Genetic and observational evidence: No independent role for cholesterol efflux over static high-density lipoprotein concentration measures in coronary heart disease risk assessment.

BACKGROUND: Observational findings for high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-mediated cholesterol efflux capacity (HDL-CEC) and coronary heart disease (CHD) appear inconsistent, and knowledge of the genetic architecture of HDL-CEC is limited. OBJECTIVES: A large-scale observational study on the associations of HDL-CEC and other HDL-related measures with CHD and the largest genome-wide association study (GWAS) of HDL-CEC. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS: Six independent cohorts were included with follow-up data for 14,438 participants to investigate the associations of HDL-related measures with incident CHD (1,570 events). The GWAS of HDL-CEC was carried out in 20,372 participants. RESULTS: HDL-CEC did not associate with CHD when adjusted for traditional risk factors and HDL cholesterol (HDL-C). In contradiction, almost all HDL-related concentration measures associated consistently with CHD after corresponding adjustments. There were no genetic loci associated with HDL-CEC independent of HDL-C and triglycerides. CONCLUSION: HDL-CEC is not unequivocally associated with CHD in contrast to HDL-C, apolipoprotein A-I, and most of the HDL subclass particle concentrations.

Data-driven multivariate population subgrouping via lipoprotein phenotypes versus apolipoprotein B in the risk assessment of coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Population subgrouping has been suggested as means to improve coronary heart disease (CHD) risk assessment. We explored here how unsupervised data-driven metabolic subgrouping, based on comprehensive lipoprotein subclass data, would work in large-scale population cohorts. METHODS: We applied a self-organizing map (SOM) artificial intelligence methodology to define subgroups based on detailed lipoprotein profiles in a population-based cohort (n = 5789) and utilised the trained SOM in an independent cohort (n = 7607). We identified four SOM-based subgroups of individuals with distinct lipoprotein profiles and CHD risk and compared those to univariate subgrouping by apolipoprotein B quartiles. RESULTS: The SOM-based subgroup with highest concentrations for non-HDL measures had the highest, and the subgroup with lowest concentrations, the lowest risk for CHD. However, apolipoprotein B quartiles produced better resolution of risk than the SOM-based subgroups and also striking dose-response behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the majority of lipoprotein-mediated CHD risk is explained by apolipoprotein B-containing lipoprotein particles. Therefore, even advanced multivariate subgrouping, with comprehensive data on lipoprotein metabolism, may not advance CHD risk assessment.