Cargando…

Significance of LDL and HDL subclasses characterization in the assessment of risk for colorectal cancer development

INTRODUCTION: Dyslipidaemia contributes to the occurrence of colorectal cancer (CRC). We hypothesized that qualitative changes of lipoproteins are associated with the risk for CRC development. This study analyses low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) diameters, as well as...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stevanovic, Milica, Vekic, Jelena, Bogavac-Stanojevic, Natasa, Janac, Jelena, Stjepanovic, Zeljka, Zeljkovic, Dejan, Trifunovic, Bratislav, Spasojevic-Kalimanovska, Vesna, Zeljkovic, Aleksandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6214700/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30429670
http://dx.doi.org/10.11613/BM.2018.030713
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Dyslipidaemia contributes to the occurrence of colorectal cancer (CRC). We hypothesized that qualitative changes of lipoproteins are associated with the risk for CRC development. This study analyses low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) diameters, as well as distribution of LDL and HDL subclasses in patients with CRC, with an aim to determine whether advanced lipid testing might be useful in predicting the risk for the onset of this malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This case-control study included 84 patients with newly diagnosed CRC and 92 controls. Gradient gel electrophoresis was applied for separation of lipoprotein subclasses and for LDL and HDL diameters determination. Lipid parameters were measured using routine enzymatic methods. RESULTS: Total cholesterol, HDL and LDL-cholesterol were significantly lower in CRC patients compared to controls (4.47 mmol/L vs. 5.63 mmol/L; 0.99 mmol/L vs. 1.27 mmol/L; 2.90 mmol/L vs. 3.66 mmol/L; P < 0.001, respectively). Patients had significantly smaller LDL (25.14 nm vs. 26.92 nm; P < 0.001) and HDL diameters (8.76 nm vs. 10.17 nm; P < 0.001) and greater proportion of small, dense LDL particles (54.0% vs. 52.9%; P = 0.044) than controls. Decreased LDL and HDL diameters were independent predictors of CRC (OR = 0.5, P = 0.001 and OR = 0.5, P = 0.008, respectively), and alongside with age and HDL-cholesterol concentrations formed the optimal cost-effective model, providing adequate discriminative abilities for CRC (AUC = 0.89) and correct patients classification (81%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CRC have decreased LDL and HDL diameters and increased proportion of smaller particles. LDL and HDL diameters determination could be useful in assessing the risk for CRC development.