Baylin, AnaRuiz-Narvaez, EdwardJensen, Majken KarolineRimm, Eric Bruce::0ab2926c8242f35e5a982e3cf59f4987::600Campos, Hannia2019-08-262010Baylin, A., E. Ruiz-Narvaez, M.K. Jensen, E. Rimm, and H. Campos. 2010. “Association between Hepatic Lipase −514 C/T Promoter Polymorphism and Myocardial Infarction Is Modified by History of Hypercholesterolemia and Waist Circumference.” Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases 20 (7): 498–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.numecd.2009.05.006.0939-47531590-3729http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:41246951Background and aims: To examine whether the association between the -514 C/T polymorphism of the hepatic lipase gene and myocardial infarction (MI) is modified by history of hypercholesterolemia and increased waist circumference.Methods and results: A total of 1940 pairs of nonfatal MI cases and population-based controls were genotyped. Multiple conditional logistic regression was used for data analyses. The -514T variant was not associated with MI in the whole population. However, among people with history of hypercholesterolemia the T allele increased MI risk for heterozygous and homozygous carriers, respectively [OR = 1.25 (95%CI = 0.92-1.70) and OR = 1.59 (95%CI = 1.09-2.32). In contrast, the T allele decreased MI risk among people with no history of hypercholesterolemia [OR = 0.85 (95%CI = 0.70-1.03) and OR = 0.76 (95%CI = 0.60 0.97)], p for interaction = 0.004. Among subjects with normal waist circumference there was no association between the -514T allele and MI for heterozygous and homozygous carriers, respectively [OR = 1.04 (95%CI = 0.86-1.25) and OR = 0.96 (95%CI = 0.77-1.21)], while among subjects with waist circumference above the limits of the metabolic syndrome definition there was a protective association [OR = 0.63 (95%CI = 0.45-0.90) and OR = 0.81 (95%CI = 0.53-1.25) p for interaction = 0.04].Conclusion: The 5141 allele is associated with MI in opposite directions depending on the background of the studied population. This could explain what seem like inconsistent results across studies.en-USJournal Article2019-08-2610.1016/j.numecd.2009.05.006