ReviewCurrent cardiology reports1999
Triglycerides and coronary risk.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of bezafibrate on office, home and ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia.Journal of human hypertension · 2013Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite extensive research, it has not yet been determined whether triglycerides represent an independent risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD). The association has been obscured by imprecision in triglyceride measurements, individual variability, and complex interactions between triglycerides and other lipid-nonlipid parameters. Recent large-scale epidemiologic data indicate that elevated fasting triglycerides represent a useful marker for risk of coronary heart disease. The strong interrelationships of triglyceride level, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) level, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle size with CHD risk suggest a metabolic interaction between the triglyceride-rich and cholesterol ester-rich lipoproteins in increasing risk of myocardial infarction. Limited data from clinical trials suggest that intervention with agents that lower triglycerides and raise HDL tend to reduce event rates among those with elevated and normal LDL levels. Many important issues defining the role of triglycerides in the primary and secondary prevention of CHD need further evaluation. These issues include the degree of risk associated with high triglyceride levels in various age, gender, racial, and ethnic subgroups, and the prognostic significance of postprandial versus fasting triglyceride levels. Further, primary and secondary intervention trials that more specifically address the clinical benefit of reducing triglyceride levels are warranted. Ultimately, screening and treatment guidelines may have to be modified to allow greater focus on fasting-triglyceride levels. Although current guidelines do not mandate screening for elevated triglyceride levels in the general population, obtaining triglyceride levels in those with known CHD or with other risk factors can provide valuable prognostic information and therefore be of aid in therapeutic decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.