Biomedical subjects

A Dowdy

Publications and source records attributed to A Dowdy.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1998

Lipid altering or antioxidant vitamins for patients with coronary disease and very low HDL cholesterol? The HDL-Atherosclerosis Treatment Study Design.

Evidence supports the idea that substantial benefits may derive from treatments that increase high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (HDL-C), apolipoprotein (apo) A-I, HDL2 (or 2b) or the size of HDL particles with, or without, apo A-II. HDL3 appears to be neutral in terms of coronary artery disease risk, and apo A-II appears to be adverse. Because HDL particles serve as antioxidants in vitro, the hypothesis that low HDL-C reflects an antioxidant deficiency state appears tenable. Based on these observations, a three-year angiographic study was proposed and received funding. Enrollment began in January 1995 and was completed in January 1997.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Moderate dose, three-drug therapy with niacin, lovastatin, and colestipol to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dl in patients with hyperlipidemia and coronary artery disease.

The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a moderate dose, 3-drug lipid-lowering regimen were evaluated among 29 male patients with hyperlipidemia and coronary artery disease. In an initial 12-month phase, regular niacin, 500 mg qid, lovastatin, 20 mg bid, and colestipol, 10 g/bid, were given with dose adjustment for lipid targets and side effects. This was followed by 2 random sequence crossover phases (8 months each) alternating regular niacin with a polygel controlled-release formulation of niacin for use in this regimen. Lipid, lipoprotein, apoprotein, and clinical chemistry determinations were obtained at baseline, during the initial phase, at the 2 crossover phases, and at 6 weeks after therapy. A final questionnaire queried specific side effects and overall preferences. Low-/high-density lipoprotein (LDL/HDL) changed from means of 215/46 mg/dl at baseline, to 94/59 mg/dl after run-in, to 85/52 mg/dl after 8 months of controlled-release niacin, and to 98/56 mg/dl after 8 months of regular niacin (regular niacin vs controlled-release niacin, p <0.005/<0.05). The target of LDL < or = 100 mg/dl was achieved at 8 months by 83% of these patients with controlled-release niacin and by 52% with regular niacin (p <0.01). Compliance was 95% with controlled-release niacin versus 85% with regular niacin (p <0.001). The controlled-release niacin and regular niacin regimens did not differ in terms of uric acid, glucose, insulin, or asparate aminotransferase levels. Overall, 21% of patients called the 3 drugs "very easy" and 72% "fairly easy" to take. The controlled-release niacin-containing regimen was preferred by 21 patients and the regular niacin by 4. In conclusion, these regimens achieve striking lipid changes among hyperlipidemic patients. Controlled release is the preferred niacin preparation in terms of LDL reduction, compliance, patient preference, and achieving the National Cholesterol Education Program guideline of LDL < or = 100 mg/dl. The 2 niacin preparations did not differ in evidence of toxicity.

Cholesterol, LDL↗

PubMed1994

Benefits of lipid-lowering therapy in men with elevated apolipoprotein B are not confined to those with very high low density lipoprotein cholesterol.

OBJECTIVES: Do the benefits of intensive lipid-lowering therapy extend to patients with only borderline or moderately elevated levels of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol? BACKGROUND: The merits of the present LDL cholesterol treatment goal of < or = 100 mg/dl need to be clarified for patients without high levels of LDL cholesterol, particularly for those patients previously classified as having only borderline high (130 to 159 mg/dl) or desirable (101 to 130 mg/dl) levels. METHODS: Disease change and clinical events were examined in LDL cholesterol subgroups in the Familial Atherosclerosis Treatment Study (FATS) trial, a randomized, blinded, quantitative arteriographic comparison of one conventional and two intensive lipid-lowering strategies in men with coronary artery disease, a positive family history and apolipoprotein B > or = 125 mg/dl. The primary end point, disease change per patient, was measured as the mean change in severity of stenosis (delta %SProx) among nine standard proximal segments. RESULTS: Of the 120 patients completing the 30-month protocol, 60 had a baseline LDL cholesterol < 90th percentile (mean LDL cholesterol 152 mg/dl) and 60 > 90th percentile (mean LDL cholesterol 221 mg/dl). Thirty-one patients had levels < 160 mg/dl (mean LDL cholesterol 134 mg/dl) and 89 > 160 mg/dl (mean LDL cholesterol 205 mg/dl). Patients with LDL cholesterol < 90th percentile benefited angiographically from therapy (delta %SProx = -1.5% diameter stenosis [regression] during intensive therapy vs. +2.3% diameter stenosis [progression] during conventional therapy, p < 0.01), as did patients with LDL cholesterol < 160 mg/dl (delta %SProx = -4.2% vs. +3.3% diameter stenosis, p = 0.0001). By comparison, angiographic benefit was less pronounced among those entering with very high LDL cholesterol (delta %SProx = -0.2% vs. +1.9% diameter stenosis, p = 0.07) or with LDL cholesterol > or = 160 mg/dl (delta %SProx = +0.2% vs. +1.6% diameter stenosis, p = 0.13). Intensive therapy resulted in a statistically significant reduction in clinical events only in the subgroup with baseline LDL cholesterol < 90th percentile (2 of 42 vs. 8 of 29 patients initially enrolled, p = 0.01) and a trend toward fewer events in patients with LDL cholesterol < 160 mg/dl (2 of 20 vs. 6 of 15 patients, p = 0.05). No such difference was seen in the higher LDL cholesterol subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment benefit in the FATS trial was not confined to patients with very high levels of LDL cholesterol and was in fact particularly evident in those patients with levels < 160 mg/dl. Such patients should be considered more likely, not less, to benefit from intensive lipid-lowering therapy.

Adult↗

PubMed1991

Alternative fat-restricted diets for hypercholesterolemia and combined hyperlipidemia: feasibility, design, subject recruitment, and baseline characteristics of the dietary alternatives study.

UNLABELLED: Dietary recommendations for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia (HC) emphasize stepwise reductions in fat intake, but there is no agreement on what lower limit is desirable or achievable. These recommendations have applied broadly to persons with HC alone, as well as to those with a combined elevation in triglyceride (TG) and cholesterol, even though they may differ in pathophysiological mechanisms and response. In this paper, we describe the design and feasibility of recruiting and randomizing subjects with HC or combined hyperlipidemia (CHL) to an outpatient dietary intervention study of progressively fat-restricted diets. Diets were designed to contain 30, 26, 22, and 18% of calories from fat; 300, 200, 100, and 100 mg cholesterol/day; and a polyunsaturated/saturated fat ratio of approximately 1.0. Triglyceride and low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) cutpoints were based on the age-specific 75th percentile value. Over 18 months, 8372 men were screened, yielding 320 HC subjects randomized to the four diets and 211 CHL subjects randomized to the first three diets (because of fewer CHL subjects). At baseline, HC and CHL subjects were similar in age, education, lifestyle, dietary intake, and LDL-C, but CHL subjects were heavier, more hyperglycemic, hyperinsulinemic, and hypertensive. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting a large cohort of HC and CHL subjects from an industrial workforce is feasible in a restricted time frame. CHL subjects demonstrate features of the insulin resistance/hypertension syndrome, differing from HC subjects. CHL is sufficiently common relative to HC (2:3) to permit a comparison of dietary responses between the two conditions. Finally, the randomization of HC and CHL subjects to the diets yielded statistically indistinguishable groups, permitting a test of the efficacy of the alternative diets within each hyperlipidemic (HL) category.

Adult↗

PubMed1977

Scrotal thermography.

An easily detectable, ipsilateral increase in scrotal infrared emission leading to a difference of at least 2.8 degrees C (5 degrees F) between abnormal and normal sides was recorded in 15 of 18 patients subsequently found to have an intrascrotal tumor, inflammation, or varicocele. It was impossible to distinguish between these disorders on the basis of thermographic findings. In four patients a significant increase in heat was found in the absence of positive physical findings. One had metastasizing seminoma, two had feminizing interstitial cell tumors, and one had varicocele that resulted in depressed spermatogenesis. Hycroceles tended to produce infrared emission equivalent to or less than that of the contralateral normal side.

Adolescent↗