Cited by 1Fatty Acid Research and HealthLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthParaoxonase enzyme and polymorphisms

Abstract 10905: Relationship of Eicosapentaenoic Acid and Docosahexaenoic Acid Dosage to Plaque Progression in Patients With Coronary Atherosclerosis Receiving Statin and Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Therapy

Sheppard, John P, Lakshmanan, Suvasini, Roy, Sion K, Bhatt, Deepak L, Budoff, Matthew J, Nelson, John R·2022·Circulation

Abstract

Introduction: Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) extensively studied in atherosclerosis. Clinical endpoint and imaging studies have yielded convergent findings favoring pure EPA over mixed EPA/DHA formulations. The effects of EPA and DHA dose on coronary plaque dynamics, however, remain unknown, and could yield insights into the utility of these PUFAs in coronary artery disease. Methods: We considered longitudinal studies that compared coronary plaque change in patients receiving statin versus statin+PUFA therapy. Outcomes were % change in total and lipid plaque volume. Treatment effects were calculated as standardized mean difference (SMD), the mean % plaque volume change between statin and statin+PUFA cohorts divided by their pooled standard error. To isolate effects of EPA or DHA dose respectively, treatment arms were pooled by dosage of the PUFA of interest. To account for dependent samples, we fit hierarchical mixed effects models using robust variance estimation, assuming a correlation of 0.5 among treatment effects within multi-arm studies. Results: Among 555 screened articles, 11 studies met inclusion criteria. Among 1,070 patients, there were 14 treatment arms stratified by EPA dose, and 15 treatment arms stratified by DHA dose. Meta-regression revealed that EPA dose (g/day) correlated positively with treatment effect (β = 0.3 [0.1, 0.6], P = 0.02), while daily DHA dose correlated negatively with…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circ.146.suppl_1.10905

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The theoretic possibility of confounding by mineral oil comparator in REDUCE-IT does not explain findings suggesting dose-dependent benefit of EPA in the broader literature.

    “However, the theoretic possibility of confounding by mineral oil comparator in REDUCE-IT does not explain findings suggesting dose-dependent benefit of EPA in the broader literature.43”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sheppard, J. P., Lakshmanan, S., Roy, S. K., Bhatt, D. L., Budoff, M. J., & Nelson, J. R.
Affiliations
  • Yale New Haven Hospital (US)
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • California Cardiovascular Institute, Fresno, CA
Venue
Circulation
Published
2022-11-08
Volume
146
Issue
Suppl_1
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W4380793522
Cited by
1
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Circulation (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Fatty Acid Research and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Paraoxonase enzyme and polymorphisms
Keywords
eicosapentaenoic acid, docosahexaenoic acid, omega-3 fatty acids, coronary artery disease, coronary plaque volume, plaque progression, statin therapy, polyunsaturated fatty acids, dose-response relationship, lipid-rich plaque

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review