High-Density Lipoproteins: Biology, Epidemiology, and Clinical Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-density lipoproteins (HDLs) have multiple pleiotropic effects against arteriosclerosis. Most are independent of the cholesterol mass within HDL particles. Yet, HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) remains a biomarker to assess cardiovascular risk. Whereas the epidemiological association between HDL-C and cardiovascular risk is strong, graded and coherent across populations, Mendelian randomization studies cast doubt on whether HDL-C is causally related to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The apparent failure of HDL-C-raising therapies (fibrates, niacin, and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors) raises questions about the HDL-C hypothesis. HDL particles are heterogeneous in lipid and protein composition, and thus in size and function. Multiple factors related to oxidation and inflammation might render HDL particles malfunctional or proatherogenic. HDL functionality might be a preferred biomarker and therapeutic target. However, most of the beneficial events of HDL particles occur in the subendothelial layer of arteries and not in plasma. In this report, we review the complexity and controversies surrounding HDL and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Importantly, intimal HDL biogenesis, function, and egress from the arterial wall might hold the key to unlocking the therapeutic potential of HDL.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".