Go to JCI Insight
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All ...
  • Videos
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
    • Video Abstracts
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews ...
    • Complement Biology and Therapeutics (May 2025)
    • Evolving insights into MASLD and MASH pathogenesis and treatment (Apr 2025)
    • Microbiome in Health and Disease (Feb 2025)
    • Substance Use Disorders (Oct 2024)
    • Clonal Hematopoiesis (Oct 2024)
    • Sex Differences in Medicine (Sep 2024)
    • Vascular Malformations (Apr 2024)
    • View all review series ...
  • Viewpoint
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Editorials
    • Commentaries
    • Editor's notes
    • Reviews
    • Viewpoints
    • 100th anniversary
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Video Abstracts
  • In-Press Preview
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Editorials
  • Commentaries
  • Editor's notes
  • Reviews
  • Viewpoints
  • 100th anniversary
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

A comparison of heritable abnormal lipoprotein patterns as defined by two different techniques
D. S. Fredrickson, … , R. I. Levy, F. T. Lindgren
D. S. Fredrickson, … , R. I. Levy, F. T. Lindgren
Published November 1, 1968
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 1968;47(11):2446-2457. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI105927.
View: Text | PDF
Research Article

A comparison of heritable abnormal lipoprotein patterns as defined by two different techniques

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Eight plasma lipoprotein patterns currently employed in attempts to identify different forms of familial dyslipoproteinemia have been compared by two methods. The first (NIH method) is based on paper electrophoretic patterns produced by the four lipoprotein classes obtained by paper electrophoresis in albuminated buffer, coupled with the measurement of the total cholesterol of three of these lipoprotein classes and ascertainment of abnormal flotation of beta-migrating lipoproteins. The second (Donner method) is based on lipoprotein patterns obtained in the analytical ultracentrifuge, adapted for computer analysis and complemented by chemical determination of the concentration of chylomicrons (lipoproteins of Sf° > 400). Pooled samples representing patients with five types of familial hyperlipoproteinemia and three different forms of inherited lipoprotein dificiency were separately analyzed. For six of the eight pools, both methods provided a distinctive lipoprotein pattern in terms of changes in one or more variables. For the remaining two pools, type IV hyperlipoproteinemia and the heterozygote for Tangier disease, both methods provided identical but not unique patterns. The results indicate that lipoprotein analyses obtained by either method may be used interconvertibly in further genetic and other clinical studies.

Authors

D. S. Fredrickson, R. I. Levy, F. T. Lindgren

×

Usage data is cumulative from June 2024 through June 2025.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 141 7
PDF 52 17
Figure 0 19
Scanned page 471 3
Citation downloads 65 0
Totals 729 46
Total Views 775
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2025 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts