Effects of apolipoprotein and low density lipoprotein receptor gene polymorphisms on lipid metabolism, and the lipid risk factors of coronary artery disease

Taina Korhonen

Department of Internal Medicine

Abstract

To facilitate the diagnosis of hypercholesterolemia, we wanted to create a simple and rapid method for diagnosing familial hypercholesterolemia in a homogenous population. The PCR method for the FH-Helsinki mutation detected 25 FH-Helsinki positive patients, two of whom had no clinical signs of FH, but had a positive family history for the disease. The method is exceptionally useful in Northern Finland, where 62% of the FH patients carry the FH-Helsinki mutation.

The role of polymorphisms and mutations of the apo B particle as etiologic factors of hypercholesterolemia was studied in a population of moderately hypercholesterolemic individuals. The catabolism of the patients’ own LDL was compared to that of a healthy and normocholesterolemic donor, and no major differences were observed. However, the presence of the XbaI cutting site was associated with elevated cholesterol values and a slightly lowered LDL catabolic rate. Patients homozygous for the EcoRI cutting site also had a slow LDL catabolic rate and slightly elevated cholesterol values. The MspI and Ins/del polymorphisms of the apo B particle were not associated with variations in LDL catabolism.

The e 4 allele of apolipoprotein E was slightly more frequent in our hypercholesterolemic population than in the average population. The lipid values did not differ significantly between the apo E phenotypes in moderately hypercholesterolemic individuals, nor could we detect any differences in the catabolic rates of their LDL according to the apo E phenotype (individuals with the phenotype apo E 2/2 were excluded from the study). In our population of CAD patients, the frequency of the e 4 allele was lower than in CAD populations from Southern Finland (0.23 vs. 0.32), suggesting that apo E 4 is not so strongly associated with coronary disease in Northern Finland as in other populations. The E 4 phenotype was associated with slightly smaller LDL cholesterol reductions by colestipol and lovastatin treatment compared with patients with the phenotype 2/3.

The lipid risk factors of male and female CAD patients were studied in a group of patients admitted to one ward of the Oulu University Hospital. We found the males to have the typical high LDL cholesterol and low HDL cholesterol lipid pattern, but women with two- or three-vessel CAD had high LDL and low HDL cholesterol associated with high VLDL lipids, and hypertension, diabetes or smoking.

Pharmacological treatment of hypercholesterolemia was studied by comparing lovastatin to colestipol, and in a separate study where a new drug, enprostil was used. Enprostil, whose main effect is on the gastrointestinal tract, would be a useful alternative for long-term treatment of hypercholesterolemia. Unfortunately, however, gastrointestinal side-effects limit its long-term use. Colestipol reduced plasma LDL cholesterol and elevated plasma HDL cholesterol and triglycerides, but it, too, caused gastrointestinal side-effects. Lovastatin proved to be the most effective cholesterol-lowering drug with the least side-effects, and statins have now been established as the most widely used hypocholesterolemic drugs.


Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations
List of original papers
1. Introduction
2. Review of the literature
2.1. Familial hypercholesterolemia
2.2. Apolipoprotein B
2.3. Apolipoprotein E
2.4. Reverse cholesterol transport
2.4.1. HDL
2.4.2. Apolipoprotein A1
2.4.3. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein
2.4.4. Apolipoprotein E
2.5. Lipoprotein(a)
2.6. Association of plasma lipids and lipoproteins with coronary artery disease
2.7. Pharmacological treatment of hypercholesterolemia
2.7.1. Enprostil
2.7.2. RS-86505-007
2.7.3. Colestipol
2.7.4. Statins
3. Purpose of the present research
4. Methods
4.1. Patients
4.1.1. Study I
4.1.2. Study II
4.1.3. Study III
4.1.4. Study IV
4.1.5. Study V
4.2. Laboratory analyses
4.2.1. Lipid and protein analyses
4.2.2. Lipoprotein fractionation
4.2.3. LDL isolation
4.2.4. Radioiodination
4.2.5. Kinetic analysis
4.2.6. Lipoprotein(a) measurement
4.2.7. Apolipoprotein E phenotyping
4.2.8. Apolipoprotein A1 measurement
4.2.9. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein activity
4.2.10. Apolipoprotein B polymorphisms
4.2.11. FH-Helsinki and North Karelia
4.2.12. Polymerase chain reaction
4.2.13. Gel electrophoresis
4.2.14. Selective coronary angiography
4.2.15. Additional laboratory analyses
4.3. Statistical methods
5. Results
5.1. Detection of FH Helsinki by polymerase chain reaction
5.2. Catabolism of LDL
5.3. Association of the apo B structure with plasma cholesterol metabolism
5.3.1. Mutations
5.3.2. Polymorphisms
5.4. Apolipoprotein E
5.4.1. Allele distribution
5.4.2. Association of apo E phenotypes with lipid and lipoprotein concentrations
5.4.3. Fractional catabolic rate of LDL in individuals with different apo E phenotypes
5.4.4. Influence of apo E polymorphism on hypolipidemic drug response
5.5. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein
5.5.1. Activity in different sexes and different types of hypercholesterolemia
5.5.2. Effect of apo E phenotypes on cholesteryl ester transfer protein activity and drug response
5.6. Lipoprotein(a)
5.6.1. Effect of Lp(a) on the severity of CAD
5.6.2. Effect of apo E phenotype on Lp(a) concentration
5.6.3. Effect of RS-86505-007 on Lp(a) concentration
5.7. Coronary artery disease
5.7.1. Plasma lipids of male CAD patients
5.7.2. Plasma lipids of female CAD patients
5.7.3. Differences between male and female CAD patients
5.8. Treatment of hyhpercholesterolemia
5.8.1. RS-86505-007
5.8.2. Lovastatin and colestipol
6. Discussion
6.1. Detection of FH-Helsinki by polymerase chain reaction
6.2. Catabolism of LDL
6.2.1. Apo B mutations
6.2.2. Apo B polymorphisms
6.3. Apolipoprotein E
6.3.1. Allele frequency
6.3.2. Influence of apo E polymorphism on plasma lipids and lipoproteins
6.3.3. Influence of apo E polymorphism on the efficacy of hypolipidemic drugs
6.4. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein activity
6.4.1. Difference between the sexes
6.4.2. Effect of apo E polymorphism
6.5. Lipoprotein(a)
6.5.1. Lp(a) and CAD
6.5.2. Effect of drug treatment on Lp(a) concentration
6.6. Difference between male and female coronary artery disease
6.6.1. Lipids
6.6.2. Risk factors of males
6.6.3. Risk factors of females
6.7. Treatment of hypercholesterolemia
6.7.1. RS 86505-007
6.7.2. Colestipol and lovastatin
7. Conclusions
References
List of Tables
4-1. Demographic data and lipid concentrations in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Study I. The results are expressed as mean ± SD.
4-2. Demographic characteristics and medication of male controls and patients with different extensions of coronary artery disease. Study III.
4-3. Demographic characteristics and medication of female controls and patients with different extensions of coronary artery disease. Study III.
4-4. Demographic characteristics of patients according to apo E phenotype. Study IV.
4-5. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients and controls. Study V.
5-1. Plasma lipids and presence of tendon xanthomata in patients with or without the FH-Helsinki mutation.
5-2. Lipid values, lipoprotein composition, and LDL apoB metabolism by XbaI genotype.
5-3. Lipid values and apolipoprotein E gene frequencies of male controls and patients with different extensions of coronary artery disease.
5-4. Lipid values and apolipoprotein E gene frequencies of female controls and patients with different extensions of coronary artery disease
5-5. Plasma total cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL cholesterol and LDL cholesterol concentrations before treatment and their mean reductions during treatment in patients receiving RS-86505-007 6 mg tid according to apolipoprotein E polymorphisms.
5-6. Pearson correlation of lipids and their changes with the cholesteryl ester transfer protein basal activity according to apo E phenotype
5-7. Apolipoprotein E phenotypes in controls and patients with high lipoprotein(a)
5-8. Ranked stepwise logistic procedure on the lipids of male and female controls and patients as explanatory factors for the extension of CAD
5-9. Compliance and adverse events.
5-10. Lipid values of patients at baseline and after colestipol and lovastatin treatment.
List of Figures
4-1. Flowchart of study IV.
4-2. Flowchart of study V.
5-1. Numbers of patients catabolising autologous LDL faster than homologous LDL according to the XbaI, EcoRI, Apo E, Ins/del and MspI genotypes.
5-2. Difference between the catabolic rates of autologous and homologous LDL.
5-3. Correlation between the HDL cholesterol change and the cholesteryl ester transfer protein change during colestipol and lovastatin treatments in the apolipoprotein E phenotype groups.
5-4. The LDL-to-HDL cholesterol ratio (± SD) of the controls and the male and female patients with different extensions of coronary artery disease. C=controls, <50%=<50% luminal stenosis, 1V=one-vessel disease, 2V=two-vessel disease 3V=three-vessel disease. The women with one,- two- or three-vessel disease differ from the controls at p<0.05. The men with two- and three-vessel disease differ from the men with <50% stenosis at p<0.05.