Jørgensen 2013: Nonfasting Triglycerides and Cardiovascular Risk
Jørgensen et al. • JAMA
Key Finding
Nonfasting triglycerides predict MI, IHD, and death
Original title: “Nonfasting triglycerides and risk of myocardial infarction, ischemic heart disease, and death”
Plain English Summary
Copenhagen study demonstrating nonfasting triglycerides predict myocardial infarction and death, supporting the importance of postprandial lipid assessment.
In-Depth Analysis
Background
Dr. A.B. Jørgensen and colleagues from Copenhagen published this study from the Copenhagen City Heart Study in JAMA (PMID: 23248205), demonstrating that nonfasting triglycerides predict cardiovascular events.
Study Design
Design: Prospective cohort study Population: 7,581 women and 6,391 men from general Copenhagen population Follow-up: Up to 31 years Exposure: Nonfasting triglycerides (2-4 hours after last meal) Outcomes: Myocardial infarction, ischemic heart disease, death
Key Findings
Hazard ratios for highest vs. lowest triglyceride quintile:
| Outcome | Women HR (95% CI) | Men HR (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|
| MI | 5.0 (2.5-9.8) | 2.3 (1.5-3.7) |
| IHD | 4.5 (2.7-7.5) | 2.3 (1.6-3.3) |
| Total mortality | 2.2 (1.7-2.9) | 1.5 (1.2-1.8) |
Key insight: Risk was continuous across the triglyceride range—no safe threshold.
Nonfasting vs. fasting: Nonfasting triglycerides were equally or more predictive than fasting values.
Mechanistic Insights
Nonfasting triglycerides reflect:
- •Postprandial lipemia (chylomicron remnants)
- •Remnant cholesterol content
- •Clearance capacity (related to insulin sensitivity)
The fed state may better reveal metabolic dysfunction than the artificial fasting state.
Clinical Implications
This study supported the shift away from mandatory fasting for lipid testing. Nonfasting triglycerides are clinically meaningful and may be more practical for routine screening.
Metabolic Health Perspective
Elevated postprandial triglycerides mark carbohydrate intolerance and insulin resistance. Dietary carbohydrate restriction effectively lowers both fasting and nonfasting triglycerides.
Paradigm Relevance
How this study applies to different clinical perspectives:
Standard Medical
Conventional clinical guidelines used by most doctors
Not directly relevant to this paradigm
Research Consensus
RelevantCurrent scientific understanding, often ahead of guidelines
Metabolic Optimization
RelevantProactive targets for optimal health, not just disease absence
Study Details
- Type
- Cohort Study
Related Biomarkers
Calculate & Evaluate on Metabolicum
Original Source
DOI (Digital Object Identifier) is a permanent link to this publication. Unlike website URLs that can change, a DOI always resolves to the correct source.
Related Studies
Budoff 2024: The KETO Trial Shows No Excess Plaque in High-LDL Dieters
Budoff et al. • JACC: Advances • 2024
KETO vs control: CAC median 0 vs 1 (P=0.520); total plaque score 0 vs 1 (P=0.357); 55% vs 48% zero CAC; no correlation between LDL and plaque (r=0.12, P=0.29)
Norwitz 2021: Evidence for the Lean Mass Hyper-Responder Phenotype
Norwitz et al. • Current Developments in Nutrition • 2022
LMHR criteria (18% of sample): LDL ≥200, HDL ≥80, TG ≤70 mg/dL; LMHR BMI 22.0 vs 24.6 non-LMHR (P=1.2×10⁻¹⁰); median LDL increase 146 vs 61 mg/dL
The Lipid Energy Model: Reimagining Lipoprotein Function in the Context of Carbohydrate-Restricted Diets
Norwitz et al. • Metabolites • 2022
LEM proposes carbohydrate restriction in lean individuals increases hepatic VLDL secretion with enhanced lipoprotein lipase turnover, generating elevated LDL without FH genetic markers