4.3 Review

High-density Lipoprotein (HDL) Dysfunction and the Future of HDL

期刊

CURRENT VASCULAR PHARMACOLOGY
卷 16, 期 5, 页码 490-498

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/1570161115666171116164612

关键词

High-density lipoprotein; cholesterol; atherosclerosis; apolipoprotein A-1; dyslipidemia; inflammation; cardiovascular disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) levels are inversely proportional to cardiovascular risk in many studies, recent pharmacological interventional studies with HDL-C raising strategies did not show a benefit in terms of vascular events. The HDL particle is heterogenous with anti-atherogenic functions and non-vascular effects. Many factors affect HDL components and may either cause compositional changes, post-translational modifications of proteins, or alter lipids and other cargo molecules; generally these factors cause more than one of these changes, resulting in functional differences. Therefore, the role of lipoproteins change in different physical and disease conditions. Mainly, in proteome, Apolipoprotein A1 (Apo-A1), Myeloperoxidase (MPO), Paroxonase (PON) are affected by inflammation or glycation-related factors; and especially esterification or unesterification of lipids, changes in phospholipid or unsaturated lipid content change the HDL function. Measuring the HDL-C level is probably not a good predictor of its cardiovascular benefits, and methods to evaluate HDL functions are required. In current medical practice, it is not simple and feasible to measure different functions of this lipoprotein, but near-future strategies may be developed. Meanwhile, as we learn more about HDL structure and the role of each component, we can develop therapeutic approaches to improve HDL function. Apo-A1-mimetics, reconstituted HDL, nanoparticles and microRNA therapies could be promising as anti-atherosclerotic therapies. They may even provide useful therapies for the treatment of some non-cardiovascular diseases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据