2016
DOI: 10.5551/jat.33068
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Proposal for the Optimal Management Target for Serum Non-High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Level in Low-Risk Japanese Workers

Abstract: , the use of statins for the primary prevention of CVD events have resulted in a reduced risk of up to approximately 20%. These findings indicate the existence of substantial residual risk. Research has indicated remnant lipoproteins, i.e., intermediate metabolites of chylomicron and very-low-density lipoprotein, as major sources of IntroductionLarge-scale cohort studies have shown that the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) increases with greater low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC) levels [1][2]… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…HDL-C and TG are likely to be intermediate factors for CRF; thus, this result may not indicate the effect of CRF accurately. Furthermore, the optimal management goal of non-HDL-C has been discussed 23 25 ) ; the same results as those in the main analysis were obtained by sensitivity analysis that examined the relationship between CRF levels and the incidence of a high level of non-HDL-C defined as a non-HDL-C level of ≥ 140 mg/dL, instead of ≥ 170 mg/dL ( p < 0.001) ( Supplementary Table 1 ). The same results as those in the main analysis were obtained by sensitivity analysis that excluded the participants with a high level of non-HDL-C within 2 years of the baseline ( p = 0.014) ( Supplementary Table 2 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…HDL-C and TG are likely to be intermediate factors for CRF; thus, this result may not indicate the effect of CRF accurately. Furthermore, the optimal management goal of non-HDL-C has been discussed 23 25 ) ; the same results as those in the main analysis were obtained by sensitivity analysis that examined the relationship between CRF levels and the incidence of a high level of non-HDL-C defined as a non-HDL-C level of ≥ 140 mg/dL, instead of ≥ 170 mg/dL ( p < 0.001) ( Supplementary Table 1 ). The same results as those in the main analysis were obtained by sensitivity analysis that excluded the participants with a high level of non-HDL-C within 2 years of the baseline ( p = 0.014) ( Supplementary Table 2 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the TG level is ≥ 400 mg/dL, or if blood is collected after a meal, then the non-HDL-C target shall be used for the initial management of dyslipidemia instead of the LDL-C target. If non-HDL-C levels are used for screening in the general population, then it should also be noted that the difference between the non-HDL-C and LDL-C levels would be < 30 mg/dL, at approximately 20 mg/dL 349 , 350 ) . As in the previous guidelines, a TG level of < 150 mg/dL and an HDL-C level of ≥ 40 mg/dL are the recommended targets for both primary and secondary prevention.…”
Section: Comprehensive Risk Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, lifestyle modification should be the basic treatment after controlling LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and TG. the difference between non-HDL-C and LDL-C is smaller than 30 mg/dL and is usually around 20 mg/ dL 615,616) . On the other hand, as in the previous guideline, it is recommended that TG and HDL-C be managed with the goals of less than 150 mg/dL (fasting) and more than 40 mg/dL for primary and secondary prevention, respectively (less than 175 mg/ dL for non-fasting).…”
Section: The Concept Of Lifetime Riskmentioning
confidence: 99%