Decrease in intestinal cholesterol absorption by plant sterols and exercise improves lipid profiles in hypercholesterolemic adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Plant sterols combined with exercise improves lipid profiles, however, the mechanism by which this lifestyle therapy alters whole body cholesterol metabolism remains unclear. OBJECTIVE This study examined the combined and individual effects of plant sterols and exercise on cholesterol absorption and synthesis in hypercholesterolemic adults. METHODS In an 8‐week, parallel‐arm trial, 84 subjects were randomized to 1 of 4 groups: plant sterols and exercise, plant sterols, exercise, or control. Cholesterol absorption and synthesis were measured using the single isotope single tracer technique, and deuterium incorporation approach, respectively. RESULTS Total cholesterol and triglyceride levels decreased (P < 0.01) by 7.7% and 11.8%, respectively, while HDL cholesterol levels increased (P < 0.01) by 7.5% in the combination group. Cholesterol absorption was 16% lower (P < 0.01) in the combination group, and 18% lower (P < 0.01) in plant sterol group, relative to control. Exercise had no effect on cholesterol absorption. Non‐significant increases in cholesterol synthesis rates of 63% (0.084 ± 0.014 pools/d), 59% (0.075 ± 0.013 pools/d), 57% (0.072 ± 0.011 pools/d), were observed in the combination, exercise, and plant sterol groups, respectively, relative to control (0.031 ± 0.019 pools/d). LDL cholesterol levels correlated with cholesterol absorption, as represented by the area under the enrichment curve (r = 0.23, P=0.05), and with percent absorption relative to control (r = 0.25, P=0.03). CONCLUSION The combination of plant sterols and exercise improves lipid profiles primarily by suppressing cholesterol absorption.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".