ReviewLaboratory medicine2020
Non-High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Guidelines for Cholesterol Lowering in Recent History.
Review in Laboratory medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06765265 (Impact of Atorvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin on 25 Hydroxy Vitamin D Levels in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Impact of Atorvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin on 25 Hydroxy Vitamin D Levels in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of non-HDL-C and depression: a cross-sectional analysis of the NHANES data.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Association between the variability of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with coronary heart disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Assessment of Dyslipidemia, Lipid Ratios, and Atherogenic Indices as Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Prediabetic and Diabetic Subjects.Journal of laboratory physicians · 2022Article
- The U-Shaped Association of Non-High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels With All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality Among Patients With Hypertension.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) released guidelines for treating cholesterol in 1988, 1994, and 2002. After a hiatus, the guidelines were released again in 2013, 2016, 2017, and 2018.
methodsIn this article, I review these guidelines, factors that affected their release, how they evolved, and why recommended treatment targets are reasonable. Also, to aid reader understanding, I briefly discuss biochemical mechanisms and the pathophysiology of beta-lipoproteins, focusing on the importance on non-high-density cholesterol (non-HDLC) in assessing risk and as a target for treatment. The concepts discussed are important to laboratory clinicians because those workers inscribe target values on the reports and may consult with medical staff members.
conclusionsThe newest recommendations, released in 2018, are an extension of the 2017 guidelines that defined non-HDLC as equivalent to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC). For the reasons discussed herein, non-HDLC has advantages over LDLC. Laboratories reporting cholesterol results should include non-HDLC values and cutoffs in their reports.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31147695What 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.