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

Background Since inflammation is believed to have a role in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular events, measurement of markers of inflammation has been proposed as a method to improve the prediction of the risk of these events. Methods We conducted a prospective, nested case–control study among 28,263 apparently healthy postmenopausal women over a mean follow-up period of three years to assess the risk of cardiovascular events associated with base-line levels of markers of inflammation. The markers included high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), serum amyloid A, interleukin-6, and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule type 1 (slCAM-1). We also studied homocysteine and several lipid and lipoprotein measurements. Cardiovascular events were defined as death from coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, or the need for coronay-revascularization procedures. Results Of the 12 markers measured, hs-CRP was the strongest univariate predictor of the risk of cardiovascular events; the relative risk of events for women in the highest as compared with the lowest quartile for this marker was 4.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 2.2 to 8.9). Other markers significantly associated with the risk of cardiovascular events were serum amyloid A (relative risk for the highest as compared with the lowest quartile, 3.0), slCAM-1 (2.6), interleukin-6 (2.2), homocysteine (2.0), total cholesterol (2.4), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (2.4), apolipoprotein B-100 (3.4), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (0.3), and the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol (3.4). Prediction models that incorporated markers of inflammation in addition to lipids were significantly better at predicting risk than models based on lipid levels alone (P<0.001). The levels of hs-CRP and serum amyloid A were significant predictors of risk even in the subgroup of women with LDL cholesterol levels below 130 mg per deciliter (3.4 mmol per liter), the target for primary prevention established by the National Cholesterol Education Program. In multivariate analyses, the only plasma markers that independently predicted risk were hs-CRP (relative risk for the highest as compared with the lowest quartile, 1.5; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.1) and the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol (relative risk, 1.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 1.9). Conclusions The addition of the measurement of C-reactive protein to screening based on lipid levels may provide an improved method of identifying women at risk for cardiovascular events.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM200003233421202

C-Reactive Protein and Other Markers of Inflammation in the Prediction of Cardiovascular Disease in Women

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

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(12)62167-9.pdf

Frailty in elderly people

In this paper we extend the “network theory of aging,” and we argue that a global reduction in the capacity to cope with a variety of stressors and a concomitant progressive increase in proinflammatory status are major characteristics of the aging process. This phenomenon, which we will refer to as “inflamm-aging,” is provoked by a continuous antigenic load and stress. On the basis of evolutionary studies, we also argue that the immune and the stress responses are equivalent and that antigens are nothing other than particular types of stressors. We also propose to return macrophage to its rightful place as central actor not only in the inflammatory response and immunity, but also in the stress response. The rate of reaching the threshold of proinflammatory status over which diseases/disabilities ensue and the individual capacity to cope with and adapt to stressors are assumed to be complex traits with a genetic component. Finally, we argue that the persistence of inflammatory stimuli over time represents the biologic background (first hit) favoring the susceptibility to age-related diseases/disabilities. A second hit (absence of robust gene variants and/or presence of frail gene variants) is likely necessary to develop overt organ-specific age-related diseases having an inflammatory pathogenesis, such as atherosclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, osteoporosis, and diabetes. Following this perspective, several paradoxes of healthy centenarians (increase of plasma levels of inflammatory cytokines, acute phase proteins, and coagulation factors) are illustrated and explained. In conclusion, the beneficial effects of inflammation devoted to the neutralization of dangerous/harmful agents early in life and in adulthood become detrimental late in life in a period largely not foreseen by evolution, according to the antagonistic pleiotropy theory of aging.

Sholom Wacholder

Papers

Associations of elevated interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein levels with mortality in the elderly