4.7 Review

High-Density Lipoprotein and Atherosclerosis Regression Evidence From Preclinical and Clinical Studies

Journal

CIRCULATION RESEARCH
Volume 114, Issue 1, Pages 205-213

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.300760

Keywords

atherosclerosis; cholesterol; HDL; coronary artery disease; mice; regression

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [HL-084312, HL-098055, AG-029748]
  2. German Research Foundation [DFG: HE 6092/1-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

High-density lipoprotein (HDL) particles transport (among other molecules) cholesterol (HDL-C). In epidemiological studies, plasma HDL-C levels have an inverse relationship to the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. It has been assumed that this reflects the protective functions of HDL, which include their ability to promote cholesterol efflux. Yet, several recent pharmacological and genetic studies have failed to demonstrate that increased plasma levels of HDL-C resulted in decreased cardiovascular disease risk, giving rise to a controversy regarding whether plasma levels of HDL-C reflect HDL function, or that HDL is even as protective as assumed. The evidence from preclinical and (limited) clinical studies shows that HDL can promote the regression of atherosclerosis when the levels of functional particles are increased from endogenous or exogenous sources. The data show that regression results from a combination of reduced plaque lipid and macrophage contents, as well as from a reduction in its inflammatory state. Although more research will be needed regarding basic mechanisms and to establish that these changes translate clinically to reduced cardiovascular disease events, that HDL can regress plaques suggests that the recent trial failures do not eliminate HDL from consideration as an atheroprotective agent but rather emphasizes the important distinction between HDL function and plasma levels of HDL-C.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available