MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Comparison of the Impact of High‐Dose DHA and EPA Supplementation on the Intravascular Kinetics of Very‐Low Density Lipoprotein Apolipoprotein C‐III

2017· article· en· W3172931143 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cécile Vors, Johanne Marin, Janie Allaire, André Tchernof, Patrick Couture, Benoı̂t Lamarche

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecUniversité Laval
FundersDivision of Antarctic SciencesDefense Health AgencyU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsDocosahexaenoic acidVery low-density lipoproteinEicosapentaenoic acidInternal medicineEndocrinologyApolipoprotein BCatabolismCrossover studyChemistryHypertriglyceridemiaLipoproteinTriglycerideCholesterolMedicineFatty acidBiochemistryMetabolismPolyunsaturated fatty acidPlacebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Apolipoprotein C‐III (apoC‐III) is an emerging risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and its presence on very‐low density lipoproteins (VLDL) may enhance their atherogenicity, primarily by delaying their rate of catabolism. We have shown in a recent study that high‐dose supplementation with docosahexaenoic acid ( DHA) led to more pronounced reductions in TG compared with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), but mechanisms remain unclear. The objective of this study was to compare the individual effect of EPA and DHA on VLDL‐apoC‐III metabolism in men and women at risk of CVD. Methods In a randomized double‐blind crossover trial, 10 men and 8 women with abdominal obesity and low‐grade inflammation were subjected to three 10‐wk supplementation phases: 1) EPA (2.7 g/d); 2) DHA (2.7 g/d); 3) corn oil (0g DHA, 0g EPA, control), separated by a 9‐wk washout. All supplements were provided as 3×1g capsules for a total of 3g/d. After each dietary intervention, subjects received a primed‐constant infusion of [5,5,5‐D(3)]‐L‐leucine for 12h under constant feeding conditions for the determination of VLDL‐apoC‐III kinetics. Results Both DHA (−11.7%, p=0.01) and EPA (−6.4%, p=0.03) similarly reduced the fractional catabolism rate (FCR) of VLDL‐apoC‐III compared with control (p=0.75 between DHA and EPA). On the other hand, neither DHA nor EPA supplementation had a significant impact on VLDL‐apoC‐III concentrations and production rate (PR). Compared with control, DHA‐ and EPA‐induced reductions in TG were correlated with DHA‐ and EPA‐induced variations in VLDL‐apoC‐III PR (r=0.49, p=0.03 and r=0.48, p=0.05 respectively), but not with changes in VLDL‐apoC‐III FCR. Conclusions High‐dose supplementation with DHA or EPA is associated with reduced clearance of VLDL‐apoC‐III, with no effect, however, on VLDL‐apoC‐III concentrations and production. Although the DHA‐ and EPA‐induced reductions in serum TG may be more sensitive to treatment‐induced variations in VLDL‐apoC‐III production, other mechanisms must be investigated to explain why DHA may reduce serum TG more than EPA. Support or Funding Information Financial support for this RCT was provided exclusively by a grant from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (MOP‐123494). Douglas Laboratories provided the EPA, DHA and placebo capsules used in this study. The funding source was not involved in the study design, conduct of the study, or collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data or in the preparation or review of the manuscript and had no right to approve or disapprove of the submitted manuscript. CV is a fellow of the French Foundation for Medical Research (FRM, file code: 40303). JA is a recipient of a PhD Scholarships from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and the Fonds de recherche du Québec – Santé.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicFatty Acid Research and Health→French-language works237,207→