The physical, chemical, and receptor binding properties of very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) fractions from familial dysbetalipoproteinemic (dys-beta) subjects, homozygous for apolipoprotein (apo-) E2 (E2/2 phenotype), and subjects with the E3/3 phenotype were studied to gain insights into the pathogenesis of dysbetalipoproteinemia, a disorder characterized by the presence of beta-VLDL in the plasma. Pre-beta-VLDL from dys-beta subjects were larger (27 vs. 17 x 10(6) D) and more triglyceride rich (68 vs. 43% dry weight) than beta-VLDL. Pre-beta-VLDL predominated in the Sf greater than 100 flotation fraction, whereas beta-VLDL predominated in the Sf 20-60 fraction. Because lipolysis converts large VLDL (Sf greater than 100) in vivo to smaller, more cholesteryl ester-rich VLDL (Sf 20-60), it is likely that pre-beta-VLDL are precursors of beta-VLDL. Although beta-VLDL were not found in type V hyperlipidemic E3/3 subjects, they were induced by intravenous heparinization, suggesting that lipolysis of pre-beta-VLDL in vivo can result in beta-VLDL formation. Similarly, heparinization of a dys-beta subject produced more beta-VLDL, at the expense of pre-beta-VLDL. The pre-beta-VLDL from normolipidemic and type V hyperlipidemic E3/3 subjects, respectively, had 90 and 280 times the affinity for the apo-B,E(LDL) receptor than did the pre-beta-VLDL from dys-beta subjects. Heparin-induced beta-VLDL from type V hyperlipidemic subjects had a sixfold higher binding affinity than did heparin-induced beta-VLDL from dys-beta subjects. These data suggest that pre-beta-VLDL from E2/2 subjects interact poorly with lipoprotein receptors in vivo, decreasing their receptor-mediated clearance and increasing their conversion to beta-VLDL during lipolytic processing.
D A Chappell
Usage data is cumulative from May 2025 through May 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 339 | 19 |
| 111 | 9 | |
| Figure | 0 | 2 |
| Scanned page | 652 | 6 |
| Citation downloads | 163 | 0 |
| Totals | 1,265 | 36 |
| Total Views | 1,301 | |
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.