The angiotensin-converting enzyme insertion/deletion polymorphism and its associations with carotid artery wall thickness and coronary heart disease: The atherosclerosis risk in communities study

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death in the United States. Recently, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) was found associated with atherosclerosis formation, with angiotensin II inducing vascular smooth muscle cell growth and migration, platelet activation and aggregation, and stimulation of plasminogen activator inhibitor-1. Angiotensin II is converted from angiotensin I by angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) and this enzyme is mainly genetically determined. The ACE gene has been assigned to chromosome 17q23 and an insertion/deletion (I/D)polymorphism has been characterized by the presence/absence of a 287 bp fragment in intron 16 of the gene. The two alleles form three genotypes, namely, DD, ID and II and the DD genotype has been linked to higher plasma ACE levels and cell ACE activity.^ In this study, the association between the ACE I/D polymorphism and carotid artery wall thickness measured by B-mode ultrasound was investigated in a biracial sample, and the association between the gene and incident CHD was investigated in whites and if the gene-CHD association in whites, if any, was due to the gene effect on atherosclerosis. The study participants are from the prospective Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, including adults aged 45 to 65 years. The present dissertation used a matched case-control design for studying the associations of the ACE gene with carotid artery atherosclerosis and an unmatched case-control design for the association of the gene with CHD. A significant recessive effect of the D allele on carotid artery thickness was found in blacks (OR = 3.06, 95% C.I: 1.11-8.47, DD vs. ID and II) adjusting for age, gender, cigarette smoking, LDL-cholesterol and diabetes. No similar associations were found in whites. The ACE I/D polymorphism is significantly associated with coronary heart disease in whites, and while stratifying data by carotid artery wall thickness, the significant associations were only observed in thin-walled subgroups. Assuming a recessive effect of the D allele, odds ratio was 2.84 (95% C.I:1.17-6.90, DD vs. ID and II) and it was 2.30 (95% C.I:1.22-4.35, DD vs. ID vs. II) assuming a codominant effect of the D allele. No significant associations were observed while comparing thick-walled CHD cases with thin-walled controls. Following conclusions could be drawn: (1) The ACE I/D polymorphism is unlikely to confer appreciable increase in the risk of carotid atherosclerosis in US whites, but may increases the risk of carotid atherosclerosis in blacks. (2) ACE I/D polymorphism is a genetic risk factor for incident CHD in US whites and this effect is separate from the chronic process of atherosclerosis development. Finally, the associations observed here are not causal, since the I/D polymorphism is in an intron, where no ACE proteins are encoded. ^

Partial volume correction incorporating Rb-82 positron range for quantitative myocardial perfusion PET based on systolic-diastolic activity ratios and phantom measurements.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative myocardial PET perfusion imaging requires partial volume corrections. METHODS: Patients underwent ECG-gated, rest-dipyridamole, myocardial perfusion PET using Rb-82 decay corrected in Bq/cc for diastolic, systolic, and combined whole cycle ungated images. Diastolic partial volume correction relative to systole was determined from the systolic/diastolic activity ratio, systolic partial volume correction from phantom dimensions comparable to systolic LV wall thicknesses and whole heart cycle partial volume correction for ungated images from fractional systolic-diastolic duration for systolic and diastolic partial volume corrections. RESULTS: For 264 PET perfusion images from 159 patients (105 rest-stress image pairs, 54 individual rest or stress images), average resting diastolic partial volume correction relative to systole was 1.14 ± 0.04, independent of heart rate and within ±1.8% of stress images (1.16 ± 0.04). Diastolic partial volume corrections combined with those for phantom dimensions comparable to systolic LV wall thickness gave an average whole heart cycle partial volume correction for ungated images of 1.23 for Rb-82 compared to 1.14 if positron range were negligible as for F-18. CONCLUSION: Quantitative myocardial PET perfusion imaging requires partial volume correction, herein demonstrated clinically from systolic/diastolic absolute activity ratios combined with phantom data accounting for Rb-82 positron range.

COMPARISON OF MEASUREMENTS OF ABSORBED DOSE TO WATER USING A WATER CALORIMETER AND IONIZATION CHAMBERS FOR CLINICAL RADIOTHERAPY PHOTON AND ELECTRON BEAMS

With the development of the water calorimeter direct measurement of absorbed dose in water becomes possible. This could lead to the establishment of an absorbed dose rather than an exposure related standard for ionization chambers for high energy electrons and photons. In changing to an absorbed dose standard it is necessary to investigate the effect of different parameters, among which are the energy dependence, the air volume, wall thickness and material of the chamber. The effect of these parameters is experimentally studied and presented for several commercially available chambers and one experimental chamber, for photons up to 25 MV and electrons up to 20 MeV, using a water calorimeter as the absorbed dose standard and the most recent formalism to calculate the absorbed dose with ion chambers.^ For electron beams, the dose measured with the calorimeter was 1% lower than the dose calculated with the chambers, independent of beam energy and chamber.^ For photon beams, the absorbed dose measured with the calorimeter was 3.8% higher than the absorbed dose calculated from the chamber readings. Such differences were found to be chamber and energy independent.^ The results for the photons were found to be statistically different from the results with the electron beams. Such difference could not be attributed to a difference in the calorimeter response. ^