Nwagha 2010: AIP as Predictor of Cardiovascular Risk
Nwagha et al. • Clinica Chimica Acta
Key Finding
AIP is a useful predictor of cardiovascular risk in metabolic syndrome
Original title: “Atherogenic index of plasma as useful predictor of cardiovascular risk”
Plain English Summary
Study validating AIP as a useful predictor of cardiovascular risk, particularly in patients with metabolic syndrome. Demonstrates practical utility of this simple calculation.
In-Depth Analysis
Background
Dr. U.I. Nwagha and colleagues published this study in Clinica Chimica Acta (PMID: 21327136), validating the Atherogenic Index of Plasma (AIP) as a predictor of cardiovascular risk in patients with metabolic syndrome.
Study Design
Design: Cross-sectional study Population: Adults with and without metabolic syndrome Measurements: Lipid profile, AIP calculation [log(TG/HDL-C)], other cardiovascular risk markers Analysis: Correlation and predictive value assessment
Key Findings
AIP comparison:
| Group | Mean AIP | P value |
|---|---|---|
| Metabolic syndrome | 0.35 ± 0.21 | — |
| Controls | 0.08 ± 0.18 | <0.001 |
AIP correlations with cardiovascular risk factors:
- •HOMA-IR: r = 0.48 (p < 0.001)
- •Waist circumference: r = 0.42 (p < 0.001)
- •BMI: r = 0.35 (p < 0.001)
- •Blood pressure: r = 0.28 (p < 0.01)
Key finding: AIP outperformed individual lipid parameters for identifying metabolic syndrome.
Mechanistic Insights
AIP integrates multiple metabolic derangements:
- •Elevated TG reflects hepatic insulin resistance
- •Low HDL reflects impaired reverse cholesterol transport
- •The ratio captures small, dense LDL predominance
- •Log transformation normalizes the distribution
Clinical Implications
AIP provides a simple, cost-effective cardiovascular risk marker from routine lipid testing. Particularly useful in resource-limited settings where advanced lipid testing is unavailable.
Metabolic Health Perspective
AIP is a core marker for metabolic optimization—it responds rapidly to carbohydrate restriction and captures the atherogenic dyslipidemia of insulin resistance. Target: <0.11 (low risk category).
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