Open Peer Review Discuss this article  (0)Comments RESEARCH ARTICLE Non-HDL cholesterol is better than LDL-c at predicting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors clustering, even in subjects with near-to-normal triglycerides: A report from  a Venezuelan population [version 1; referees: 1 approved with reservations] Valmore Bermúdez ,       Wheeler Torres , Juan Salazar , María Sofía Martínez ,          Edward Rojas , Luis Carlos Olivar , Victor Lameda , Ángel Ortega , Paola Ramírez ,        Milagros Rojas , Sheena Rastogi , Rosanna D’Addosio , Kyle Hoedebecke ,        Modesto Graterol , Resemily Graterol , Sandra Wilches , Mayela Cabrera de Bravo , Joselyn Rojas-Quintero 7 Endocrine and Metabolic Diseases Research Center, University of Zulia, Maracaibo, Venezuela Grupo de Investigación Altos Estudios de Frontera (ALEF), Universidad Simón Bolívar, Cúcuta, Colombia Internal Medicine Program, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zulia, Maracaibo, Venezuela WONCA Polaris - USA, Bangkok, 10500, Thailand Yongsan Health Clinic, Seoul, 96205, South Korea Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA Abstract  Non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-c) hasBackground: emerged as an important tool in primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), especially among those at high risk. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of non-HDL-c for the coexistence aggregation of multiple ASCVD risk factors and compare this with LDL-c in general subjects with normal or near normal triglycerides from Maracaibo city in Venezuela.  This is a descriptive, cross-sectional study with a randomizedMethods: multistage sampling. 2026 subjects were selected for this study, all were adults ≥18 years old of both genders and inhabitants of Maracaibo city, Venezuela. A complete history and physical medical assessment was performed. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the odds ratio (CI95%) for the coexistence of multiple risk factors for ASCVD.  The median (p25-p75) of non-HDL-c was 143 mg/dL (114-174Results: mg/dL). 52.1% (n=1056) of the sample were women, with a median of 144 mg/dL (115-174 mg/dL) among women and 143 mg/dL (114-17 4mg/dL) among men; p=0.740. Individuals ≥50 years old, smokers, those with hypertension, obesity, diabetes, high waist circumference and elevated hs-C Reactive Protein, all had higher levels of non-HDL-c. A lower median was observed among those <30 years of age with elevated physical activity levels in 1,2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 5,6 1 1 1 1 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  Referee Status:   Invited Referees  version 1 published 26 Apr 2018 1 report , National TaiwanChau-Chung Wu University College of Medicine, Taiwan 1  26 Apr 2018,  :504 (doi:  )First published: 7 10.12688/f1000research.13005.1  26 Apr 2018,  :504 (doi:  )Latest published: 7 10.12688/f1000research.13005.1 v1 Page 1 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 https://f1000research.com/articles/7-504/v1 https://f1000research.com/articles/7-504/v1 https://f1000research.com/articles/7-504/v1 https://f1000research.com/articles/7-504/v1 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1880-8887 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4211-528X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0049-531X https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3303-2258 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4994-075X https://f1000research.com/articles/7-504/v1 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.13005.1 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.13005.1 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.12688/f1000research.13005.1&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2018-04-26   observed among those <30 years of age with elevated physical activity levels in their leisure time. Non-HDL-c between 130-159 mg/dL (OR=2.44; CI 95%=1.48-4.02; p<0.001) and ≥160 mg/dL (OR=3.28; CI 95%=1.72-6.23; p<0.001) was associated with greater risk of coexistent multiple risk factors for ASCVD, albeit LDL-c was not significant in the multivariate model.  Elevated non-HDL-c was associated with conglomeration ofConclusions: multiple risk factors for ASCVD. This suggests evaluation of non-HDL-c may be of better utility in primary care for early identification of subjects for high risk of ASCVD. Future research might focus on the influence of non-HDL-c in cardiovascular mortality. Keywords non-HDL-c, LDL-c, cholesterol, ASCVD, risk factor, Coronary Artery Disease  Valmore Bermúdez ( ), Kyle Hoedebecke ( )Corresponding authors: valmore@gmail.com khoedebecke@gmail.com   : Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation;  : Resources, Validation,Author roles: Bermúdez V Torres W Visualization;  : Methodology, Resources, Writing – Original Draft Preparation;  : Data Curation, Resources, Visualization,Salazar J Martínez MS Writing – Original Draft Preparation;  : Data Curation, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation;  : FormalRojas E Olivar LC Analysis, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation;  : Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft Preparation; Lameda V : Investigation, Validation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation;  : Formal Analysis, Validation, Writing – Original DraftOrtega Á Ramírez P Preparation;  : Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation;  : Data Curation, Investigation;  : Investigation,Rojas M Rastogi S D’Addosio R Writing – Original Draft Preparation;  : Project Administration, Writing – Review & Editing;  : Formal Analysis, Validation,Hoedebecke K Graterol M Visualization;  : Data Curation, Investigation, Writing – Original Draft Preparation;  : Data Curation, Formal Analysis,Graterol R Wilches S Investigation;  : Investigation, Supervision, Writing – Original Draft PreparationRojas-Quintero J  No competing interests were disclosed.Competing interests:  This work was supported by the Technological, Humanistic, and Scientific Development Council (Consejo de DesarrolloGrant information: Científico, Humanístico y Tecnológico; CONDES), University of Zulia (grant nº CC-0437-10-21-09-10). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.  © 2018 Bermúdez V  . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the  ,Copyright: et al Creative Commons Attribution Licence which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Data associated with the article are available under the terms of the   (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver  Bermúdez V, Torres W, Salazar J   How to cite this article: et al. Non-HDL cholesterol is better than LDL-c at predicting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors clustering, even in subjects with near-to-normal triglycerides: A report from a Venezuelan    2018,  :504 (doi:  )population [version 1; referees: 1 approved with reservations] F1000Research 7 10.12688/f1000research.13005.1  26 Apr 2018,  :504 (doi:  ) First published: 7 10.12688/f1000research.13005.1 Page 2 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.13005.1 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.13005.1 Introduction Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in the world, representing 31.5% of deaths, with approximately 17.3 million deaths globally1. Hyperlipidemia plays an important role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis by inducing chronic inflam- mation, arterial plaque formation and remodeling, leading to compromised perfusion. Thankfully, hyperlipidemia remains a modifiable risk factor for ASCVD2,3. Historically, the therapeutic goal for ASCVD risk reduction was to reduce cholesterol levels associated with low density lipo- proteins (LDL-c), as elevated quantities have been associated with a higher incidence of ASCVD4. An important body of evidence, including randomized controlled trials, have demon- strated that statins reduce mortality from ASCVD when used as primary or secondary prevention5–8. Nonetheless, other studies have shown that the risk for future cardiac events remain elevated despite achieving LDL-c goals, suggesting that LDL-c might not be the best estimator of ASCVD in some populations9,10. LDL-c levels only reflect the amount of cholesterol contained within the low density lipoproteins, but does not quantify its quantity, size or structure. Additionally, there are other lipo- proteins that possess atherogenic properties, such as very low density lipoproteins (VLDL-c), chylomicrons, and lipopro- tein remnants. All these have Apo-B, and can participate in atherogenesis by accumulation in the intima and eliciting pro-inflammatory responses11. Other disadvantage of using LDL-c is the methodologic limitation of its calculations using Friedewald´s equation, which cannot be used in the setting of hypertriglyceridemia12. Recall that elevated triglycerides (TGs) can independently increase the risk for ASCVD13. There- fore, non-high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol has emerged as an alternative predictor of ASCVD. Non-HDL cholesterol essentially represents the sum of all lipo- proteins that have atherogenic properties (LDL, VLDL, IDL, lipoprotein remnant)11. Studies such as the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration14 (N=302,430) suggest that aiming to reduce non-HDL disregarding other lipid parameters might be a new and better approach. This is supported by the fact that patients in this study with elevated non-HDL-c had higher risk of cardiac events (HR=1.50; CI 95%=1.39–1.61) than those with elevated TGs (HR=0.99; CI 95%=0.94–1.05) or with elevated LDL-c (HR=1.38; CI 95%=1.09–1.73). Moreover, non-HDL-c has demonstrated to be a useful pre- dictor for the appearance of metabolic syndrome, which can be of great utility in primary care settings15. Lastly, non- HDL-c seems to be a better predictor of metabolic syndrome compared with LDL-c, even in patients with TG <400 mg/dL, and the predictive value was independent from central obesity and insulin resistant states16. Despite all the advantages of non-HDL-c in order to estimate ASCVD risk, the current practice measurement of non-HDL-c is underused. The objective of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of non-HDL-c for the aggregation of multi- ple ASCVD risk factors and compare it with LDL-c in general subjects with normal or near normal TGs from Maracaibo municipality in Venezuela. Methods Study design and selection of participants The Maracaibo City Metabolic Syndrome Prevalence Study (MMSPS) is a descriptive and cross-sectional study carried out by our research group in Maracaibo, Venezuela, with the main goal to determine the prevalence of metabolic syndrome in this population and it´s methodology was described previously17. For the purpose of the present sub-study, indi- viduals with no determination of fasting insulin level were excluded; thus, a total of 2026 individuals older than 18 years old were included for this investigation. The study was approved by the Bioethics Committee of the Endocrine and Metabolic Diseases Research Center – University of Zulia (approval number: BEC-006-0305). This ethical approval included all future studies that used the data from the MMSPS. All participants signed written consent before being questioned and physically examined by a trained team. Clinical evaluation of the participants All individuals underwent a full history and physical exam by trained personnel. During the initial interview, personal and family history of premature ASCVD, endocrine and meta- bolic diseases were explored. Age, gender, as well as social and economic stratus using Graffar’s scale modified by Mendez-Castellano18, were recorded. Smoking history was categorized in three different classes: a) current smoker (smoked >100 cigarettes in a lifetime, current smoking, and chronic smoker who stopped for <1 year; b) ex-smoker (smoker who stopped smoking for >1 year); c) non-smoker (never smoked or who smoked <100 cigarettes in a lifetime). Current drinkers were considered to be those having drunk >1 gram a day20. Physical activity was assessed by the Long Form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)21. This instrument quantifies the amount of minutes invested in trans- portation, work, homework (gardening, cleaning), and leisure time. The participants were divided into quintiles based on total Metabolic Equivalents (METs)/min/week scores considering a sedentary person those with a MET score of 0 and those individuals with some degree of physi- cal activity (≥1 MET) were stratified into five groups: very low (Q1), low (Q2), moderate (Q3), high (Q4) and very high (Q5) for a total of six categories. Leisure time was classi- fied as follows: Q1 or very low PA in men<296.999 METs and women <230.999 METs; b) Q2 or low PA in men 297.000–791.999 METs and women 231.000–445.499 METs; c) Q3 or moderate PA in men 792.000–1532.399 METs and in women 445.500–742.499 METs; d) Q4 high PA in men 1532.400–2879.999 METs and in women 742.500–1798.499 METs; and e) Q5 or very high PA in men ≥2879.000 METs and women ≥1798.500 METs. Page 3 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 Blood pressure evaluation Blood pressure was measured by manual methods using a sphygmomanometer and stethoscope to detect 1st and 5th Korotkoff’s sounds for systolic and diastolic blood pres- sure, respectively. Participants had a 15 minute resting period before BP determination, they were seating with both feet on the ground. Measurements were repeated three times in 15 minute intervals. Joint National Committee 7 (JNC7) was used to classify BP as normal BP <120/80 mmHg, prehyperten- sion in those with systolic blood pressure (SBP) 120–139 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure (PAD) between 80–89 mmHg, and hypertension when BP is ≥140/90 mmHg22. Anthropometric evaluation Height was determined using a calibrated stadiometer placed on a flat surface. Weight was determined using a digital scale (Tanita, TBF-310 GS Body Composition Analyzer, Tokyo – Japan), with the patient wearing light clothing and bare- foot. Body mass index (BMI) was determined using Quetelec´s equation [weight/height2], and using World Health Organiza- tion criteria participants were deemed normal weight (BMI <25 kg/m2), overweight (25.0 – 29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30.0 kg/m2)23. Waist circumference was measured using a standardized metric belt using the metric system in centimeters and millimeters. An anatomic reference was used to measure waist circumfer- ence an equidistant point between the lower border of the ribs and the antero-superior iliac spine, according to the National Institutes of Health of the United States24. Central obesity was considered if waist circumference was ≥91 cm in women and ≥98 cm in men, according to the specific cut off values proposed for the population of Maracaibo, Venezuela25. Laboratory analyses Antecubital venous sampling was performed after an eight hour period of fasting. Samples were centrifuged and serum was obtained. Levels of glucose, total cholesterol, and TGs were determined using commercial enzymatic and colorimet- ric ELISA kits (Human Gesellshoft Biochemica and Diagnos- tica MBH). Glucose levels were interpreted according to the American Diabetes Association 2017 diagnostic criteria as fol- lows: normal glucose <100 md/dL, impaired fasting glucose when fasting glucose is 100–125 mg/dL, and diabetes mellitus when glucose was ≥126 mg/dL26. Before diagnosing diabetes, a confirmatory test was repeated on a different day. Levels of high sensitive C reactive protein (hs-CRP) were determined using immunoturbidimetric analyses (Human Gesellshoft Bio- chemica and Diagnostica MBH), and the cut off point for an elevated hs-CRP was ≥0.765 mg/L27. Fasting insulin concentration was determined using a commer- cial kit based on ELISA (DRG International. Inc. USA. New Jersey), with a detection limit of <1 mU/L. Resistance to insu- lin was calculate by the software HOMA-Calculator v2.2.2 provided by the Oxford Centre for Diabetes Endocrinology and Metabolism. Cutoff value for HOMA2-IR was 2.0028. Evaluation of non-HDL cholesterol and LDL-c Non-HDL cholesterol levels were calculated with the following formula: Non-HDL-c = total cholesterol – HDL-c LDL-c were determined using Friedwald formula29. Cutoff points for non-HDL-c: a) <130 mg/dL; b) 130–159 mg/dL; and c) ≥160 mg/dL. Cutoff points for LDL-c: a) <100 mg/dL; b) 100–129 mg/dL; and c) ≥130 mg/dL30. Definition of composite of multiple risk factors The aggregation of multiple risk factors was considered when one individual presented with two or more of the following: • Fasting glucose ≥100 mg/dL; • Blood pressure ≥130/85 mmHg; • Waist circumference ≥91 cm in females and ≥98 cm in males • HOMA2IR≥2. Statistical analysis Qualitative variables were shown as absolute and rela- tive frequencies. Associations between these variables were explored using χ2 (Chi square) testing and differences with Z test. Quantitative variables were shown as arithmetic mean ± standard deviation after normality testing was performed using the Geary test. Non-normal distribution variables were logarithmically transformed and analyzed as with parametric testing when normality was achieved. When these variables remained non-normal they were shown as median with inter- quartile ranges (p25–p75th). U Mann Whitney test and Kruskal-Wallis test were used for comparisons between two groups and three or more groups, respectively. A multivariate regression model was created to estimate odds ratio and confidence intervals for prediction of com- posite of multiple risk factors. The first model was adjusted for age, sex, age group, ethnic group, socio-economic status, literacy, employment status, smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity during leisure time, hypertension, hs-CRP, LDL-c and non-HDL cholesterol. SPSS v.21 for Windows (IBM Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analyses and data gathering. We considered results statistically significant at p<0.05. Results General characteristics of the sample From the 2026 participants, 52.1% (n=1056) were female and 47.9% were male (n=846). The mean age was 40.79±15.76 years. Other general features are presented in Table 1. Median non-HDL-c was 143 mg/dL (114–174) mg/dL, with 144 (115–174) mg/dL among females and 143 (114–174) mg/dL in males; p=0.740. Page 4 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 http://www.dtu.ox.ac.uk/homacalculator/index.php Epidemiology of non-HDL-c: Age, ethnicity, smoking, alcohol and physical activity Table 2 shows the epidemiology of non-HDL-c according to social and demographic features. Non-HDL-c levels showed an increasing trend with age, from 118 (97–143) mg/dL in those <30 years old, 151 (124–175) mg/dL among those from 30–49 years old and 166 (137–196) mg/dL in >50 years old; p<0.001. On the other hand, indigenous Venezuelan popula- tions showed lower non-HDL-c levels (127; 97–151 mg/dL) compared with mixed race (145; 116–175 mg/dL) and white Hispanics (145; 114–176 mg/dL; p<0.001). Higher levels of non-HDL-c were found among smokers (151; 118–183 mg/dL) compared with non-smokers or ex-smokers, p=0.001. Subjects with very high physical activity exhibited lower non-HDL-c levels 124 (98–160) mg/dL when compared with sedentary subjects [147 (118–175) mg/dL; p<0.001]. No significant differences were found when comparing alcohol drinkers and non-drinkers. Non-HDL-c, chronic diseases and low-grade inflammation: Hypertension, obesity, diabetes and us-CRP Table 3 shows non-HDL-c levels according to clinical, metabolic, and anthropometric variables. Non-HDL-c were significantly higher among those with hypertension compared to those with normal blood pressure (159 vs. 132 mg/dL, respectively; p<0.001). This behavior was also observed when comparing obese and normal weight individuals (155 vs. 124 mg/dL, respectively; p<0.001), type 2 diabetes and non-diabetic individuals (161 vs. 137 mg/dL; p<0.001), abdominal obes- ity and persons with normal waist circumference (154 vs. 132 mg/dL; p<0.001), and elevated hs-CRP vs. normal hs-CRP (156 vs. 140 mg/dL; p<0.001). Tertile distribution according non-HDL-c and both, clinical and anthropometric variables are shown in Table 4. Non-HDL-c and composite of multiple risk factors for ASCVD Figure 1 shows levels of non-HDL-c according to the number of risk factors for ASCVD. Those with any risk factor had a non-HDL-c of 122 (98–146) mg/dL, and 161 (131–192) mg/dL in those with three criteria and 159 (137–195) mg/dL in those with four criteria; p<0.001. Table 5 shows a multivariate logistic regression model where levels of non-HDL-c between 130 – 159 mg/dL, (OR=2.59; CI95%: 1.62-4.13; p<0.001) and ≥160 mg/dL (OR=3.75; CI95%=2.04-6.91; p<0.001), had an inverse probability of presenting a composite of multiple risk factors, while LDL-C was not significantly associated (OR=0.42; CI95%: 0.23-0,95; p=0.035). Dataset 1. MMSPS non-HDL and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors raw data http://dx.doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.13005.d195980 Table 1. General characteristics of the sample. WOMEN (n= 1056) MEN (n=970) TOTAL (n=2026) Age (Years) 41.06±15.68 38.20±14.89 39.69±15.37 Weight (Kg) 69.35±16.17 84.58±20.29 76.64±19.77 Height (meters) 1.58±0.07 1.71±0.07 1.64±0.10 Body mass index (kg/m2) 27.90±6.23 28.84±6.21 28.35±6.23 Waist circumference (cm) 91.10±13.77 98.76±15.90 94.77±15.31 Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) 117.63±17.48 122.15±15.98 119.80±16.92 Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) 75.56±10.85 79.17±11.52 77.29±11.32 Fasting Glucose (mg/dL) 98.65±31.54 99.67±33.94 99.14±32.71 Fasting insulin (mU/L) 14.57±9.34 14.83±9.83 14.69±9.58 HOMA2-IR 2.18±1.37 2.23±1.47 2.21±1.42 Total Cholesterol (mg/dL) 194.73±44.78 188.07±47.53 191.54±46.22 Triacylglycerides (mg/dL) 117.16±85.47 146.23±116.50 131.08±102.52 HDL-C (mg/dL) 46.99±11.86 40.89±11.34 44.07±12.00 LDL-C (mg/dL) 125.07±39.51 120.61±42.33 122.93±40.94 Non HDL-c (mg/dL) 144.5 (115.5-174.0) 143 (114.0-174.0) 143.0 (114.0-174.0) All results are shown as arithmetic mean and standard deviation. except Non HDL-c (median p25–p75th). Abbreviations: HDL-c: High density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-c: Low density lipoprotein cholesterol; HOMA: Homeostasis model assessment. Page 5 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 http://dx.doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.13005.d195980 Table 2. Non-HDL-C behavior according to sociodemographic characteristics and some psico- biological habits. Non-HDL-C (mg/dL) p* Median (p25–p75) Age Groups (years) <0.001 <30 118 (97–143) 30–49 151 (124–175) >50 166 (137–196) Ethnicity <0.001 Mixed 145 (116–175) Hyspanic white 145 (114–176) Afro-venezuelans 134 (108–164) Amerindians 127 (97–151) Others 147 (124–183) Alcohol consumption§ 0.781 Yes 142 (114–174) No 144 (114–174) Tobacco smoke <0.001 No smoker 139 (110–169) Smoker 151 (118–183) Former smoker 150 (129–184) Physical activity (Leisure time dominion) <0.001 Inactive 147 (118–175) Very Low 147 (117–178) Low 140 (117–168) Moderate 142 (111–180) High 137 (112–174) Very High 124 (98–160) * Mann-Whitney U Test; for 3 or more categories: Kruskal-Wallis H test. § Positive alcohol consumption: ≥1 gram/day Page 6 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 Table 3. Non-HDL-C behavior according to clinical and anthropometric characteristics. Non-HDL cholesterol Median (p25–p75) p* BP JNC-7 <0.001 Normal blood pressure 132 (106–158) Pre-hypertension 146 (118–175) Hypertension 159 (130–190) BMI (kg/m2) <0.001 ≤24,9 124 (98–152) 25–29,9 148 (119–180) ≥30 155 (129–183) Glycemic Status§ <0.001 Normo-glycemic 137 (110–166) Impaired Fasting Glucose 155 (129–185) DM2 161 (132–196) Waist circumference† <0.001 Normal 132 (105–161) High 154 (128–183) hsCRP (mg/L) <0.001 <0,765 140 (109–169) ≥0,765 156 (121–187) Abbreviations: BMI: Body mass index; BP: Blood pressure; hsCRP: High-sensitivity C reactive proteína; JNC-7: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on hypertension. † Cutoff for Maracaibo adult population: ≥98 cm for men and ≥91 cm for women). § American Diabetes Association (ADA) blood glucose diagnostic criteria. *Mann-Whitney U test; for 3 or more categories: Kruskal-Wallis H test. Page 7 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 Table 4. Non-HDL-C tertiles according to clinical and anthropometric characteristics. Non HDL<130 Non HDL=130–159 Non HDL≥160 χ2 (p) n % n % n % BP JNC-7 101.58 (<0.001) Normal blood pressure 375 49.9 226 39.6 192 27.3 Pre-hypertension 262 34.8 225 39.4 278 39.5 Hypertension 115 15.3 120 21.0 233 33.2 BMI (kg/m2) 151.54 (<0.001) ≤24.9 343 45.6 159 27.8 120 17.0 25–29.9 237 31.5 201 35.2 281 40.0 ≥30 172 22.9 211 37.0 302 43.0 Glycemic Status§ 74.97 (<0.001) Normo-glycemic 609 81.0 408 71.5 426 60.6 Impaired Fasting Glucose 102 13.6 116 20.3 186 26.5 DM2 41 5.5 47 8.2 91 12.9 Waist circumference† 112.04 (<0.001) Normal 493 65.6 276 48.3 268 38.1 High 259 34.4 295 51.7 435 61.9 hsCRP (mg/L) 26.95 (<0.001) <0.765 416 80.9 293 78.8 307 67.3 ≥0.765 98 19.1 79 21.2 149 32.7 Abbreviations: BMI: Body mass index; BP: Blood pressure; hsCRP: High-sensitivity C reactive proteína; JNC-7: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on hypertension. † Cutoff for Maracaibo adult population: ≥98 cm for men and ≥91 cm for women). § American Diabetes Association (ADA) blood glucose diagnostic criteria. Figure 1. Non-HDL-C levels according to Risk Factor Clustering (MRFA). Kruskal-Wallis H Test: p<0.001. Page 8 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 Table 5. Logistic regression model for multiple risk factor aggregation. Dependent variable: MRFA (≥2 factors) Odds Ratio. crude (CI 95%a) pb Odds Ratio. adjustedc (CI 95%) pb LDL-C <100 1.00 - 1.00 - 100–129 1.66 (1.33–2.08) <0.001 0.75 (0.48–1.18) 0.215 ≥130 2.47 (1.99–3.08) <0.001 0.42 (0.23–0.95) 0.035 Colesterol Non-HDL <130 1.00 - 1.00 - 130–159 2.08 (1.66–2.60) <0.001 2.59 (1.62–4.13) <0.001 ≥160 3.65 (2.94–4.53) <0.001 3.75 (2.04–6.91) <0.001 a CI: Confidence Interval at 95%. b Significance level c Model 1 Adjusted by: sex, age groups, ethnicity, social-economic status, educative status, marital status, working status, smoking habits, alcohol consumption, physical activity in Leisure time dominion, hsCRP, LDL-c and No-HDL-c. Discussion For nearly 50 years, incredible efforts have been made to identify specific and prevalent ASCVD risk factors, planning and appli- cation of primary and secondary prevention strategies, evalua- tion of population genetics and overall ethnicity genetic risks, and modification due to epigenetics. These risk factors have been of various natures, from anthropometric measurements, such as BMI and waist circumference, lifestyle patterns, to blood lipids sub-fractions, such as LDL-c and HDL-c. In regards to the focus of the present study, lipid profiles and novel lipid fractions and their association with ASCVD have been the main focus of grand scale epidemiological, clinical, and pharmacological investigation31,32. In spite of all the efforts, data has been accumulating that sug- gests that focusing on one lipid fraction, namely LDL-c, may not be the appropriate approach33, due to recently described atherogenic particles, like IDL, Apo B, and non-HDL33. The concept of cardiovascular residual risk factor has been inti- mately associated with cardiovascular disease reduction, being twice as effective as LDL-c34. In fact, Helgadottir et al.35 reported that genetic risk scores using non-HDL-c strongly associates with coronary artery disease, and this genetic risk was considerably lower than that offered by LDL-c. It is no coincidence that non-HDL-c has been shown to correlate with coronary artery disease progression, cardiovascular morbidity, and mortality34,36. The present results show that higher non-HDL-c levels were associated with higher risk of multiple risk factors for ASCVD. These results are similar to those reported by Kumar et al. where non-HDL-c had a better predictive value than LDL-c for atherosclerosis among those with TGs >150 mg/dl37. This study excluded patients with increased TGs >400 mg/dl; therefore, one cannot assume this association is also seen in this group. Moreover, Arsenault et al.38 followed over 21 thousand subjects without diabetes or previous coronary heart disease (CHD), demonstrating that high non-HDL-c is associated with increased CHD. Following the recommendation of the Strong Heart Study39, the recent 2016 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on the Role of Non-Statin Therapies for LDL-Cholesterol Lowering in the Management of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk proposed a goal of <100 mg/dl for non-HDL-c in diabetic patients40. As expected, subjects with diabetes in our popula- tion have higher non-HDL-c, which is a recognized risk factor in diabetic subjects at risk for ASCVD41. Interestingly, Apo B and non-HDL-c are better predictors of diabetes development than glycated hemoglobin42. In line with this notion, the present results also show that non-HDL-c is associated with higher levels of hs-CRP (systemic inflammation), hypertension, and central obesity. We previously described our population as having a high prevalence of obesity and overweight, manag- ing a staggering 65.7%43. Thus, the overlapping of risk factors and metabolic syndrome/type 2 diabetes development is imminent and borderline epidemic. Lastly, Hispanic population seems to be at higher risk for LDL-particle numbers and non-HDL-c discordance44. Page 9 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 Kilgore et al.45 reported that subjects with high non-HDL-c and normal LDL-c were likely to be Hispanic males with metabolic syndrome and other cardiovascular risks. Like- wise, using the database from The Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos, Rodriguez et al.46 reported that almost two thirds of Latinos have a form of dyslipidemia, with South Americans having high non-HDL-c and high LDL-c. Therefore, ethnicity is of high importance when evaluating clinical risk for ASCVD, including blood lipid profiles and sedentary lifestyles in these groups47. To summarize, this investigation in Hispanic population shows that non-HDL-c is associated with multiple risk aggre- gation for ASCVD, being associated with hypertension, central obesity and low grade inflammation. The question that arises is: Should non–HDL-c replace LDL-C as the main target of therapy?33. The fact that non–HDL-c is a better risk predictor, can be performed in a non-fasting state, and can be easily calculated by extracting HDL-c from total cholesterol without using any other laboratory assay makes it the most advantageous parameter for prediction of ASCVD even in subjects with TAG <200 mg/dl. Data availability Dataset 1: MMSPS non-HDL and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors raw data. DOI, 10.5256/f1000research.13005. d19598048 Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information This work was supported by the Technological, Humanistic, and Scientific Development Council (Consejo de Desarrollo Científico, Humanístico y Tecnológico; CONDES), University of Zulia (grant nº CC-0437-10-21-09-10). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. References 1. Roth GA, Huffman MD, Moran AE, et al.: Global and Regional Patterns in Cardiovascular Mortality From 1990 to 2013. Circulation. 2015; 132(17): 1667–1678. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 2. Pasterkamp C, Falk E: Atherosclerotic plaque rupture: an overview. Journal of Clinical and Basic Cardiology. 2000; 3(2): 81–6. Reference Source 3. Boyle JJ: Macrophage activation in atherosclerosis: pathogenesis and pharmacology of plaque rupture. Curr Vasc Pharmacol. 2005; 3(1): 63–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 4. Kannel WB, Dawber TR, Thomas HE Jr, et al.: Comparison Of Serum Lipids In The Prediction Of Coronary Heart Disease. Framingham Study Indicates That Cholesterol Level And Blood Pressure Are Major Factors In Coronary Heart Disease; Effect Of Obesity And Cigarette Smoking Also Noted. R I Med J. 1965; 48: 243–50. PubMed Abstract 5. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group: Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet. 1994; 344(8934): 1383–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 6. Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) Study Group: Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med. 1998; 339(19): 1349–57. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 7. The Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group: MRC/BHF heart protection study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. ACC Curr J Rev. 2002; 11(6): 34–5. Publisher Full Text 8. Willerson JT: Effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. Circulation. 1996; 94(12): 3054. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 9. Jepsen AM, Langsted A, Varbo A, et al.: Increased Remnant Cholesterol Explains Part of Residual Risk of All-Cause Mortality in 5414 Patients with Ischemic Heart Disease. Clin Chem. 2016; 62(4): 593–604. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 10. Sampson UK, Fazio S, Linton MF: Residual cardiovascular risk despite optimal LDL cholesterol reduction with statins: the evidence, etiology, and therapeutic challenges. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2012; 14(1): 1–10. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 11. Fruchart JC, Davignon J, Hermans MP, et al.: Residual macrovascular risk in 2013: what have we learned? Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2014; 13(1): 26. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 12. Fukuyama N, Homma K, Wakana N, et al.: Validation of the Friedewald Equation for Evaluation of Plasma LDL-Cholesterol. J Clin Biochem Nutr. 2008; 43(1): 1–5. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 13. Bermúdez V, Salazar J, Calvo M, et al.: Importance of high triglycerides levels between novel coronary risk factors. Revista Colombiana de Cardiología. 2017; 24(6): 583–591. Publisher Full Text 14. The Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Di Angelantonio E, Sarwar N, et al.: Major lipids, apolipoproteins, and risk of vascular disease. JAMA. 2009; 302(18): 1993–2000. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 15. Ghodsi S, Meysamie A, Abbasi M, et al.: Non-high-density lipoprotein fractions are strongly associated with the presence of metabolic syndrome independent of obesity and diabetes: a population-based study among Iranian adults. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2017; 16: 25. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 16. Moriyama K, Takahashi E: Non-HDL Cholesterol is a More Superior Predictor of Small-Dense LDL Cholesterol than LDL Cholesterol in Japanese Subjects with TG Levels <400 mg/dL. J Atheroscler Thromb. 2016; 23(9): 1126–37. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 17. Bermúdez V, Marcano RP, Cano C, et al.: The Maracaibo city metabolic syndrome prevalence study: design and scope. Am J Ther. 2010; 17(3): 288–94. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 18. Méndez-Castellano H, De Méndez M: Estratificación social y biología humana: método de Graffar modificado. Arch Venez Pueric Pediatr. 1986; 49: 93–104. Reference Source 19. Bermúdez V, Miquilena E, Salazar J, et al.: Smoking Habit in Adult Population from Maracaibo City, Venezuela. Int J Respir Pulm Med. 2016; 3(6): 61. Publisher Full Text 20. Bermúdez V, Torres Y, Apruzzese V, et al.: Alcohol drinking patterns in the adult population from the Maracaibo municipality, Zulia – Venezuela. Revista Latinoamericana de Hipertensión. 2014; 9(3): 21–8. Reference Source 21. International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and New Zealand Physical Activity Questionnaire (NZPAQ): A doubly labelled water validation. J Sci Med Sport. 2007; 10(1): 52. Publisher Full Text 22. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al.: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA. 2003; 289(19): 2560–71. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 23. WHO: Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO Consultation. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2000; 894: i–xii, 1–253. PubMed Abstract 24. Health Statistics: NHANES III reference manuals and reports (CDROM). Page 10 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 http://dx.doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.13005.d195980 http://dx.doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.13005.d195980 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26503749 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.008720 http://h1707126.stratoserver.net/kup/pdf/96.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15638783 http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1570161052773861 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14325143 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7968073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(94)90566-5 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9841303 http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199811053391902 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1062-1458(02)00911-X http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8989104 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.94.12.3054 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26888894 http://dx.doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2015.253757 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22102062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11883-011-0219-7 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3697085 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24460800 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2840-13-26 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3922777 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18648653 http://dx.doi.org/10.3164/jcbn.2008036 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/2459246 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rccar.2017.03.001 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19903920 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1619 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3284229 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28596946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40200-017-0306-6 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/5463311 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27001003 http://dx.doi.org/10.5551/jat.33985 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/5090818 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20068446 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MJT.0b013e3181c121bc http://www.worldcat.org/title/estratificacion-social-y-biologia-humana-metodo-graffar-modificado/oclc/69773230 http://dx.doi.org/10.23937/2378-3516/1410061 https://search.proquest.com/openview/2b839b17ab3ecc0f856c30ac259399b6/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1216405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1440-2440(07)70138-X http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12748199 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.19.2560 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11234459 Hyattsvillem, MD: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1996. Reference Source 25. Bermúdez V, Rojas J, Salazar J, et al.: Sensitivity and Specificity Improvement in Abdominal Obesity Diagnosis Using Cluster Analysis during Waist Circumference Cut-Off Point Selection. J Diabetes Res. 2015; 2015: 1–14, 750265. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 26. American Diabetes Association: 2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2017; 40(Suppl 1): S11–S24. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 27. Bermúdez V, Cabrera M, Mendoza L, et al.: High-sensitivity c-Reactive protein epidemiological behavior in adult individuals from Maracaibo, Venezuela. Revista Latinoamericana de Hipertensión. 2013; 8(1): 22–29. Reference Source 28. Bermúdez V, Rojas J, Martínez MS, et al.: Epidemiologic Behavior and Estimation of an Optimal Cut-Off Point for Homeostasis Model Assessment- 2 Insulin Resistance: A Report from a Venezuelan Population. Int Sch Res Notices. 2014; 2014: 1–10, 616271. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 29. Friedewald WT, Levy RI, Fredrickson DS: Estimation of the Concentration of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol in Plasma, Without Use of the Preparative Ultracentrifuge. Clin Chem. 1972; 18(6): 499–502. PubMed Abstract 30. Jellinger PS, Handelsman Y, Rosenblit PD, et al.: AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT OF DYSLIPIDEMIA AND PREVENTION OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE - EXECUTIVE SUMMARYComplete Appendix to Guidelines available at http://journals.aace. com. Endocr Pract. 2017; 23(4): 479–497. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 31. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, et al.: Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Circulation. 2004; 110(2): 227–39. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 32. Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, et al.: 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63: 2889–934. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 33. Harper CR, Jacobson TA: Using apolipoprotein B to manage dyslipidemic patients: time for a change? Mayo Clin Proc. 2010; 85(5): 440–5. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 34. Robinson JG, Wang S, Smith BJ, et al.: Meta-analysis of the relationship between non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction and coronary heart disease risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009; 53(4): 316–22. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 35. Helgadottir A, Gretarsdottir S, Thorleifsson G, et al.: Variants with large effects on blood lipids and the role of cholesterol and triglycerides in coronary disease. Nat Genet. 2016; 48(6): 634–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 36. Bittner V: Non-HDL Cholesterol: Measurement, Interpretation and Significance. John Hopkins Advanced Studies in Medicine. 2007; 7(1): 8–11. Reference Source 37. Kumar BV, Guntakalla YR, Thomas Z, et al.: Role of Non High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (Non HDL-C) in Predicting Coronary Artery Disease. Indian Journal of Pharmacy Practice. 2015; 8(4): 166–170. Reference Source 38. Arsenault BJ, Rana JS, Stroes ES, et al.: Beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: respective contributions of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, triglycerides, and the total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio to coronary heart disease risk in apparently healthy men and women. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009; 55(1): 35–41. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 39. Lu W, Resnick HE, Jablonski KA, et al.: Non-HDL cholesterol as a predictor of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: the strong heart study. Diabetes Care. 2003; 26(1): 16–23. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 40. Writing Committee, Lloyd-Jones DM, Morris PB, et al.: 2016 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on the Role of Non-Statin Therapies for LDL- Cholesterol Lowering in the Management of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 68(1): 92–125. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 41. Lin FJ, Tseng WK, Yin WH, et al.: Residual Risk Factors to Predict Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Patients with and without Diabetes Mellitus. Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1): 9179. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 42. Hwang YC, Ahn HY, Park SW, et al.: Apolipoprotein B and non-HDL cholesterol are more powerful predictors for incident type 2 diabetes than fasting glucose or glycated hemoglobin in subjects with normal glucose tolerance: a 3.3-year retrospective longitudinal study. Acta Diabetol. 2014; 51(6): 941–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 43. Bermúdez V, Pacheco M, Rojas J, et al.: Epidemiologic behavior of obesity in the Maracaibo City metabolic syndrome prevalence study. PLoS One. 2012; 7(4): e35392. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 44. Degoma EM, Davis MD, Dunbar RL, et al.: Discordance between non-HDL- cholesterol and LDL-particle measurements: results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis. 2013; 229(2): 517–23. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 45. Kilgore M, Muntner P, Woolley JM, et al.: Discordance between high non-HDL cholesterol and high LDL-cholesterol among US adults. J Clin Lipidol. 2014; 8(1): 86–93. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 46. Rodriguez CJ, Daviglus ML, Swett K, et al.: Dyslipidemia patterns among Hispanics/Latinos of diverse background in the United States. Am J Med. 2014; 127(12): 1186–94.e1. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 47. Wang Z, Manichukal A, Goff DC Jr, et al.: Genetic associations with lipoprotein subfraction measures differ by ethnicity in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA). Hum Genet. 2017; 136(6): 715–726. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 48. Bermúdez V, Torres W, Salazar J, et al.: Dataset 1 in: Non-HDL cholesterol is better than LDL-c at predicting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors clustering, even in subjects with near-to-normal triglycerides: A report from a Venezuelan population. F1000Research. 2018. Data Source Page 11 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes3/cdrom/NCHS/MANUALS/ANTHRO.PDF http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25945356 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/750265 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4402167 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27979889 http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc17-S005 http://www.revistahipertension.com.ve/rlh_8_1_2013/capitulo3.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27379332 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/616271 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4897148 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4337382 http://journals.aace.com/?code=aace-site http://journals.aace.com/?code=aace-site http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28156151 http://dx.doi.org/10.4158/EP171764.GL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15249516 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000133317.49796.0E http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24239923 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.002 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20435837 http://dx.doi.org/10.4065/mcp.2009.0517 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/2861973 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19161879 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.10.024 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27135400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ng.3561 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/45ec/0850689432490d77ef0f9d3f91f8899d5cec.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/037e/bd8b29660df9b5b9e264b9bd970a9d42f3dc.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117361 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.057 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12502653 http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/diacare.26.1.16 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27046161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.03.519 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28835613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08741-0 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/5569020 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24816996 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00592-014-0587-x http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22530014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0035392 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3329432 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23591415 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2013.03.012 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4066302 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24528689 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacl.2013.11.001 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25195188 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.07.026 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4551715 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28352986 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00439-017-1782-y http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/5429342 http://dx.doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.13005.d195980   Open Peer Review Current Referee Status: Version 1  30 May 2018Referee Report doi:10.5256/f1000research.14101.r33526  Chau-Chung Wu Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Bioethics, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan The study showed elevated non-HDL-c was associated with conglomeration of multiple risk factors for ASCVD. The result is predictable and not novel. It has been shown in many previous publications. However, one major concern about the methodology: Were the blood pressure and sugar measured before any treatment or just on treatment? The authors should clarify it, because it may change the risk calculation in some patients, esp. for those already with hypertension or diabetes mellitus from the beginning of the study. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes  No competing interests were disclosed.Competing Interests: I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Page 12 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018 http://dx.doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.14101.r33526   The benefits of publishing with F1000Research: Your article is published within days, with no editorial bias You can publish traditional articles, null/negative results, case reports, data notes and more The peer review process is transparent and collaborative Your article is indexed in PubMed after passing peer review Dedicated customer support at every stage For pre-submission enquiries, contact   research@f1000.com Page 13 of 13 F1000Research 2018, 7:504 Last updated: 20 SEP 2018