-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background. Niacin is the most effective treatment currently available for raising HDL-C levels. Objective. To evaluate if gender and baseline lipid levels have an effect on the HDL-C response of niacin ER and to identify factors that predict response to niacin ER at the 500 mg dose. Material and Methods. The change in HDL-C effect between baseline and follow-up levels was quantified in absolute change as well as dichotomized into high versus low response (high response was defined as an HDL-C effect of >15% increase and low response was HDL-C <5%) in a sample of 834 individuals. Results. Both males and females with low HDL-C levels at baseline exhibited a response to treatment in the multivariate model (males, HDL-C <40 mg/dL: OR = 5.18, 95% CI: 2.36-11.39; females, HDL-C <50 mg/dL: OR = 5.40, 95% CI: 1.84-15.79). There was also a significant difference in the mean HDL-C effect between baseline and follow-up HDL-C levels in the 500 mg niacin ER dose group for both males (mean HDL-C effect = 0.08, P < 0.001) and females (mean HDL-C effect = 0.10, P = 0.019). Conclusion. Baseline HDL-C levels are the biggest predictor of response to niacin ER treatment for both males and females among the factors evaluated.
Cholesterol 01/2013; 2013:681475.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Developmental neurobehavioral outcomes attributed to exposure to chlorpyrifos (CPF) obtained from epidemiologic and animal studies published before June 2010 were reviewed for risk assessment purposes. For epidemiological studies, this review considered (1) overall strength of study design, (2) specificity of CPF exposure biomarkers, (3) potential for bias, and (4) Hill guidelines for causal inference. In the case of animal studies, this review focused on evaluating the consistency of outcomes for developmental neurobehavioral endpoints from in vivo mammalian studies that exposed dams and/or offspring to CPF prior to weaning. Developmental neuropharmacologic and neuropathologic outcomes were also evaluated. Experimental design and methods were examined as part of the weight of evidence. There was insufficient evidence that human developmental exposures to CPF produce adverse neurobehavioral effects in infants and children across different cohort studies that may be relevant to CPF exposure. In animals, few behavioral parameters were affected following gestational exposures to 1 mg/kg-d but were not consistently reported by different laboratories. For postnatal exposures, behavioral effects found in more than one study at 1 mg/kg-d were decreased errors on a radial arm maze in female rats and increased errors in males dosed subcutaneously from postnatal day (PND) 1 to 4. A similar finding was seen in rats exposed orally from PND 1 to 21 with incremental dose levels of 1, 2, and 4 mg/kg-d, but not in rats dosed with constant dose level of 1 mg/kg-d. Neurodevelopmental behavioral, pharmacological, and morphologic effects occurred at doses that produced significant brain or red blood cell acetylcholinesterase inhibition in dams or offspring.
Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B 02/2012; 15(2):109-84. · 4.72 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in US adults, assess the association between low HDL-C levels and clinical characteristics, and quantify the utilization of dyslipidemic agents as it relates to the distribution of HDL-C.
We analyzed a sample of 4129 adults (>20 years) who underwent fasting blood evaluations in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2005-2008. Sex-specific crude and adjusted logistic models were developed to evaluate the association between individual characteristics and low HDL-C, in which low HDL-C was defined as less than 40 mg/dl for men and less than 50 mg/dl for women.
Approximately 24% of men and 27% of women had low HDL-C levels. Factors most strongly associated with low HDL-C levels for men included being obese [odds ratio (OR) = 3.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.98-5.40], having elevated triglyceride levels (>200 mg/dl: OR = 8.17, 95% CI: 5.54-12.03) and having apolipoprotein B levels more than 117 mg/dl (OR = 5.99, 95% CI: 2.74-13.13). The same factors were associated with low HDL-C levels among women: being obese (OR = 2.89, 95% CI: 1.78-4.71), having elevated triglyceride levels (>200 mg/dl: OR = 13.35, 95% CI: 7.49-23.77) and having apolipoprotein B levels more than 117 mg/dl (OR = 5.88, 95% CI: 2.29-15.11). Approximately 82% of men and 79% of women with low HDL-C levels reported not using any dyslipidemic medication.
Although having low HDL-C was common among US adults, few reported taking a dyslipidemic agent. Our study also confirmed some of the known risk factors associated with low HDL-C levels in the general US population.
Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine 10/2011; 12(10):714-22. · 1.51 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Limited information is available on the epidemiology of hypertriglyceridemia (HTG; 150-499 mg/dL) and severe HTG (SHTG; >500 mg/dL) in children. This study estimates the prevalence of HTG and SHTG, evaluates factors that may be associated with these conditions, and describes the use of dyslipidemic agents in children. The sample included children 12 to 19 years old who participated in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2001-2008 (n = 3248) and children 5 to 19 years of age who were part of a large managed-care claims database in the United States (n = 65 258). Results from NHANES confirm the rarity of SHTG in the US pediatric population (ie, 0.2%). Factors statistically significantly associated with having HTG or SHTG in the claims database were being male, 12 to 19 years old, having high low-density lipoprotein (LDL), having low high-density lipoprotein (HDL), diabetes, and psychological disorders. Fibrates were the most commonly prescribed triglyceride-lowering agent among children with SHTG, followed by statins and Lovaza.
Clinical Pediatrics 08/2011; 50(12):1103-9. · 1.15 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The relationship between red meat consumption and colorectal cancer (CRC) has been the subject of scientific debate. To estimate the summary association between red meat intake and CRC and to examine sources of heterogeneity, a meta-analysis of prospective studies was conducted. Thirty-four prospective studies of red meat and CRC were identified, of which 25 represented independent nonoverlapping study populations. Summary relative risk estimates (SRREs) for high versus low intake and dose-response relationships were calculated. In the high versus low intake meta-analysis, the SRRE was 1.12 (95% CI: 1.04-1.21) with significant heterogeneity (P=0.014). Summary associations were modified by tumor site and sex. The SRREs for colon cancer and rectal cancer were 1.11 (95% CI: 1.03-1.19) and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.97-1.46), respectively. The SRREs among men and women were 1.21 (95% CI: 1.04-1.42) and 1.01 (95% CI: 0.87-1.17), respectively. The available epidemiologic data are not sufficient to support an independent and unequivocal positive association between red meat intake and CRC. This conclusion is based on summary associations that are weak in magnitude, heterogeneity across studies, inconsistent patterns of associations across the subgroup analyses, and the likely influence of confounding by other dietary and lifestyle factors.
European journal of cancer prevention: the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) 07/2011; 20(4):293-307. · 2.21 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A growing amount of evidence has supported an association between elevated triglyceride levels and cardiovascular disease. However, little information regarding co-morbidities, levels of other cholesterol types, or medication use among adults with severe hypertriglyceridemia (SHTG; (500 to 2,000 mg/dl) is available. We examined the data from 5,680 subjects, ≥ 20 years old, who had participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2001 and 2006, to evaluate the epidemiology of adults with SHTG. Approximately 1.7% of the sample had SHTG, equating to roughly 3.4 million Americans. The participants with SHTG tended to be men (75.3%), non-Hispanic whites (70.1%), and aged 40 to 59 years (58.5%). More than 14% of those with SHTG reported having diabetes mellitus, and 31.3% reported having hypertension. Only 14% of the subjects with SHTG reported using statins, and 4.0% reported using fibrates. The factors significantly associated with having SHTG included high-density lipoprotein <40 mg/dl (odds ratio [OR) 11.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.28 to 20.86), non-high-density lipoprotein 160 to 189 mg/dl (OR 9.74, 95% CI 1.68 to 56.40) or non-high-density lipoprotein ≥ 190 mg/dl (OR 24.99, 95% CI 3.90 to 160.31), diabetes mellitus (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.45 to 6.37), and chronic renal disease (OR 7.32, 95% CI 1.45 to 36.94). In conclusion, SHTG is rare among adults in the United States and the use of pharmacologic intervention is low among those with SHTG.
The American journal of cardiology 01/2011; 107(6):891-7. · 3.58 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A tremendous amount of scientific interest has been generated regarding processed meat consumption and cancer risk. Therefore, to estimate the association between processed meat intake and colorectal cancer (CRC), a meta-analysis of prospective studies was conducted. Twenty-eight prospective studies of processed meat and CRC were identified, of which 20 represented independent nonoverlapping study populations. Summary relative risk estimates (SRREs) for high versus low intake and dose-response relationships were calculated. The SRRE for high (vs. low) processed meat intake and CRC was 1.16 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10-1.23] for all studies. Summary associations were modified considerably by sex; the SRRE for men was 1.23 (95% CI: 1.07-1.42) and the SRRE for women was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.94-1.16), based on nine and 13 studies, respectively. Sensitivity analyses did not indicate appreciable statistical variation by tumor site, processed meat groups, or study location. The SRRE for each 30-gram increment of processed meat and CRC was 1.10 (95% CI: 1.05-1.15) based on nine studies, and the SRRE for each incremental serving of processed meat per week was 1.03 (95% CI: 1.01-1.05) based on six studies. Overall, summary associations were weak in magnitude (i.e. most less than 1.20), processed meat definitions and analytical comparisons were highly variable across studies, and isolating the independent effects of processed meat intake is difficult, given the likely influence of confounding by other dietary and lifestyle factors. Therefore, the currently available epidemiologic evidence is not sufficient to support a clear and unequivocal independent positive association between processed meat consumption and CRC.
European journal of cancer prevention: the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) 09/2010; 19(5):328-41. · 2.21 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The objective of the present review was to examine the potential association between animal fat intake and breast cancer. We conducted a meta-analysis and review of epidemiological cohort studies, including data reported in the Pooling Project publication of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer. Random- and fixed-effects models were utilised to generate summary relative risk estimates (SRRE), and sensitivity and influence analyses were conducted. In the meta-analysis that included data reported in the Pooling Project publication of prospective cohorts (n 8) and subsequent publications of cohort studies (n 3), no significant association was observed comparing the highest category of animal fat intake with the lowest (SRRE 1.03; 95 % CI: 0.76, 1.40). Similarly, no significant association between a 5 % increment of energy from animal fat intake and breast cancer (SRRE 1.02; 95 % CI 0.97, 1.07) was observed in the meta-analysis of these studies. In conclusion, the results of the present quantitative assessment are not supportive of a positive independent association between consumption of animal fat and breast cancer, although findings may be sensitive to the type of dietary instrument used in cohort studies.
Nutrition Research Reviews 02/2010; 23(1):169-79. · 4.84 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In the recent World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research report of diet and cancer, it was concluded that there is limited but suggestive evidence that animal fat intake increases the risk of colorectal cancer. Objective: To clarify this potential relation, we conducted meta-analyses across a variety of subgroups, incorporating data from additional studies.
Analyses of high compared with low animal fat intakes and categorical dose-response evaluations were conducted. Subgroup analyses, consisting of evaluations by study design, sex, and tumor site were also performed.
Six prospective cohort studies with comprehensive dietary assessments, contributing 1070 cases of colorectal cancer and approximately 1.5 million person-years of follow-up, were identified. The summary relative risk estimate (SRRE) for these studies was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.83, 1.31; P for heterogeneity = 0.221) on the basis of high compared with low intakes. When data from case-control studies were combined with the cohort data, the resulting SRRE was 1.15 (95% CI: 0.93, 1.42) with increased variability (P for heterogeneity = 0.015). In our dose-response analysis of the cohort studies, no association between a 20-g/d increment in animal fat intake and colorectal cancer was observed (SRRE: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.95, 1.09). In a separate analysis of 3 prospective cohort studies that reported data for animal protein or meat protein, no significant association with colorectal cancer was observed (SRRE: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.70, 1.15).
On the basis of the results of this quantitative assessment, the available epidemiologic evidence does not appear to support an independent association between animal fat intake or animal protein intake and colorectal cancer.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 04/2009; 89(5):1402-9. · 6.67 Impact Factor
