Is the gender difference in LDL size explained by the metabolic complications of visceral obesity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported a significant gender difference in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) size, with men being characterized by smaller, denser LDL particles than women, and it has been suggested that the contribution of the greater accumulation of visceral adipose tissue in men compared with women may be a factor potentially contributing to the gender difference in LDL heterogeneity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We measured LDL particle size by 2-16% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gradient gel electrophoresis in 299 men and 231 women in whom visceral adipose tissue accumulation was measured by computed tomography. A fasting plasma lipoprotein-lipid profile was also obtained in all subjects. RESULTS: Overall, the men were characterized by a more deteriorated metabolic risk factor profile, which included higher plasma insulin and triglyceride levels, a greater visceral adipose tissue accumulation (P < 0.001) and smaller LDL particles (251.7 +/- 5.2 vs. 254.4 +/- 4.2 A, P < 0.0001). This gender difference in LDL peak particle diameter remained significant (252.4 +/- 4.3 vs. 253.5 +/- 4.3 A, P < 0.01) after adjustment for sex-specific differences in plasma triglyceride levels by covariance analysis. Significant negative correlations were noted between the LDL particle diameter and the triglyceride concentrations in both genders (r = -0.52 and r = -0.36, P < 0.0001 for the men and women, respectively), with no gender difference in this relationship being found. However, viscerally obese women (visceral adipose tissue levels > 100 cm2) with increased plasma triglyceride concentrations (> 2.0 mmol L-1) still had larger LDL particles than viscerally obese men with a similar elevation in their triglyceride levels (251.6 +/- 4.9 vs. 248.7 +/- 4.5 A, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Results of the present study suggest that the reduced LDL particle size observed in men compared with women cannot be entirely explained by their higher visceral adipose tissue accumulation and increased plasma triglyceride levels. Moreover, the gender difference in LDL size could be influenced, at least in part, by the severity of the hypertriglyceridaemic state.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".