(Circulation. 1995;92:1779-1785.)
© 1995 American Heart Association, Inc.
Articles |
From the Helsinki Heart Study (L.T.), Helsinki, Finland; and First Department of Medicine (M.M., V.M.), University of Helsinki, Finland.
Correspondence to Leena Tenkanen, PhD, Helsinki Heart Study, Kalliolinnantie 4, SF-00140 Helsinki, Finland.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and Results We used Cox regression models to explore the
effects of gemfibrozil among overweight subjects with additional
coronary risk factors in this
hypercholesterolemic male population of 2046
subjects randomized to gemfibrozil and 2035 to placebo. The effect of
gemfibrozil was largely confined to overweight subjects: among those
with body mass index (BMI) >26 kg/m2, the net
difference in cardiac end points between gemfibrozil and placebo groups
was 21 (25 of 1119 versus 46 of 1081), and in those with BMI
26
kg/m2, it was 7 (31 of 927 versus 38 of 954). The
risk reduction with gemfibrozil was 78% (P=.002) among
those with BMI >26 kg/m2 and
dyslipidemia (TG
2.3 mmol/L and HDL
cholesterol <1.08 mmol/L). Among those with BMI >26
kg/m2 and three or four of the following factors
presentsmoking, sedentary lifestyle, blood pressure
140/90
mm Hg, or blood glucose >4.4 mmol/Lthe risk reduction was 68%
(P=.03).
Conclusions Gemfibrozil reduced the coronary risk mainly in overweight subjects with additional risk factors known to contribute to the insulin-resistance syndrome or predispose to it.
Key Words: obesity exercise smoking infarction lipoproteins
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Helsinki Heart Study was a primary prevention trial to test the hypothesis that gemfibrozil reduces CHD incidence in middle-aged dyslipidemic men.14 During the 5-year trial, a 34% reduction of cardiac end points was seen,15 and later analyses showed that the greatest benefit was derived by those with an elevated ratio of LDL-C to HDL-C and a high level of TG.16 The protective effect was estimated to have been achieved via modulation of the lipid levels. However, recent studies have shown that in addition to its effect on lipids, gemfibrozil may modulate the fibrinolytic system.17 18
These findings suggest that in CHD prevention, even subjects with some nonlipid risk factors, especially those related to the insulin resistance syndrome or predisposing to it, may in particular benefit from treatment with gemfibrozil. Forming different subgroups of obesity, smoking, hypertension, sedentary lifestyle, elevated blood glucose and levels of HDL-C and TG, and their combinations allowed us to delineate subgroups with higher and lower probabilities of the insulin resistance syndrome and to compare the treatment effect in these subgroups.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
5.2 mmol/L and they should have no evidence of CHD or other
major disease. The trial participants were randomly allocated to
gemfibrozil (n=2046) or placebo (n=2035). Definite fatal and
nonfatal
myocardial infarctions and cardiac deaths were the end points
recorded.14
Measurement of Lipids, Lipoproteins, and Glucose
The samples
from the local clinics were mailed daily to the
central laboratory (at the National Public Health Institute in
Helsinki). The interval from sampling to analysis ranged from 1
to 5 days. Total cholesterol concentration was determined
directly from serum, and HDL-C was measured after precipitation of VLDL
and LDL with dextran sulfate/magnesium chloride by an enzymatic method
(Kit No. 236691, Boehringer Mannheim). The serum concentration
of TG was measured as glycerol after enzymatic hydrolysis with
lipase/esterase (Kit No. 124966, Boehringer Mannheim). The
LDL-C concentration was calculated with the formula LDL-C=total
cholesterol minus HDL-C minus TG divided by 2.2. TG levels
of
8.1 mmol/L (
717 mg/dL) were excluded from LDL calculations,
as were computed LDL-C levels of <2.6 mmol/L (<101 mg/dL).
These restrictions resulted in 1.4% missing values for LDL-C. Fasting
samples for determining serum TG were drawn at the second screening
visit and thereafter semiannually.
The lipid and lipoprotein values were measured and calculated similarly for each follow-up visit and the mean of all available values during the follow-up represents the subjects' in-trial value. In some analyses, dichotomized variables were used. For TG, we used 2.3 mmol/L (204 mg/dL) as the cutoff point according to European recommendations for treatment practice.19 As no such recommendations existed for HDL-C, we used the limit value for the lowest tertile in the trial population (1.08 mmol/L [42 mg/dL]). Blood glucose was determined from fasting samples at the second screening visit and annually during the trial. The mean value in the trial population, 4.4 mmol/L (79.3 mg/dL), was used as the dichotomy cutoff point (median, 4.3 mmol/L).
Recording and Categorization of Lifestyle Factors and
Blood Pressure
Obesity was measured in terms of BMI (in
kg/m2). In
most analyses, it was dichotomized with 26 kg/m2 as
the cutoff point (median, 26.3 kg/m2; mean±SD,
26.6±2.9
kg/m2). In some analyses, the group with BMI >26
kg/m2 was further divided into "overweight" and
"obese" with the cutoff point at 30 kg/m2, the
commonly used limit for actual obesity. Smoking habits were classified
at baseline based on the reported number of cigarettes smoked per day.
For the analyses, the subjects were classified as nonsmokers or
smokers. All ex-smokers who had stopped more than 3 months before
the beginning of the study were categorized as nonsmokers. Spare time
physical activity was recorded according to the Gothenburg
scale20 into four categories, but for the analyses
we used a dichotomized scale: sedentary (categories I and II) and
active (categories III and IV).
The baseline measurements of systolic
and diastolic
blood pressures were used to scale hypertension: 1, systolic
<140 mm Hg and/or diastolic <90 mm Hg; 2,
systolic
140 mm Hg and diastolic
90 mm Hg but
not level 3; and 3, systolic
165 mm Hg and
diastolic
95 mm Hg.
Statistical Analysis
We present the mean values of HDL-C,
LDL-C, and TG at
baseline and during treatment by categories of the other risk factors
to explore the effect of treatment on lipid levels. Strictly, the
effect of treatment in any subgroup is the difference between placebo
and gemfibrozil mean values during treatment. However, as the placebo
and gemfibrozil mean values at baseline were both closely similar to
the placebo mean during the trial, only the mean values for the
gemfibrozil group are presented. The P values for
the differences in mean lipid levels were derived with a two-way
ANOVA. In these calculations, the log of TG was used. The crude
incidences of CHD in different subgroups were given to illustrate the
differences in treatment effect. In some instances, the results were
confirmed by calculating the relative risks using Cox's proportional
hazards models with appropriate covariates.21 The
treatment effect was expressed in terms of reduced relative risk in the
gemfibrozil subgroup compared with the corresponding placebo group. The
P value for this comparison of relative risks was based on
likelihood ratio statistics and was obtained via Cox models.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
The prevalence of subjects with both
high TG and low HDL-C levels in
the total study population was 14%. Among those with hypertension,
elevated blood glucose, sedentary lifestyle, or smoking, the prevalence
was higher (Table 3
), although body mass had a greater
impact than these other variables.
|
Overweight as a Coronary Risk Factor
The treatment effect was
mainly confined to overweight subjects.
The total difference in cardiac end points between the placebo and the
gemfibrozil groups was 28, with 21 end points among those with BMI >26
kg/m2 (25 of 1119 versus 46 of 1081) and only 7 among those
with BMI <26 kg/m2 (31 of 927 versus 38 of 954) (Fig
1
). The risk pattern was slightly J
shaped with 66% excess risk among those with BMI >30
kg/m2 compared with those with BMI
26 kg/m2
(Table 4
). The risk estimate was strongly dependent on
the covariates included in the model: adding age and smoking increased
the risk estimate for BMI (from 66% to 78%), whereas adding blood
pressure and HDL-C considerably decreased (to 37%) the estimate of CHD
risk ascribed to obesity.
|
|
Joint Effect of Overweight and Low HDL-C and High TG
Levels
Among those with BMI >26 kg/m2, the subgroup
with high TG and low HDL-C levels showed the greatest CHD risk: the CHD
incidence was 2.6 times that found in the subgroup with normal TG and
normal HDL-C levels (Fig 2
). However, the high-risk
group experienced a substantial treatment effect, with a 78% reduction
in CHD incidence (P=.002).
|
Joint Effect of Overweight and Other CHD Risk Factors
Obesity
accentuated the relative risks associated with sedentary
lifestyle, hypertension, and blood glucose, whereas the relative risk
associated with smoking was the same among lean and overweight men (Fig
3
). However, the treatment effect was
consistently most favorable in the overweight subjects. Among
the 30% of obese subjects who had at least three of these four risk
factors present, 19 cardiac end points were "prevented,"
whereas only 2 were prevented among the remaining 70% of obese
subjects (Fig 4
, top). In terms of relative risk, those
of the placebo subjects with BMI >26 kg/m2 and at least
three of the other risk factors present had a relative risk of 5.3
(95% confidence interval, 2.2 to 12.9) compared with those with BMI
>26 kg/m2 and none or one other risk factor, whereas the
high-risk subjects receiving gemfibrozil experienced a risk
reduction of 68% compared with high-risk placebo-treated men.
The placebo arm of the high-risk subgroup with high TG and low
HDL-C levels had a very high CHD incidence: 32.7 (per 1000
person-years), with 12 cardiac end points (Fig 4
, bottom).
There
also was a good treatment effect; the incidence in the corresponding
gemfibrozil subgroup was 5.5, with only 2 end points. However, the
subgroup with normal TG and normal HDL levels also profited from
treatment, showing a 57% reduction of cardiac end points.
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Lean and the Overweight: CHD Risk and Effect of
Treatment
In the present study, obesity was measured in terms of BMI,
which is not the most accurate way of determining abdominal obesity,
the risk factor for CHD.4 Moreover, when the cutoff point
for obesity was set at 26 kg/m2, the CHD risk was
diluted because the risk due to obesity increased notably only when BMI
was >30 kg/m2. Nevertheless, there was a considerable
treatment effect of 43% even among subjects merely with overweight
(BMI, 26 to 30 kg/m2), and this effect persisted even when
other risk factors were adjusted for (Table 4
). The treatment
effects,
as well as the risks, mirror the underlying metabolic
differences among the lean and the obese. Among the overweight, those
with elevated blood glucose, hypertension, or sedentary lifestyle or
who were smokers consistently had a substantial treatment
effect, whereas lean subjects with similar attributes experienced no
treatment effect (Fig 3
). The risk pattern among lean and obese
hypertensives in the placebo group was unexpected, however, as several
studies have found that lean hypertensives are at greater risk of CHD
than obese hypertensives.22 23 Carman et
al23
even suggested that hypertension in lean individuals may be a distinct
disease with strong genetic determinants. The marked discrepancy of our
findings from those of other studies was possibly caused by the
selection criterion for our subjects, which required them to be
hyperlipidemic. This could entail an enhanced role for
hypofibrinolysis among the obese hypertensives with
an accompanying increase in CHD risk.24 In any case, our
findings suggest that different metabolic mechanisms
regulate the treatment effect among the lean and the obese.
Distribution of Insulin Resistance in Study
Population
Several studies have shown that obesity is related to
insulin
resistance, and a recent Finnish study showed that the presence of type
IIB hyperlipidemia increased insulin resistance related
to obesity alone.25 Due to the selection criterion, the
majority of the Helsinki Heart Study population had high levels of
LDL-C and a higher proportion of type IIB subjects than the general
population. The prevalence of insulin resistance among the obese may
thus be higher in our study population than in the general
population.
Lamarche et al26 found that the groups with the lipid level combinations of high TGlow HDL-C, high TGnormal HDL-C, and normal TGlow HDL-C were metabolically different. Only the group with high TGlow HDL-C had higher fasting plasma insulin levels and hyperinsulinemia during an oral glucose tolerance test compared with normolipemic subjects, which was suggestive of insulin resistance. In our study, higher levels of obesity involved greater proportions of subjects with high TG and low HDL-C levels, and thus they very probably also had higher prevalences of insulin resistance. Our results also indicated that lifestyle factors such as smoking and little spare-time physical activity were associated with a higher prevalence of high TG and low HDL-C levels. Previous studies have shown that both smoking and sedentary lifestyle may promote the insulin-resistance syndrome.7 8
Viewed in the context of findings from other studies, results from the present study suggest that the metabolic state characterized by insulin resistance may be a common feature underlying the treatment effects seen. However, these inferences remain mainly on a hypothetical level: first, because insulin resistance was not measured in our study, and second, because all of the risk factors considered may occur without insulin resistance and insulin resistance may occur without them, although far less frequently.
Some Possible Pathways for the Treatment Effect
There are
several putative pathways for the treatment effect seen.
First, the good treatment effect among those with the nonlipid risk
factors related to the insulin-resistance syndrome could be caused
by a direct effect of gemfibrozil on insulin resistance. However, as
far as we know, there are no studies reporting such an effect.
Second,
a high level of TG and a low level of HDL-C, the
dyslipidemia characteristic of insulin-resistance
syndrome, responds well to treatment with gemfibrozil16
(Tables 1
and 2
). Therefore, part of the
treatment effect seen in
subjects with nonlipid risk factors may certainly be ascribed to a
correction of the accompanying dyslipidemia. Table 3
shows
that the prevalence of this kind of dyslipidemia did
increase with rising levels of any of the nonlipid risk factors,
whereas LDL-C remained fairly constant across categories of the
nonlipid risk factors (Tables 1
and 2
).
Third, there is ample evidence indicating that TG influences hemostatic functions, especially the level of plasminogen activator inhibitor1.27 The particular pattern of dyslipidemia in the subgroups considered suggests that along with a lowering of the TG level, gemfibrozil may have enhanced fibrinolysis. In the Helsinki Heart Study, there were fewer fatal cerebral infarctions in the gemfibrozil group during the trial (one versus four) and more fatal intracranial hemorrhages (five versus none) than in the placebo group, and this trend was accentuated when the entire extended 8.5-year follow-up was considered (cerebral infarctions, 1 versus 5; intracranial hemorrhages, 7 versus 1).28
Fourth, as suggested by Fujii and Sobel,18 gemfibrozil may also potentiate fibrinolysis by direct diminution of endogenous plasminogen activator inhibitor1 synthesis; they even proposed that the treatment effect in the Helsinki Heart Study may have been at least in part related to such a diminution.
In addition to the favorable modification of the lipid and lipoprotein cholesterol levels, there are several other putative pathways for the treatment effects seen. When considering our findings with the experimental and epidemiological evidence from other studies,18 27 29 the fibrinolytic pathwayeither via TG or directseems plausible. Such conclusions remain speculative, however, as no fibrinolytic parameters were measured in the Helsinki Heart Study.
Some Aspects Related to the Epidemiological Modeling
The
assessment of CHD risk due to obesity (Table 4
) illustrates
the difficulties of measuring effect when the risk factors form a web
of interdependencies. We are exposed to these difficulties even when
using the regression models designed for risk assessment. For example,
in Table 4
, when age and smoking were added to the model, the
fit
improved and the risk due to BMI increased. This probably occurred
because smoking explained the end points found among the lean subjects
and thereby decreased the variance around the BMI risk estimate. The
addition of systolic blood pressure and HDL-C to the model had
the opposite effect; the risk estimate for BMI decreased. This occurred
because BMI is associated with both systolic blood pressure and
HDL-C, and part of its atherogenic effect is probably mediated through
systolic blood pressure and low HDL-C (and
simultaneous high TG). When adjusting for HDL-C, we thus
adjusted for part of the effect of BMI on CHD. There are similar
problems with the other risk factors considered here: they are
interrelated, they progress to a large extent
simultaneously, and they probably in part share the same
pathways in their atherogenic effect. In these circumstances, the
notion of "independent effect" has no great relevance.
In conclusion, gemfibrozil reduced the coronary risk mainly in overweight subjects who had one or more additional risk factors known to contribute to the insulin-resistance syndrome or predispose to it. With increased clustering of hypertension, elevated blood glucose level, smoking, and sedentary lifestyle among the overweight, the CHD risk rose, as expected, but the treatment effect also improved.
| Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms |
|---|
|
Received February 23, 1995; revision received April 12, 1995; accepted May 3, 1995.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Björntorp P. Abdominal fat distribution and disease: an overview of epidemiological data. Ann Med. 1992;24:15-18. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Stanton JL, Braitman LE, Riley AM, Khoo C-S, Smith JL. Demographic, dietary, life style, and anthropometric correlates of blood pressure. Hypertension. 1982;4(suppl III):III-135-III-142.
4.
Després JP, Moorjani S, Lupien PJ, Tremblay A,
Nadeau A, Bouchard C. Regional distribution of body fat, plasma
lipoproteins, and cardiovascular disease.
Arteriosclerosis. 1990;10:497-511.
5. Pouliot M-C, Després J-P, Nadeau A, Moorjani S, Prud'Homme D, Lupien PJ, Tremblay A, Bouchard C. Visceral obesity in men: associations with glucose, plasma insulin, and lipoprotein levels. Diabetes. 1992;41:826-834. [Abstract]
6. Reaven GM. Role of insulin resistance in human disease. Diabetes. 1988;37:1595-1607. [Abstract]
7. Facchini FS, Hollenbeck CB, Jeppesen J, Chen Y-DI, Reaven GM. Insulin resistance and cigarette smoking. Lancet. 1992;339:1128-1130. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. Barnard RJ, Ugianskis EJ, Martin DA, Inkeles SB. Role of diet and exercise in the management of hyperinsulinemia and associated atherosclerotic risk factors. Am J Cardiol. 1992;69:440-444. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. Juhan-Vague I, Vague P, Alessi MC, Badier C, Valadier Aillaud MF, Atlan C. Relationships between plasma insulin, triglyceride, body mass index, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1. Diabetes Metab. 1987;13:331-336.
10.
Hoffman CJ, Miller RH, Hultin MB. Correlation of
factor VII activity and antigen with cholesterol and
triglycerides in healthy young adults.
Arterioscler Thromb. 1992;12:267-270.
11.
Nordt TK, Schneider DJ, Sobel BE. Augmentation
of the synthesis of plasminogen activator
inhibitor type-1 by precursors of insulin: a potential risk
factor for vascular disease. Circulation. 1994;89:321-330.
12. Hamsten A, de Faire U, Walldius G, Dahlén G, Szamosi A, Landou C, Blombäck M, Wiman B. Plasminogen activator inhibitor in plasma: risk factor for recurrent myocardial infarction. Lancet. 1987;2:3-9. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
13. Nordoy A. Haemostatic factors in coronary heart disease. J Intern Med. 1993;233:377-383. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
14.
Mänttäri M, Elo O, Frick MH, Haapa K,
Heinonen OP, Heinsalmi P, Helo P, Huttunen JK, Kaitaniemi P, Koskinen
P, Manninen V, Mäenpää H, Mälkönen M,
Norola S, Pasternack A, Pikkarainen J, Romo M, Sjöblom T,
Nikkilä EA. The Helsinki Heart Study: basic design and
randomization procedure. Eur Heart J. 1987;8:1-29.
15. Frick MH, Elo O, Haapa K, Heinonen OP, Heinsalmi P, Helo P, Huttunen JK, Kaitaniemi P, Koskinen P, Manninen V, Mäenpää H, Mälkönen M, Mänttäri M, Norola S, Pasternack A, Pikkarainen J, Romo M, Sjöblom T, Nikkilä EA. The Helsinki Heart Study: primary prevention trial with gemfibrozil in middle-aged men with dyslipidemia: safety of treatment, changes in risk factors, and incidence of coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. 1987;317:1237-1245. [Abstract]
16.
Manninen V, Tenkanen L, Koskinen P, Huttunen JK,
Mänttäri M, Heinonen OP, Frick MH. Joint effects of
serum triglyceride and LDL cholesterol and HDL
cholesterol concentrations of coronary heart
disease risk in the Helsinki Heart Study: implications for
treatment. Circulation. 1992;85:37-45.
17. Wilkens HC, Meade TW, Barzegar S, Foley AJ, Hughes LO, Bauer KA, Rosenberg RD, Miller GJ. Gemfibrozil reduces plasma prothrombin fragment F1+2 concentrations, a marker of coagulability, in patients with coronary heart disease. Thromb Haemost. 1992;67:503-506. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18.
Fujii S, Sobel BE. Direct effects of gemfibrozil
on the fibrinolytic system: diminution of synthesis of
plasminogen activator inhibitor
type 1. Circulation. 1992;85:1888-1893.
19.
Study Group, European Atherosclerosis
Society. The recognition and management of hyperlipidaemia in
adults: a policy statement of European Atherosclerosis
Society. Eur Heart J. 1988;9:571-600.
20. Wilhelmsen L, Tibblin G, Fodor J, Werkö L. A multifactorial primary preventive trial in Gothenburg, Sweden. In: Larson OA, Malmborg RO, eds. Coronary Heart Disease and Physical Fitness. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1971:266-270.
21. Dixon WJ, ed. BMDP Statistical Software Manual. Berkeley/Los Angeles/Oxford: University of California Press; 1990.
22.
Cambien F, Chretien JM, Ducimetiere P, Guize L, Richard
JL. Is the relationship between blood pressure and
cardiovascular risk dependent on body mass
index? Am J Epidemiol. 1985;122:434-442.
23.
Carman WJ, Barrett-Connor E, Sowers MF, Khaw K.
Higher risk of cardiovascular mortality among
lean hypertensive individuals in Tecumseh, Michigan.
Circulation. 1994;89:703-711.
24. Jansson JH, Johansson B, Boman K, Nilsson TK. Hypofibrinolysis in patients with hypertension and elevated cholesterol. J Intern Med. 1991;229:309-316. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
25.
Karhapää P, Voutilainen E, Malkki M, Laakso
M. Obese men with type IIB hyperlipidemia are
insulin resistant. Arterioscler
Thromb. 1993;13:1469-1475.
26.
Lamarche B, Després J-P, Pouliot M-C, Prud'homme
D, Moorjani S, Lupien PJ, Nadeau A, Tremblay A, Bouchard C.
Metabolic heterogeneity associated
with high plasma triglyceride or low HDL
cholesterol levels in men.
Arterioscler Thromb. 1993;13:33-40.
27.
Mussoni L, Mannucci L, Sirtori M, Camera M, Maderna P,
Sironi L, Tremoli E.
Hypertriglyceridemia and regulation
of fibrinolytic activity. Arterioscler
Thromb. 1992;12:19-29.
28. Huttunen JK, Heinonen OP, Manninen V, Koskinen P, Hakulinen T, Teppo L, Mänttäri M, Frick MH. The Helsinki Heart Study: an 8.5-year safety and mortality follow-up. J Intern Med. 1994;235:31-39. [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
29. Wiman B, Hamsten A. The fibrinolytic enzyme system and its role in the etiology of thrombotic disease. Semin Thromb Hemost. 1990;16:207-216.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J.-C. Fruchart, F. M Sacks, M. P Hermans, G. Assmann, W V. Brown, R. Ceska, M J. Chapman, P. M Dodson, P. Fioretto, H. N Ginsberg, et al. The Residual Risk Reduction Initiative: a call to action to reduce residual vascular risk in dyslipidaemic patients Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research, November 1, 2008; 5(4): 319 - 335. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Pedro-Botet Review: The role of fenofibrate in reducing cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes The British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease, January 1, 2008; 8(1): 22 - 27. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. S Wierzbicki Fibrates after the FIELD study: some answers, more questions Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research, December 1, 2006; 3(3): 166 - 171. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Menard and J.-L. Ardilouze Multitherapy for diabetes Can. Med. Assoc. J., November 7, 2006; 175(10): 1247 - 1247. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. S. Wierzbicki Diabetic dyslipidaemia: the triad Eur. Heart J. Suppl., October 1, 2006; 8(suppl_F): F30 - F33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. E. Bloomfield The role of fibrates in a statin world. Arch Intern Med, April 10, 2006; 166(7): 715 - 716. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Tenkanen, M. Manttari, P. T. Kovanen, H. Virkkunen, and V. Manninen Gemfibrozil in the Treatment of Dyslipidemia: An 18-Year Mortality Follow-up of the Helsinki Heart Study. Arch Intern Med, April 10, 2006; 166(7): 743 - 748. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. J. Barter and K.-A. Rye Cardioprotective Properties of Fibrates: Which Fibrate, Which Patients, What Mechanism? Circulation, March 28, 2006; 113(12): 1553 - 1555. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Rizzo and K. Berneis Low-density lipoprotein size and cardiovascular risk assessment QJM, January 1, 2006; 99(1): 1 - 14. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M J. Chapman Review: Fibrates: therapeutic review The British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease, January 1, 2006; 6(1): 11 - 19. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. T. Bloomgarden Second World Congress on the Insulin Resistance Syndrome: Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and treatment approaches Diabetes Care, August 1, 2005; 28(8): 2073 - 2080. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Staels and J.-C. Fruchart Therapeutic Roles of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Agonists Diabetes, August 1, 2005; 54(8): 2460 - 2470. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P.J. Barter Cardioprotective Effects of High-Density Lipoproteins: The Evidence Strengthens Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., July 1, 2005; 25(7): 1305 - 1306. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P.J. Barter Antiatherogenic Properties of Fibrates Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., June 1, 2005; 25(6): 1095 - 1096. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. F Watts Treating low HDL-cholesterol in normocholesterolaemic patients with coronary disease: statins, fibrates or horses for courses? Eur. Heart J., May 1, 2004; 25(9): 716 - 719. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Barter Review: Reconsidering the value of fibrates: lessons from the trials The British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease, May 1, 2003; 3(3): 162 - 167. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. J. Robins, H. B. Rubins, F. H. Faas, E. J. Schaefer, M. B. Elam, J. W. Anderson, and D. Collins Insulin Resistance and Cardiovascular Events With Low HDL Cholesterol: The Veterans Affairs HDL Intervention Trial (VA-HIT) Diabetes Care, May 1, 2003; 26(5): 1513 - 1517. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. B. Rubins, S. J. Robins, D. Collins, D. B. Nelson, M. B. Elam, E. J. Schaefer, F. H. Faas, J. W. Anderson, and for the VA-HIT Study Group Diabetes, Plasma Insulin, and Cardiovascular Disease: Subgroup Analysis From the Department of Veterans Affairs High-Density Lipoprotein Intervention Trial (VA-HIT) Arch Intern Med, December 9, 2002; 162(22): 2597 - 2604. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H.B. Rubins, D. Collins, and S.J. Robins The VA HDL Intervention Trial: clinical implications Eur. Heart J., July 2, 2000; 21(14): 1113 - 1115. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Haim, M. Benderly, D. Brunner, S. Behar, E. Graff, H. Reicher-Reiss, and U. Goldbourt Elevated Serum Triglyceride Levels and Long-Term Mortality in Patients With Coronary Heart Disease : The Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention (BIP) Registry Circulation, August 3, 1999; 100(5): 475 - 482. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Staels, J. Dallongeville, J. Auwerx, K. Schoonjans, E. Leitersdorf, and J.-C. Fruchart Mechanism of Action of Fibrates on Lipid and Lipoprotein Metabolism Circulation, November 10, 1998; 98(19): 2088 - 2093. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. K. Nordt, K. Kornas, K. Peter, S. Fujii, B. E. Sobel, W. Kubler, and C. Bode Attenuation by Gemfibrozil of Expression of Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor Type 1 Induced by Insulin and its Precursors Circulation, February 4, 1997; 95(3): 677 - 683. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
J. Arts, M. Kockx, H. M.G. Princen, and T. Kooistra Studies on the Mechanism of Fibrate-Inhibited Expression of Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor-1 in Cultured Hepatocytes From Cynomolgus Monkey Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., January 1, 1997; 17(1): 26 - 32. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
H. R. Superko Beyond LDL Cholesterol Reduction Circulation, November 15, 1996; 94(10): 2351 - 2354. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
H. R. Lijnen and D. Collen Impaired Fibrinolysis and the Risk for Coronary Heart Disease Circulation, November 1, 1996; 94(9): 2052 - 2054. [Full Text] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1995 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |