diagnosis of breast cancer. Self-reported age, race or ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, and history of breast biopsy. Community radiologists rated breast density by using 4 Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories. During 5.3 years of follow-up, invasive breast cancer was diagnosed in 14,766 women. The breast density model was well calibrated overall (expected-observed ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.06]) and in racial and ethnic subgroups. It had modest discriminatory accuracy (concordance index, 0.66 [CI, 0.65 to 0.67]). Women with low-density mammograms had 5-year risks less than 1.67% unless they had a family history of breast cancer and were older than age 65 years. The model has only modest ability to discriminate between women who will develop breast cancer and those who will not. A breast cancer prediction model that incorporates routinely reported measures of breast density can estimate 5-year risk for invasive breast cancer. Its accuracy needs to be further evaluated in independent populations before it can be recommended for clinical use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Biochem Med (Zagreb)
                Biochem Med (Zagreb)
                BM
                Biochemia Medica
                Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine
                1330-0962
                1846-7482
                15 October 2018
                15 October 2018
                15 October 2018
                : 28
                : 3
                : 030703
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Biochemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
                [2 ]Medigroup General Hospital, Belgrade, Serbia
                [3 ]Clinic of General Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia
                [4 ]Faculty of Medicine of the Military Medical Academy, University of Defence, Belgrade, Serbia
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: jelena.vekic@ 123456pharmacy.bg.ac.rs
                Article
                bm-28-3-030703
                10.11613/BM.2018.030713
                6214700
                30429670
                deceba45-bb9d-49f5-a758-9cabe5edcdef
                ©Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 April 2018
                : 04 September 2018
                Categories
                Original Papers

                colorectal cancer,risk prediction,lipoprotein subclasses,lipoprotein size,cost-effectiveness

                Comments

                Comment on this article