Differential association between the progression of coronary artery calcium score and coronary plaque volume progression according to statins: the Progression of AtheRosclerotic PlAque DetermIned by Computed TomoGraphic Angiography Imaging (PARADIGM) study.
Computed Tomography Angiography
Coronary Angiography
Coronary Artery Disease
/ chemically induced
Disease Progression
Female
Humans
Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors
/ adverse effects
Male
Middle Aged
Plaque, Atherosclerotic
/ chemically induced
Prospective Studies
Registries
Vascular Calcification
/ chemically induced
Agatston score
coronary artery atherosclerosis
coronary artery calcification
coronary artery calcium score
coronary computed tomography angiography
statins
Journal
European heart journal. Cardiovascular Imaging
ISSN: 2047-2412
Titre abrégé: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101573788
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Nov 2019
01 Nov 2019
Historique:
received:
17
08
2018
revised:
24
09
2018
accepted:
29
01
2019
pubmed:
23
2
2019
medline:
15
12
2020
entrez:
22
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Coronary artery calcium score (CACS) is a strong predictor of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Conversely, statins, which markedly reduce MACE risk, increase CACS. We explored whether CACS progression represents compositional plaque volume (PV) progression differently according to statin use. From a prospective multinational registry of consecutive patients (n = 2252) who underwent serial coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) at a ≥ 2-year interval, 654 patients (61 ± 10 years, 56% men, inter-scan interval 3.9 ± 1.5 years) with information regarding the use of statins and having a serial CACS were included. Patients were divided into non-statin (n = 246) and statin-taking (n = 408) groups. Coronary PVs (total, calcified, and non-calcified; sum of fibrous, fibro-fatty, and lipid-rich) were quantitatively analysed, and CACS was measured from both CCTAs. Multivariate linear regression models were constructed for both statin-taking and non-statin group to assess the association between compositional PV change and change in CACS. In multivariate linear regression analysis, in the non-statin group, CACS increase was positively associated with both non-calcified (β = 0.369, P = 0.004) and calcified PV increase (β = 1.579, P < 0.001). However, in the statin-taking group, CACS increase was positively associated with calcified PV change (β = 0.756, P < 0.001) but was negatively associated with non-calcified PV change (β = -0.194, P = 0.026). In the non-statin group, CACS progression indicates the progression of both non-calcified and calcified PV progression. However, under the effect of statins, CACS progression indicates only calcified PV progression, but not non-calcified PV progression. Thus, the result of serial CACS should be differently interpreted according to the use of statins.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30789215
pii: 5353147
doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jez022
pmc: PMC6806249
doi:
Substances chimiques
Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1307-1314Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004 Jul;24(7):1272-7
pubmed: 15059806
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Oct;11(10):1475-1484
pubmed: 29909109
N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 27;358(13):1336-45
pubmed: 18367736
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018 Dec;11(12):1785-1794
pubmed: 29055625
JAMA. 2004 Nov 10;292(18):2217-25
pubmed: 15536108
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Apr;15(4):380-8
pubmed: 24448227
N Engl J Med. 2008 Nov 20;359(21):2195-207
pubmed: 18997196
JAMA. 2014 Jan 15;311(3):271-8
pubmed: 24247483
Invest Radiol. 2011 Dec;46(12):790-5
pubmed: 21826008
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Jun;29(5):1177-90
pubmed: 23417447
Circulation. 2005 Jul 26;112(4):563-71
pubmed: 16009795
Am J Cardiol. 2004 Aug 15;94(4):431-6
pubmed: 15325924
Radiology. 2016 Dec;281(3):737-748
pubmed: 27636027
Eur Heart J. 2015 Feb 21;36(8):472-4
pubmed: 25575600
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Apr 7;65(13):1283-1285
pubmed: 25835439
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990 Mar 15;15(4):827-32
pubmed: 2407762
Lancet. 1994 Nov 19;344(8934):1383-9
pubmed: 7968073
Eur Radiol. 2015 Oct;25(10):3073-83
pubmed: 25994190
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Jul 28;66(4):337-46
pubmed: 26205589
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Mar 26;61(12):1231-9
pubmed: 23500326
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2019 Jan - Feb;13(1):48-54
pubmed: 30342980
Am Heart J. 2016 Dec;182:72-79
pubmed: 27914502
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Apr 7;65(13):1273-1282
pubmed: 25835438
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2016 Nov - Dec;10(6):435-449
pubmed: 27780758
Eur Heart J. 2013 Oct;34(38):2949-3003
pubmed: 23996286
N Engl J Med. 1998 Dec 31;339(27):1972-8
pubmed: 9869668
Circulation. 2018 Feb 13;137(7):665-679
pubmed: 29142010
Circulation. 2014 Jun 24;129(25 Suppl 2):S1-45
pubmed: 24222016
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Mar;5(3 Suppl):S28-37
pubmed: 22421228
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2017 Feb;70(2):115
pubmed: 29389351
Radiology. 2005 Aug;236(2):477-84
pubmed: 15972340
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014 Sep-Oct;8(5):342-58
pubmed: 25301040
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010 Dec;3(12):1229-36
pubmed: 21163451
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Feb;5(2):169-77
pubmed: 22340823
EuroIntervention. 2011 Apr;6(9):1123-30, 9
pubmed: 21518687
Eur Heart J. 2008 Oct;29(19):2373-81
pubmed: 18682447