Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Helen M Colhoun a Department of Epidemiology and Public
Health, Royal Free and University College Medical School, University
College London, London WC1E 6BT, b Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Hospital Trust, London
SW3 6NP
Correspondence to: H M Colhoun helen{at}public-health.ucl.ac.uk
The relative contribution of socioeconomic differences in
risk factors in adulthood versus earlier life to the social class gradient in coronary heart disease is controversial.1
Socioeconomic position in childhood was a strong predictor of stroke
and cancer mortality in the Boyd Orr cohort but it had only a weak
association with mortality from coronary heart disease.2
Furthermore, there is no social class gradient in intermediate vascular
outcomes such as arterial distensibility in children.3 We
examined whether there is a social class difference in coronary heart
disease in adults in early mid-life by using a subclinical measure of
coronary artery disease We looked at the prevalence of coronary artery calcification
in 149 men and women aged 30-40 (mean (SD) age 36 (2.5)) in relation to
socioeconomic status. Participants were randomly sampled from the lists
of patients from two general practices in London. Participants were
included regardless of their cardiovascular history, although none had
a history of coronary heart disease. The participants had formed the
comparison group for a larger study that included type 1 diabetic
patients.4 Two measures of socioeconomic status were used:
current social class by own occupation using the registrar general's
classification and whether they were in full time education at age 19. Fasting lipids were measured. We used electron beam computed tomography
to quantify coronary artery calcification, a method that has been
validated as a measure of coronary plaque volume.5 The
odds of having any detectable calcification associated with social
class were examined by using logistic regression, adjusting for
covariates. These models were repeated, examining education instead of
social class. Approval was obtained from the ethics committee, and
participants gave written informed consent.
Being in the manual social class (26%) was associated with a
significantly higher prevalence of calcification (odds ratio=2.3, 95%
confidence interval 1.3 to 5.2, P=0.04), as was having left full time
education before the age of 19 (odds ratio 2.8 (1.2 to 6.3), P=0.01).
Adjusting for age, sex, systolic blood pressure, high density
lipoprotein cholesterol, low density lipoprotein cholesterol,
triglycerides, alcohol consumption, and body mass index either singly
or simultaneously attenuated the odds ratios for social class (adjusted
odds ratio=2.0, 95% confidence interval (0.7 to 5.2), P=0.2) and
educational status (adjusted odds ratio 2.2 (0.8 to 6.0), P=0.1) only
slightly, although their significance was reduced. Adjusting for pack
years of smoking and physical activity level in those 126 participants
on whom these data were available did not alter the odds ratio. In this
subgroup the odds ratio for social class was 1.8 and was 3.0 for
educational status, both before and after adjustment.
The study shows that socioeconomic differences in coronary artery
calcification already exist in men and women in their 30s. A
socioeconomic difference in the precursor non-calcified lesions of
atherosclerosis may be present even earlier in the life course. Social
class differences in coronary risk factors were generally small or
non-existent in this cohort (data not given) and explained little of
the social class difference in coronary artery calcification.
The unequivocal class difference in people in their 30s has important
implications. Firstly, interventions aimed at reducing inequalities in
heart disease must include young adults and possibly children.
Secondly, studies of socioeconomic gradients in coronary heart disease
that do not consider the risk factor profiles of participants in their
20s and 30s are unlikely to explain the gradient in full. Thirdly, the
paucity of effect of adjusting for established risk factors on class
difference emphasises that the biological mechanisms through which
social inequalities affect risk for coronary heart disease have yet to
be discovered. Finally, electron beam computerised tomography is an
important technique for exploring the basis of socioeconomic
differences in coronary disease in relatively young cohorts.
coronary artery calcification.
![]()
Methods and results
Top
Methods and results
Comment
References
![]()
Comment
Top
Methods and results
Comment
References
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Contributors: HMC initiated the research, designed the protocol, participated in the data collection, analysed the data, and drafted the paper. She is also the guarantor. MBR helped formulate the hypothesis and study design, advised on the protocol, participated in the data collection, edited the paper, and scored all the electron beam computerised tomography scans. SRU and JHF helped formulate the hypothesis and study design, advised on the protocol, and edited the paper.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: Project grant from the British Heart Foundation.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Brunner E, Shipley MJ, Blane D, Smith GD, Marmot MG. When does cardiovascular risk start? Past and present socioeconomic circumstances and risk factors in adulthood. J Epidemiol Community Health 1999; 53: 757-764[Abstract]. |
| 2. |
Frankel S, Smith GD, Gunnell D.
Childhood socioeconomic position and adult cardiovascular mortality: the Boyd Orr cohort.
Am J Epidemiol
1999;
150:
1081-1084 |
| 3. |
Leeson CP, Whincup PH, Cook DG, Mullen MJ, Donald AE, Seymour CA, et al.
Cholesterol and arterial distensibility in the first decade of life: a population-based study.
Circulation
2000;
101:
1533-1538 |
| 4. | Colhoun HM, Rubens MB, Underwood SR, Fuller JH. The effect of type 1 diabetes mellitus on the sex difference in coronary artery calcification. J Am Coll Cardiol (in press). |
| 5. |
Wexler L, Brundage B, Crouse J, Detrano R, Fuster V, Maddahi J, et al.
Coronary artery calcification: pathophysiology, epidemiology, imaging methods, and clinical implications. A statement for health professionals from the American Heart Association.
Circulation
1996;
94:
1175-1192 |
(Accepted 11 August 2000)