Atherosclerosis, formerly considered a bland lipid storage disease, actually involves an ongoing inflammatory response. Recent advances in basic science have established a fundamental role for inflammation in mediating all stages of this disease from initiation through progression and, ultimately, the thrombotic complications of atherosclerosis. These new findings provide important links between risk factors and the mechanisms of atherogenesis. Clinical studies have shown that this emerging biology of inflammation in atherosclerosis applies directly to human patients. Elevation in markers of inflammation predicts outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes, independently of myocardial damage. In addition, low-grade chronic inflammation, as indicated by levels of the inflammatory marker C-reactive protein, prospectively defines risk of atherosclerotic complications, thus adding to prognostic information provided by traditional risk factors. Moreover, certain treatments that reduce coronary risk also limit inflammation. In the case of lipid lowering with statins, this anti-inflammatory effect does not appear to correlate with reduction in low-density lipoprotein levels. These new insights into inflammation in atherosclerosis not only increase our understanding of this disease, but also have practical clinical applications in risk stratification and targeting of therapy for this scourge of growing worldwide importance.

/pdf/inflammation-and-atherosclerosis-1q9qkglell.pdf

Inflammation and Atherosclerosis

The primary purpose of this narrative review was to evaluate the current literature and to provide further insight into the role physical inactivity plays in the development of chronic disease and premature death. We confirm that there is irrefutable evidence of the effectiveness of regular physical activity in the primary and secondary prevention of several chronic diseases (e.g., cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, hypertension, obesity, depression and osteoporosis) and premature death. We also reveal that the current Health Canada physical activity guidelines are sufficient to elicit health benefits, especially in previously sedentary people. There appears to be a linear relation between physical activity and health status, such that a further increase in physical activity and fitness will lead to additional improvements in health status.

/pdf/health-benefits-of-physical-activity-the-evidence-17tsp10zcy.pdf

Health benefits of physical activity: the evidence

In 1998, the American Heart Association convened Prevention Conference V to examine strategies for the identification of high-risk patients who need primary prevention. Among the strategies discussed was the measurement of markers of inflammation.1 The Conference concluded that “many of these markers (including inflammatory markers) are not yet considered applicable for routine risk assessment because of: (1) lack of measurement standardization, (2) lack of consistency in epidemiological findings from prospective studies with endpoints, and (3) lack of evidence that the novel marker adds to risk prediction over and above that already achievable through the use of established risk factors.” The National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III Guidelines identified these markers as emerging risk factors,1a which could be used as an optional risk factor measurement to adjust estimates of absolute risk obtained using standard risk factors. Since these publications, a large number of peer-reviewed scientific reports have been published relating inflammatory markers to cardiovascular disease (CVD). Several commercial assays for inflammatory markers have become available. As a consequence of the expanding research base and availability of assays, the number of inflammatory marker tests ordered by clinicians for CVD risk prediction has grown rapidly. Despite this, there has been no consensus from professional societies or governmental agencies as to how these assays of markers of inflammation should be used in clinical practice.

On March 14 and 15, 2002, a workshop titled “CDC/AHA Workshop on Inflammatory Markers and Cardiovascular Disease: Applications to Clinical and Public Health Practice” was convened in Atlanta, Ga, to address these issues. The goals of this workshop were to determine which of the currently available tests should be used; what results should be used to define high risk; which patients should be tested; and the indications for which the tests would be most useful. These …

Markers of Inflammation and Cardiovascular Disease Application to Clinical and Public Health Practice: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Heart Association

In the mid 1990s, immunoassays for C-reactive protein (CRP), with greater sensitivity than those previously in routine use, revealed that increased CRP values, even within the range previously considered normal, strongly predict future coronary events. These findings triggered widespread interest, especially, remarkably, in the US, where the clinical use of CRP measurement had been largely ignored for about 30 years. CRP production is part of the nonspecific acute-phase response to most forms of inflammation, infection, and tissue damage and was therefore considered not to provide clinically useful information. Indeed, CRP values can never be diagnostic on their own and can only be interpreted at the bedside, in full knowledge of all other clinical and pathological results. However, they can then contribute powerfully to management, just as universal recording of the patient’s temperature, an equally nonspecific parameter, is of great clinical utility.

The present torrent of studies of CRP in cardiovascular disease and associated conditions is facilitated by the ready commercial availability of automated CRP assays and of CRP itself as a research reagent. However, unlike the earlier rejection in the US of CRP as an empirical test because of its perceived lack of specificity, the current enthusiasm over CRP in cardiovascular disease is widely characterized by failure to recognize appropriately the nonspecific nature of the acute-phase response, and by lack of critical biological judgment. Quality control of the source, purity, and structural and functional integrity of the CRP, and the relevance of experimental design before ascribing pathophysiological functions, are also often ignored.

This article provides information about CRP as a protein and an acute-phase reactant, and a knowledge-based framework for interpretation and analysis of clinical observations of CRP in relation to cardiovascular and other diseases. We also review the properties of CRP, its possible role in pathogenesis of disease, and our own observations that identify it as a possible therapeutic target.

/pdf/c-reactive-protein-a-critical-update-2lu4q92irw.pdf

C-reactive protein: a critical update

The Montreal Definition and Classification of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Global Evidence-Based Consensus

Objective: To assess associations between baseline values of four different circulating markers of inflammation and future risk of coronary heart disease, potential triggers of systemic inflammation (such as persistent infection), and other markers of inflammation. Design: Nested case-control comparisons in a prospective, population based cohort. Setting: General practices in 18 towns in Britain. Participants: 506 men who died from coronary heart disease or had a non-fatal myocardial infarction and 1025 men who remained free of such disease until 1996 selected from 5661 men aged 40–59 years who provided blood samples in 1978-1980. Main outcome measures: Plasma concentrations of C reactive protein, serum amyloid A protein, and serum albumin and leucocyte count. Information on fatal and non-fatal coronary heart disease was obtained from medical records and death certificates. Results: Compared with men in the bottom third of baseline measurements of C reactive protein, men in the top third had an odds ratio for coronary heart disease of 2.13 (95% confidence interval 1.38 to 3.28) after age, town, smoking, vascular risk factors, and indicators of socioeconomic status were adjusted for. Similar adjusted odds ratios were 1.65 (1.07 to 2.55) for serum amyloid A protein; 1.12 (0.71 to 1.77) for leucocyte count; and 0.67 (0.43 to 1.04) for albumin. No strong associations were observed of these factors with Helicobacter pylori seropositivity, Chlamydia pneumoniae IgG titres, or plasma total homocysteine concentrations. Baseline values of the acute phase reactants were significantly associated with one another (P Conclusion: In the context of results from other relevant studies these findings suggest that some inflammatory processes, unrelated to the chronic infections studied here, are likely to be involved in coronary heart disease.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/321/7255/199.full.pdf

Low grade inflammation and coronary heart disease: prospective study and updated meta-analyses

Alcohol and mortality in British men: explaining the U-shaped curve.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(97)12355-8.pdf

Changes in physical activity, mortality, and incidence of coronary heart disease in older men

Background—We have studied the relations between physical activity, types of physical activity, and changes in physical activity and all-cause mortality in men with established coronary heart disea...

M Walker

Papers

Low grade inflammation and coronary heart disease: prospective study and updated meta-analyses

Alcohol and mortality in British men: explaining the U-shaped curve.

Changes in physical activity, mortality, and incidence of coronary heart disease in older men

Physical Activity and Mortality in Older Men With Diagnosed Coronary Heart Disease

Social class differences in ischaemic heart disease in british men