Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

The residual risk of inflammation and remnant cholesterol in acute coronary syndrome patients on statin treatment undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Lipids in Health and Disease volume 23, Article number: 172 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Residual risk assessment for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients after sufficient medical management remains challenging. The usefulness of measuring high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and remnant cholesterol (RC) in assessing the level of residual inflammation risk (RIR) and residual cholesterol risk (RCR) for risk stratification in these patients needs to be evaluated.

Methods

Patients admitted for ACS on statin treatment who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between March 2016 and March 2019 were enrolled in the analysis. The included patients were stratified based on the levels of hsCRP and RC during hospitalization. The primary outcome was ischemic events at 12 months, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The secondary outcomes included 12-month all-cause death and cardiac death.

Results

Among the 5778 patients, the median hsCRP concentration was 2.60 mg/L and the median RC concentration was 24.98 mg/dL. The RIR was significantly associated with ischemic events (highest hsCRP tertile vs. lowest hsCRP tertile, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–2.30, P = 0.046), cardiac death (aHR: 1.77, 95% CI:1.02–3.07, P = 0.0418) and all-cause death (aHR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.24–3.24, P = 0.0048). The RCR was also significantly associated with these outcomes, with corresponding values for the highest tertile of RC were 1.81 (1.21–2.73, P = 0.0043), 2.76 (1.57–4.86, P = 0.0004), and 1.72 (1.09–2.73, P = 0.0208), respectively. The risks of ischemic events (aHR: 2.80, 95% CI: 1.75–4.49, P < 0.0001), cardiac death (aHR: 4.10, 95% CI: 2.18–7.70, P < 0.0001), and all-cause death (aHR: 3.00, 95% CI, 1.73–5.19, P < 0.0001) were significantly greater in patients with both RIR and RCR (highest hsCRP and RC tertile) than in patients with neither RIR nor RCR (lowest hsCRP and RC tertile). Notably, the RIR and RCR was associated with an increased risk of ischemic events especially in patients with adequate low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) control (LDL-C < 70 mg/dl) (Pinteraction=0.04). Furthermore, the RIR and RCR provide more accurate evaluations of risk in addition to the GRACE score in these patients [areas under the curve (AUC) for ischemic events: 0.64 vs. 0.66, P = 0.003].

Conclusion

Among ACS patients receiving contemporary statin treatment who underwent PCI, high risks of both residual inflammation and cholesterol, as assessed by hsCRP and RC, were strongly associated with increased risks of ischemic events, cardiac death, and all-cause death.

Introduction

Annually, an estimated 7 million individuals worldwide are thought to receive an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) diagnosis, which imposes a significant disease burden [1]. Although substantial advancements have been made in the diagnosis and treatment of ACS, it remains one of the primary causes of global mortality [2]. Previous studies have revealed that even after the administration of current evidence-based therapies such as revascularization and intensive statin therapy, ACS patients still carry significant residual risks for cardiovascular death and thrombotic complications [3]. Therefore, it is essential to identify the determinants of residual risk factors and provide individualized treatment to improve their prognosis.

Typically, the residual cardiovascular risk mainly consists of two components: residual inflammatory risk (RIR) and residual cholesterol risk (RCR) [4, 5]. The RIR refers to the persistent subclinical vascular inflammation, which is a significant factor in recurrent atherothrombotic events in discharged patients and can be assessed by measuring the levels of several signaling molecules, such as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) [6,7,8,9]. RCR refers to the remaining elevated levels of atherogenic lipoproteins despite the implementation of lipid-lowering therapies and is mostly defined as the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level [7, 10, 11]. A recently published collaborative study indicated that regardless of LDL-C level, individuals with elevated hsCRP were at significant cardiovascular risk [7]. Therefore, it may be crucial to consider utilizing a new residual risk marker associated with atherogenic dyslipidemia in conjunction with hsCRP to accurately determine residual cardiovascular risk. Remnant cholesterol (RC) is the amount of cholesterol carried by triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and has been established as a causative factor for an elevated risk of cardiovascular diseases [12, 13]. Furthermore, it was suggested that RC plays a significant role in addressing the residual risk of cardiovascular events beyond the impact of LDL-C in primary as well as secondary preventive populations [14,15,16,17,18]. However, the synergistic potential of combining RC as a marker of RCR with hsCRP as an indicator of RIR for enhancing risk stratification has not yet been explored.

Thus, this study hypothesize that dual residual risk elevation as assessed by hsCRP and RC may confer a greater risk of ischemic events among ACS patients receiving contemporary statin treatment who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The primary goal of this investigation was to assess the independent and combined prognostic value of hsCRP and RC in a large and contemporary cohort of real-world patients.

Method

Study design

The study cohort was derived from a prospective, real-world, single-center registry at the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command in Shenyang, China, which recruited consecutive patients receiving PCI for coronary artery disease between March 2016 and March 2019 [19, 20]. The inclusion criteria for the study were as follows: (1) patients aged 18 years or older, (2) patients diagnosed with ACS who underwent PCI, and (3) patients who had been prescribed statin therapy before PCI. Individuals without comprehensive information on lipid characteristics, such as total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides, as well as inflammatory biomarkers, were excluded. The institutional ethics committee of the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command accepted this study and waived the need for formal informed consent. The study also met the standards of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Laboratory analysis and data collection

Blood samples were collected from each patient during hospitalization, subsequent to the procedural intervention. All indicators were measured using standard hospital assays. The level of hsCRP was measured using a Cobas c 501 analyzer (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany), and the levels of lipid traits were analyzed using a Beckman Coulter AU5800 (Beckman Coulter Inc., Brea, CA). According to the dyslipidemia guidelines, RC was computed by the following equation: TC - LDL-C - HDL-C [21, 22]. The enrolled patients were categorized into three tertiles (lowest, middle, and highest) based on hsCRP and RC concentrations.

A standard web-based data collection system (CV-NET, Crealife Technology) was used to collect patients’ demographic and clinical characteristics, including age, sex, medical history, ACS type, laboratory findings, angiographic and procedural characteristics, and medication treatment.

Outcomes and follow-up

The primary outcome was ischemic events at 12 months, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. The secondary outcomes included 12-month all-cause death and cardiac death. Clinical follow-ups were routinely conducted at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the procedure or at unscheduled readmission by qualified research nurses or doctors via phone or outpatient visits. Every clinical incident was reviewed by a clinical events committee.

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables are reported as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) or median (Q1-Q3 quartiles) as appropriate and were compared using analysis of variance or the Kruskal‒Wallis test. Categorical variables are presented as numbers (percentages) and were compared using the χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test. Time-to-event outcomes were analyzed by the Kaplan‒Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome among the groups. To address potential confounding factors, multivariable regression models were employed, adjusting for covariates such as age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, previous MI, previous PCI, previous stroke, smoking, type of ACS, anemia, estimated glomerular filtration rate, arterial access, coronary arteries treated, and number of stents.

The patients were classified into four groups to evaluate the combined prognostic effect of hsCRP and RC: patients in hsCRP tertiles 1 and 2 and RC tertiles 1 and 2 were defined as having no residual risk; patients in hsCRP tertiles 1 and 2 and RC tertile 3 were defined as having RCR; patients in hsCRP tertile 3 and RC tertiles 1 and 2 were defined as having RIR; and patients in hsCRP tertile 3 and RC tertile 3 were defined as having residual cholesterol and residual inflammation risk (RCIR). The subgroup analyses were further stratified by age (< 65 years or ≥ 65 years), sex (male or female), presence of diabetes (yes or no), and LDL-C level (< 70 mg/dL or ≥ 70 mg/dL).

The nonlinear associations between residual risk markers (hsCRP and RC) and 12-month ischemic events, cardiac death, and all-cause death were evaluated using a restricted cubic spline (RCS). Additionally, we performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and computed the areas under the curve (AUC) to evaluate whether the addition of hsCRP and RC to the global registry of acute coronary events (GRACE) score could improve the ability to predict the outcome events [23]. The ROC curve comparisons were performed in accordance with the methods of DeLong et al [24]. Unless otherwise noted, a two-sided P value less than 0.05 indicated statistical significance. The statistical analysis was conducted using SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).

Results

Baseline characteristics

A total of 5778 patients were included in the study. The median (interquartile range) hsCRP level was 2.60 (1.10, 7.40) mg/L, and the median (interquartile range) RC level was 24.98 (17.71, 34.90) mg/dL. As Table 1 illustrates, patients with elevated hsCRP levels were older and presented more frequently with STEMI. Additionally, these patients had a greater incidence of hypertension, diabetes, anemia, and active smoking; a lower incidence of previous MI and PCI; greater levels of TC and LDL-C; and lower levels of HDL-C. Moreover, patients with elevated RC who were younger exhibited a lower incidence of STEMI. A greater proportion of these patients were female, and there was a greater incidence of cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes and active smoking. Regarding procedural characteristics, most factors were balanced, except that the stent length in patients with elevated hsCRP was likely longer and the number of stents in patients with elevated RC was likely greater. Regarding the medications at discharge, almost all patients had undergone antiplatelet therapy with aspirin. Patients with elevated hsCRP and RC were more likely to be prescribed ACEI/ARB and β-blocker.

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of individuals by tertiles of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and remnant cholesterol
Full size table

Individual effects of hsCRP on outcomes

The primary outcome of 12-month ischemic events occurred in 39 (1.95%), 41 (2.22%), and 66 (3.43%) patients in the lowest, middle, and highest tertiles of hsCRP level group, respectively (log-rank P = 0.007). The incidences of 12-month all-cause death and cardiac death were also greater in the highest tertile of hsCRP level group. The Kaplan‒Meier analysis results are shown in Fig. 1-ABC. Compared with patients in tertile 1, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) (95% CI) for those in tertile 3 were 1.52 (1.01–2.30) for ischemic events (P = 0.046), 1.77 (1.02–3.07) for cardiac death (P = 0.0418), and 2.00 (1.24–3.24) for all-cause death (P = 0.0048) (Table 2). The adjusted Kaplan‒Meier analysis results are shown in Supplementary 1. When hsCRP was analyzed as a continuous variable, as the concentration per 1 mg/L increase, the risk of ischemic events (aHR: 1.005, P = 0.0311), cardiac death (aHR: 1.007, P = 0.0043) and all-cause death (aHR: 1.006, P = 0.0012) also significantly increased (Table 2). The RCS curves demonstrated a positive correlation between the risk of hsCRP and ischemic events (overall P value = 0.02, P for nonlinearity = 0.0503) (Fig. 2A). The RCS curves between hsCRP and cardiac death or all-cause death are shown in Supplementary 2–3.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The cumulative Kaplan-Meier analyses according to high-sensitivity C-reactive protein or remnant cholesterol

(hsCRP: A. ischemic events B. cardiac death C. all-cause death; RC: D. ischemic events E. cardiac death F. all-cause death)

Full size image
Table 2 Cox regression analyses of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein for predicting clinical outcomes
Full size table
Fig. 2
figure 2

Restricted cubic spline fitting for the association between high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and remnant cholesterol with ischemic events

Full size image

Individual effects of RC on outcomes

The primary outcome of 12-month ischemic events occurred in 42 (2.22%), 39 (2.02%), and 65 (3.34%) patients in the lowest, middle, and highest tertiles of RC level group, respectively (log-rank P = 0.019). The incidences of 12-month all-cause death and cardiac death were also greater in the highest tertile of RC level group. The Kaplan‒Meier analysis results are shown in Fig. 1-DEF. Compared with patients in tertile 1, the aHR (95% CI) for those in tertile 3 were 1.81 (1.21–2.73) for ischemic events (P = 0.0043), 2.76 (1.57–4.86) for cardiac death (P = 0.0004), and 1.72 (1.09–2.73) for all-cause death (P = 0.0208) (Table 3). The adjusted Kaplan‒Meier analysis results are shown in Supplementary 1. When RC was analyzed as a continuous variable, as the concentration per 10 mg/dL increased, the risk of ischemic events (aHR: 1.08, P = 0.0001), cardiac death (aHR: 1.11, P < 0.0001) and all-cause death (aHR: 1.10, P < 0.0001) also significantly increased (Table 3). The RCS curves demonstrated a positive correlation between the risk of RC and ischemia events (overall P value = 0.0008, P for nonlinearity = 0.0647) (Fig. 2B). The RCS curves between RC and cardiac death or all-cause death are shown in Supplementary 2–3.

Table 3 Cox regression analyses of remnant cholesterol for predicting clinical outcomes
Full size table

Joint effects of hsCRP and RC on outcomes

The primary outcome of 12-month ischemic events occurred in 46 (1.79%), 34 (2.65%), 35 (2.78%), and 31 (4.65%) patients in the no residual risk, RCR, RIR, and RCIR groups, respectively (log-rank P < 0.001). The incidences of 12-month all-cause death and cardiac death were also greater in the RCIR group. The Kaplan‒Meier analysis results are shown in Fig. 3. Compared with no residual risk, the aHR (95% CI) of ischemic events for RCR, RIR, and RCIR were 1.69 (1.08–2.66), 1.35 (0.86–2.13), and 2.80 (1.75–4.49), respectively; the aHR (95% CI) of cardiac death were 2.61 (1.41–4.84), 1.89 (1.02–3.49), and 4.10 (2.18–7.70), respectively; the aHR (95% CI) of all-cause death were 1.87 (1.10–3.20), 1.99 (1.23–3.23), and 3.00 (1.73–5.19), respectively (Table 4). The adjusted Kaplan‒Meier analysis results are shown in Supplementary 4.

Fig. 3
figure 3

The cumulative Kaplan-Meier analyses according to residual risk defined by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and remnant cholesterol

(A. ischemic events B. cardiac death C. all-cause death)

Abbreviations: RCR, residual cholesterol risk; RIR, residual inflammation risk; RCIR, residual cholesterol and residual inflammation risk;

Full size image
Table 4 Cox regression analyses of residual risk for predicting clinical outcomes
Full size table

Subgroup analysis

The subgroup analysis results for the primary outcome of ischemic events at 12 months are shown in Fig. 4. No statistically significant interactions were detected between age (< 65 years vs. ≥65 years), sex (male vs. female), or diabetes status (yes vs. no) (all Pinteraction > 0.05). However, a significant difference was found in patients with and without LDL-C < 70 mg/dL (Pinteraction = 0.04). In patients with adequate LDL-C control (< 70 mg/dL), compared with no residual risk, the HR (95% CI) of ischemic events for RCR, RIR, and RCIR were 2.75 (1.02–7.38), 5.80 (2.25–14.96), and 5.09 (1.71–15.13), respectively. In patients with elevated LDL-C levels (≥ 70 mg/dL), the corresponding values were 1.27 (0.77–2.09), 1.10 (0.66–1.82), and 2.24 (1.36–3.71), respectively.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Forest plot of subgroup analysis for ischemic events according to residual risk defined by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and remnant cholesterol

Abbreviations: RCR, residual cholesterol risk; RIR, residual inflammation risk; RCIR, residual cholesterol and residual inflammation risk; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol

Full size image

Additional effects after adding hsCRP and RC to GRACE score

As shown in Table 5, adding hsCRP or RC separately to the GRACE score independently improved the predictive value for both the primary and secondary outcomes. Furthermore, the predictive performance of the GRACE score model was further enhanced when both hsCRP and RC were incorporated into the model [AUC: ischemic events: 0.64 (95% CI, 0.60–0.69) vs. 0.66 (95% CI, 0.62–0.71), P = 0.003; cardiac death: 0.70 (95% CI, 0.64–0.76) vs. 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68–0.79), P < 0.001; all-cause death: 0.71 (95% CI, 0.66–0.76) vs. 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69–0.78), P < 0.001].

Table 5 Evaluation of predictive models for clinical outcomes
Full size table

Discussion

The present study, utilizing data from a large real-world registry, aimed to assess the potential of combining hsCRP with RC for improving risk stratification for ACS patients on contemporary statin treatment undergoing PCI. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) elevated hsCRP and RC levels were both independently associated with a greater risk of ischemic events, cardiac death and all-cause death after controlling for potential confounders; (2) patients with simultaneous risks of residual inflammation and residual cholesterol had a greater risk of ischemic events, cardiac death and all-cause death, especially in patients with adequate LDL-C control (LDL-C < 70 mg/dl); and (3) adding hsCRP and RC to GRACE score models can significantly enhance the ability to predict adverse clinical outcomes.

Mechanistically, RC consists of triglyceride-risk lipoproteins that generally do not penetrate the arterial wall due to their larger particle size compared with the fenestra’s size in the elastic lamina of the media [25]. However, these particles can also slowly enter the intima and contribute significantly to the development and progression of atherosclerosis because they contain more cholesterol per particle and are more prone than LDL particles to be taken up by macrophages in the arterial wall [25, 26]. A Mendelian randomization study indicated that regardless of LDL-C or HDL-C levels, a 2.8-fold increase in the causative risk of ischemic heart disease was linked to every 1.0 mmol/L increase in RC [27]. Inflammation is also crucial for the development and subsequent rupture of arterial plaques, which can lead to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and potentially trigger an MI [28]. From the CANTOS trial to LoDoCo2 trial, anti-inflammatory medications that target certain inflammatory pathways demonstrated the potential to lower the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with chronic coronary disease and those who have experienced MI [29,30,31]. Given the negative interactions between inflammation and lipids in several processes associated with plaque formation and rupture, it is physiologically feasible that simultaneous increased levels of RC and hsCRP confer the highest risk of ischemic events, cardiac death, or all-cause death, as demonstrated in the present study.

Regarding the relative effects between the RIR and RCR, a previously published collaborative analysis revealed that inflammation assessed by hsCRP or IL-6 serves as a more robust predictor of future cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality than cholesterol evaluated as LDL-C [7, 8]. Nevertheless, in ACS patients on statin treatment undergoing PCI, the findings indicate that the substitution of LDL-C with RC in assessing RCR appears to possess at least a comparable level of predictive capability for the risk of future ischemic events compared with the RIR evaluated by hsCRP. This result may be attributed to the unique physicochemical properties of remnant particles. First, as mentioned before, these remnant particles have a similar atherogenic propensity to that of LDL particles but contain approximately 40 times more cholesterol [32]. Second, unlike LDL, remnants may not need to undergo oxidation before being digested by macrophages, leading to foam cell formation and subsequent inflammation that contributes to the development of atherosclerosis [25, 33, 34]. Moreover, prior investigations have also demonstrated that elevated blood levels of RC may more accurately indicate residual cardiovascular risk than LDL-C levels in primary [14, 16] and secondary prevention populations [17, 18].

Reducing LDL-C levels has been the main emphasis of current consensus and guidelines related to lowering the risk of cardiovascular events [35, 36]. Nevertheless, a significant percentage of patients continue to pose a high residual risk even after meeting treatment goals suggested by guidelines [3]. According to the subgroup analysis, the results revealed that individuals with adequate LDL-C control may face a 2-fold greater risk of ischemic events due to an increased dual residual risk, as evaluated through hsCRP and RC, than individuals whose LDL-C values are greater than 70 mg/dL. These findings appear to be consistent with prior research results indicating a correlation between RC and the overall amount of coronary atherosclerotic plaque burden in individuals with ideal LDL-C levels [37]. Another collaborative analysis of 10 trials has also revealed that increased on-treatment RC levels were substantially associated with a greater cumulative incidence of cardiovascular events among patients with robust reductions in LDL-C levels [38]. Therefore, even after LDL-C has been decreased to the recommended concentration in patients on lipid-lowering medication, the combined residual risk assessed by hsCRP and RC may be taken into consideration for directing additional treatment intensification [39].

Since RC and hsCRP are actively implicated in the formation of atherosclerosis beyond the influence of LDL-C, treatment with RC-lowering and anti-inflammatory drugs for minimizing the risk of cardiovascular diseases has previously been explored. According to recent research, individuals treated with proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors exhibited benefits with respect to decreased cholesterol remnants and lipid residual risk, beyond the reductions in LDL-C [40]. Specifically, a combined analysis of three randomized controlled trials suggested that alirocumab therapy resulted in a 42.1–52.5% decrease in RC levels compared with placebo [41]. Regarding anti-inflammatory therapies, the administration of canakinumab, an anti-interleukin-1β antibody, has demonstrated efficacy in decreasing the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events, independent of reduced lipid levels [29]. Moreover, large-scale randomized controlled studies have indicated that colchicine not only decreases ischemic events by 23% in recent MI patients but also reduces cardiovascular event risk by one-third among individuals with chronic coronary heart disease receiving standard therapy [30, 31]. Thus, with the continuous refinement of the concepts of RIR and RCR, as well as the ongoing development of targeted therapies, personalized cardiovascular care can be advanced to connect the most appropriate intervention measures with the most suitable patients to achieve precision medicine.

Study strengths and limitations

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to utilize RC as an indicator of RCR in conjunction with hsCRP, a marker of RIR, to evaluate the combined impact of elevated dual risks on the prognosis of ACS patients receiving statin treatment who underwent PCI within a large and contemporary cohort derived from real-world data. Meanwhile, all clinical events were systematically monitored through a standardized assessment conducted by trained personnel at predetermined intervals, complemented by committee oversight, thereby bolstering the validity and reliability of the study outcomes. However, certain limitations should also be noted. First, this was a post hoc analysis of a sizable prospective single-center cohort of ACS patients who underwent PCI, which may impact the generalizability of the results. These findings require confirmation through more specifically designed studies. Second, the concentration of RC was computed instead of being measured directly. But the two methods have demonstrated good correlation [42], and the equation utilized has been shown to have independent prognostic value in multiple previous studies [15, 16, 43,44,45]. Third, the circulating lipid profile and hsCRP were measured subsequent to the procedure, which may not reflect the average levels during follow-up. The on-treatment data may have more clinical significance. Finally, a follow-up of 12 months post-discharge is recognized as relatively short. Thus, the impact of elevated dual risk on the long-term prognosis of patients requires further investigation.

Conclusion

In summary, the current investigation suggested that elevated dual residual risks evaluated by hsCRP and RC are associated with adverse clinical outcomes in patients admitted for ACS who are receiving contemporary statin therapy and undergoing PCI. These novel findings suggested that, beyond LDL-C targeting, a comprehensive assessment of other residual inflammatory and cholesterol risk factors is necessary for enhanced risk stratification, which is crucial for improved clinical decision-making and patient management in ACS patients post-PCI.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

ACS:

Acute coronary syndrome

hsCRP:

High-sensitivity C-reactive protein

RC:

Remnant cholesterol

RIR:

Residual inflammation risk

RCR:

Residual cholesterol risk

RCIR:

Residual cholesterol and residual inflammation risk

PCI:

Percutaneous coronary intervention

LDL-C:

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol

HDL-C:

High-density lipoprotein cholesterol

TC:

Total cholesterol

References

  1. Bhatt DL, Lopes RD, Harrington RA. Diagnosis and treatment of Acute Coronary syndromes: a review. Jama-J Am Med Assoc. 2022;327(7):662–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bergmark BA, Mathenge N, Merlini PA, Lawrence-Wright MB, Giugliano RP. Acute coronary syndromes. Lancet. 2022;399(10332):1347–58.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Hoogeveen RC, Ballantyne CM. Residual Cardiovascular risk at low LDL: remnants, Lipoprotein(a), and inflammation. Clin Chem. 2021;67(1):143–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ridker PM. How common is residual inflammatory risk? Circ Res. 2017;120(4):617–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ridker PM. Residual inflammatory risk: addressing the obverse side of the atherosclerosis prevention coin. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(22):1720–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lawler PR, Bhatt DL, Godoy LC, Lüscher TF, Bonow RO, Verma S, Ridker PM. Targeting cardiovascular inflammation: next steps in clinical translation. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(1):113–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ridker PM, Bhatt DL, Pradhan AD, Glynn RJ, MacFadyen JG, Nissen SE. Inflammation and cholesterol as predictors of cardiovascular events among patients receiving statin therapy: a collaborative analysis of three randomised trials. Lancet. 2023;401(10384):1293–301.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ridker PM, MacFadyen JG, Glynn RJ, Bradwin G, Hasan AA, Rifai N. Comparison of interleukin-6, C-reactive protein, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol as biomarkers of residual risk in contemporary practice: secondary analyses from the Cardiovascular inflammation reduction trial. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(31):2952–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Guedeney P, Claessen BE, Kalkman DN, Aquino M, Sorrentino S, Giustino G, Farhan S, Vogel B, Sartori S, Montalescot G, et al. Residual inflammatory risk in patients with low LDL cholesterol levels undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(19):2401–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sud M, Han L, Koh M, Abdel-Qadir H, Austin PC, Farkouh ME, Godoy LC, Lawler PR, Udell JA, Wijeysundera HC, et al. Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and adverse Cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(12):1440–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ridker PM, Mora S, Rose L. Percent reduction in LDL cholesterol following high-intensity statin therapy: potential implications for guidelines and for the prescription of emerging lipid-lowering agents. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(17):1373–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Twickler TB, Dallinga-Thie GM, Cohn JS, Chapman MJ. Elevated remnant-like particle cholesterol concentration: a characteristic feature of the atherogenic lipoprotein phenotype. Circulation. 2004;109(16):1918–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wadström BN, Pedersen KM, Wulff AB, Nordestgaard BG. Elevated remnant cholesterol, plasma triglycerides, and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality. Eur Heart J. 2023;44(16):1432–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Quispe R, Martin SS, Michos ED, Lamba I, Blumenthal RS, Saeed A, Lima J, Puri R, Nomura S, Tsai M, et al. Remnant cholesterol predicts cardiovascular disease beyond LDL and ApoB: a primary prevention study. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(42):4324–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Doi T, Langsted A, Nordestgaard BG. Elevated remnant cholesterol reclassifies risk of Ischemic Heart Disease and myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;79(24):2383–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Castañer O, Pintó X, Subirana I, Amor AJ, Ros E, Hernáez Á, Martínez-González MÁ, Corella D, Salas-Salvadó J, Estruch R, et al. Remnant cholesterol, not LDL cholesterol, is Associated With Incident Cardiovascular Disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(23):2712–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Langsted A, Madsen CM, Nordestgaard BG. Contribution of remnant cholesterol to cardiovascular risk. J Intern Med. 2020;288(1):116–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zafrir B, Khoury R, Saliba W. Remnant cholesterol and risk of myocardial infarction in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing revascularization. J Clin Lipidol. 2023;17(3):332–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Qiu M, Na K, Qi Z, Zhou H, Li P, Xu K, Wang B, Liu H, Li J, Li Y, et al. Contemporary use of Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a GRACE risk score stratification-based analysis in a Large-Scale, real-world study from China. Mayo Clin Proc. 2023;98(7):1021–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Li Y, Li J, Qiu M, Ma S, Na K, Li X, Qi Z, Chen S, Li Y, Han Y. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardio Inte. 2022;99(Suppl 1):1395–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. An International Atherosclerosis Society Position Paper: global recommendations for the management of dyslipidemia–full report. J Clin Lipidol. 2014;8(1):29–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jacobson TA, Ito MK, Maki KC, Orringer CE, Bays HE, Jones PH, McKenney JM, Grundy SM, Gill EA, Wild RA, et al. National lipid association recommendations for patient-centered management of dyslipidemia: part 1–full report. J Clin Lipidol. 2015;9(2):129–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Eagle KA, Lim MJ, Dabbous OH, Pieper KS, Goldberg RJ, Van de Werf F, Goodman SG, Granger CB, Steg PG, Gore JM, et al. A validated prediction model for all forms of acute coronary syndrome: estimating the risk of 6-month postdischarge death in an international registry. Jama-J Am Med Assoc. 2004;291(22):2727–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44(3):837–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nordestgaard BG: Triglyceride-Rich Lipoproteins and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: New Insights From Epidemiology, Genetics, and, Biology. Circ Res. 2016, 118(4):547–563.

  26. Bornfeldt KE. The Remnant Lipoprotein Hypothesis of Diabetes-Associated Cardiovascular Disease. Arterioscl Throm Vas. 2022;42(7):819–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Varbo A, Benn M, Tybjærg-Hansen A, Jørgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, Nordestgaard BG. Remnant cholesterol as a causal risk factor for ischemic heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(4):427–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Libby P, Ridker PM, Maseri A. Inflammation and atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2002;105(9):1135–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ridker PM, Everett BM, Thuren T, MacFadyen JG, Chang WH, Ballantyne C, Fonseca F, Nicolau J, Koenig W, Anker SD, et al. Antiinflammatory therapy with Canakinumab for atherosclerotic disease. New Engl J Med. 2017;377(12):1119–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tardif JC, Kouz S, Waters DD, Bertrand OF, Diaz R, Maggioni AP, Pinto FJ, Ibrahim R, Gamra H, Kiwan GS, et al. Efficacy and safety of low-dose colchicine after myocardial infarction. New Engl J Med. 2019;381(26):2497–505.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Nidorf SM, Fiolet A, Mosterd A, Eikelboom JW, Schut A, Opstal T, The S, Xu XF, Ireland MA, Lenderink T, et al. Colchicine in patients with chronic coronary disease. New Engl J Med. 2020;383(19):1838–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Borén J, Williams KJ. The central role of arterial retention of cholesterol-rich apolipoprotein-B-containing lipoproteins in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis: a triumph of simplicity. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2016;27(5):473–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Varbo A, Benn M, Tybjærg-Hansen A, Nordestgaard BG. Elevated remnant cholesterol causes both low-grade inflammation and ischemic heart disease, whereas elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol causes ischemic heart disease without inflammation. Circulation. 2013;128(12):1298–309.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Nakajima K, Nakano T, Tanaka A. The oxidative modification hypothesis of atherosclerosis: the comparison of atherogenic effects on oxidized LDL and remnant lipoproteins in plasma. Clin Chim Acta. 2006;367(1–2):36–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mach F, Baigent C, Catapano AL, Koskinas KC, Casula M, Badimon L, Chapman MJ, De Backer GG, Delgado V, Ference BA, et al. 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: lipid modification to reduce cardiovascular risk. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(1):111–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, Barbato E, Berry C, Chieffo A, Claeys MJ, Dan GA, Dweck MR, Galbraith M, et al. 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2023;44(38):3720–826.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lin A, Nerlekar N, Rajagopalan A, Yuvaraj J, Modi R, Mirzaee S, Munnur RK, Seckington M, Doery JC, Seneviratne S, et al. Remnant cholesterol and coronary atherosclerotic plaque burden assessed by computed tomography coronary angiography. Atherosclerosis. 2019;284:24–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Elshazly MB, Mani P, Nissen S, Brennan DM, Clark D, Martin S, Jones SR, Quispe R, Donnellan E, Nicholls SJ, et al. Remnant cholesterol, coronary atheroma progression and clinical events in statin-treated patients with coronary artery disease. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2020;27(10):1091–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang K, Wang R, Yang J, Liu X, Shen H, Sun Y, Zhou Y, Fang Z, Ge H. Remnant cholesterol and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: metabolism, mechanism, evidence, and treatment. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:913869.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Cordero A, Fernández OM, Cortez QG, Romero-Menor C, Fácila L, Seijas-Amigo J, Rondán MJ, Sandin M, Rodríguez-Mañero M, Bello MM, et al. Effect of PCSK9 inhibitors on remnant cholesterol and lipid residual risk: the LIPID-REAL registry. Eur J Clin Invest. 2022;52(12):e13863.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Toth PP, Hamon SC, Jones SR, Martin SS, Joshi PH, Kulkarni KR, Banerjee P, Hanotin C, Roth EM, McKenney JM. Effect of alirocumab on specific lipoprotein non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and subfractions as measured by the vertical auto profile method: analysis of 3 randomized trials versus placebo. Lipids Health Dis. 2016;15:28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Varbo A, Nordestgaard BG. Directly measured vs. calculated remnant cholesterol identifies additional overlooked individuals in the general population at higher risk of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(47):4833–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Cordero A, Alvarez-Alvarez B, Escribano D, García-Acuña JM, Cid-Alvarez B, Rodríguez-Mañero M, Quintanilla MA, Agra-Bermejo R, Zuazola P, González-Juanatey JR. Remnant cholesterol in patients admitted for acute coronary syndromes. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2023;30(4):340–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Qin Z, Zhou K, Li YP, Wang JL, Cheng WJ, Hu CP, Shi C, He H, Zhou YJ. Remnant lipoproteins play an important role of in-stent restenosis in type 2 diabetes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a single-centre observational cohort study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2019;18(1):11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Cao YX, Zhang HW, Jin JL, Liu HH, Zhang Y, Gao Y, Guo YL, Wu NQ, Hua Q, Li YF, et al. The longitudinal association of remnant cholesterol with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes and pre-diabetes. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2020;19(1):104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

This work was supported by grants from the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2022YFC2503500 and 2022YFC2503504).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jia Liao and Miaohan Qiu contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Frigid Zone Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, 110016, China

    Jia Liao, Miaohan Qiu, Xiaolin Su, Zizhao Qi, Ying Xu, Haiwei Liu, Kai Xu, Xiaozeng Wang, Jing Li, Yi Li & Yaling Han

  2. Department of Cardiology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430022, China

    Jia Liao

Authors
  1. Jia Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miaohan Qiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaolin Su
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zizhao Qi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ying Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Haiwei Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kai Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Xiaozeng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Jing Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Yi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Yaling Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

JL and MHQ were responsible for writing the original draft, methodology, data curation, formal analysis, and visualization. XLS, ZZQ, YX, HWL, KX, XZW and JL were responsible for the investigation. YL was responsible for conceptualization, methodology, data curation, and project administration. YLH was responsible for conceptualization, funding acquisition, data curation, project administration, methodology, and supervision. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yi Li or Yaling Han.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the institutional ethical committee of the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command with a waiver of the requirement to obtain informed consent was provided to conduct this analysis. And the study complied with the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liao, J., Qiu, M., Su, X. et al. The residual risk of inflammation and remnant cholesterol in acute coronary syndrome patients on statin treatment undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Lipids Health Dis 23, 172 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12944-024-02156-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12944-024-02156-3

Keywords

Lipids in Health and Disease

ISSN: 1476-511X