ArticleScientific reports2019
CETP, LIPC, and SCARB1 variants in individuals with extremely high high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiple facets of HDLs as modifiable risk factors in stroke-the good, the bad, and the ugly.Journal of lipid research · 2025Review
- Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Deficiency and Hyperalphalipoproteinemia.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2025Review
- Identifying the natural products in the treatment of atherosclerosis by increasing HDL-C level based on bioinformatics analysis, molecular docking, and in vitro experiment.Journal of translational medicine · 2023Article
- A PolynesianHGG advances · 2023Article
- Placental genomics mediates genetic associations with complex health traits and disease.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Role of Genetics in Preventive Cardiology: Focused on Dyslipidemia.Korean circulation journal · 2021Review
- Is a High HDL-Cholesterol Level Always Beneficial?Biomedicines · 2021Review
- Hepatic lipase (LIPC) sequencing in individuals with extremely high and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concentration of high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) in humans is partially determined by genetic factors; however, the role of these factors is incompletely understood. The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence and characteristics of CETP, LIPC, and SCARB1 variants in Korean individuals with extremely high HDL-C levels. We also analysed associations between these variants and cholesterol efflux capacity (CEC), reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1) expression. Of 13,545 participants in the cardiovascular genome cohort, 42 subjects with HDL-C levels >100 mg/dL were analysed. The three target genes were sequenced by targeted next-generation sequencing, the functional effects of detected variants were predicted, and CEC was assessed using a radioisotope and apolipoprotein B-depleted sera. We observed two rare variants of CETP in 13 individuals (rare variant c.A1196G [p.D399G] of CETP was discovered in 12 subjects) and one rare variant of SCARB1 in one individual. Furthermore, all subjects had at least one of four common variants (one CETP and three LIPC variants). Two additional novel CETP variants of unknown frequency were found in two subjects. However, the identified variants did not show significant associations with CEC, ROS generation, or VCAM-1 expression. Our study provides additional insights into the role of genetics in individuals with extremely high HDL-C.
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.