Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24619460›Full record

ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2014

HDL hypothesis: where do we stand now?

Sayed M Tariq, Mandeep S Sidhu, Peter P Toth, William E Boden

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Liver X receptors and liver physiology.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Molecular basis of disease · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Lipid Profiles in Out-of-Hospital Sudden Unexpected Death.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2018
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. miRNAs and High-Density Lipoprotein metabolism.Biochimica et biophysica acta · 2016
    Review
  11. Micro-RNAs and High-Density Lipoprotein Metabolism.Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology · 2016
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Low High-Density Lipoprotein and Risk of Myocardial Infarction.Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology · 2015
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sayed M TariqDepartment of Medicine, Albany Medical Center, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA, TariqS@mail.amc.edu.
Mandeep S Sidhu
Peter P Toth
William E Boden

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is robust epidemiological evidence dating back to the original Framingham Heart Study from 1977 that indicates an important inverse relationship between high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and risk of incident coronary artery disease (CAD). Despite this body of scientific information demonstrating that low levels of HDL-C are an independent predictor of subsequent CAD events, multiple therapeutic attempts to raise HDL-C levels have failed to demonstrate a consistent reduction in prognostically important endpoints such as death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke. Recently, several major randomized trials using different therapeutic interventions have raised appropriate concerns about our basic understanding of HDL-C and whether the "HDL hypothesis" of lowering cardiovascular events through therapeutic interventions directed at raising HDL-C is a scientifically viable one. While two recent randomized controlled trials (AIM-HIGH and HPS2-THRIVE) failed to show a reduction in cardiovascular events in patients treated to optimally low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) at baseline with extended-release niacin on a background of simvastatin, these clinical trials studied specific populations of stable ischemic heart disease patients. The data from these two contemporary trials cannot be extrapolated to all patient populations, such as those with acute coronary syndromes or myocardial infarction or those with significant residual mixed dyslipidemia not treated with optimal doses of intensive statin therapy, as these patients were excluded by trial design in both studies. Therefore, at the present time, there is insufficient evidence from clinical trials to recommend HDL-targeted therapy for additional event reduction in CAD patients. However, we will review the relevant data from recent major trials (AIM-HIGH, HPS2-THRIVE, ILLUMINATE, and dal-OUTCOMES) and highlight the potential clinical implications of these trials in modern pharmacotherapy as it relates to HDL-C raising and potential cardiovascular event reduction.

Indexed as

Anticholesteremic AgentsCholesterol, HDLCholesterol, LDLClinical Trials as TopicCoronary Artery DiseaseHumansRisk FactorsAnticholesteremic AgentsCholesterol, HDLCholesterol, LDL

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.