4.7 Article

High-density lipoprotein subpopulation profile and coronary heart disease prevalence in male participants of the Framingham Offspring Study

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.ATV.0000146325.93749.a8

关键词

lipoproteins; high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; high-density lipoprotein subpopulations; apolipoprotein; A-I; coronary heart disease

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [N01-HC-38038, HL-64738, HL-54776, R01 HL064738] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective - High-density lipoprotein (HDL) is a heterogeneous lipoprotein class and there is no consensus on the value of HDL subspecies in coronary heart disease (CHD) risk assessment. We tested the hypothesis whether specific HDL subpopulations are significantly associated with CHD-prevalence. Methods and Results - ApoA-I concentrations (mg/dL) in HDL subpopulations were quantitatively determined by native 2d gel electrophoresis, immunoblotting, and image analysis in male participants in the Framingham Offspring Study (FOS). CHD cases ( n = 169) had higher prebeta-1 and alpha-3 particle and lower alpha-1, prealpha-3, and prealpha-1 particle levels than either all ( n = 1277) or HDL cholesterol-matched ( n = 358) controls. alpha-1 and prealpha-3 levels had an inverse association, whereas alpha-3 and prealpha-1 particle levels had a positive association with CHD prevalence after adjusting the data for established CHD risk factors. Standardized logit coefficients indicated that alpha-1 HDL was most significantly associated with CHD prevalence. Moreover, each mg/dL increase in alpha-1 particle level decreased odds of CHD by 26% ( P < 0.0001), whereas each mg/dL increase in HDL cholesterol decreased odds of CHD by 2% in a model including all established CHD risk factors. Conclusions - Specific HDL subpopulations were positively correlated, whereas others were inversely correlated with CHD prevalence in male subject in the FOS, indicating that the various HDL particles might have different roles in the cause of CHD.

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

4.7
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