Triglyceride-rich lipoprotein cholesterol and cardiovascular risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The triglyceride-rich apoB lipoprotein particles make up a minority of the apoB particles in plasma. They vary in size, in lipid, and in protein content. Most are small enough to enter the arterial wall and therefore most are atherogenic. But how important a contribution TRL particles make to the total risk created by the apoB lipoproteins remains controversial. A recent Mendelian randomization analysis determined that the cardiovascular risk related to the cholesterol within these apoB particles--the TRL cholesterol--was greater than--and independent of--the risk related to apoB. If correct, these observations have major clinical significance. RECENT FINDINGS: Accordingly, we have analyzed these results in detail. In our view, the independent strength of the association between TRL cholesterol and apoB with cardiovascular risk seems inconsistent with the biological connections between apoB and cholesterol as integral and highly correlated constituents of apoB particles. These results are also inconsistent with other lines of evidence such as the results of the fibrate randomized clinical trials. Moreover, we are also concerned with other aspects of the analysis. SUMMARY: We do not regard the issue as settled. However, this enquiry has led us to a fuller understanding of the determinants of the cholesterol content of the TRL apoB particles and the complex processing of cholesterol amongst the plasma lipoproteins.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".