Targeting the vasculature in cardiometabolic disease

Obesity has reached epidemic proportions and is a major contributor to insulin resistance (IR) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Importantly, IR and T2D substantially increase the risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. Although there are successful approaches to maintain glycemic control, there continue to be increased CV morbidity and mortality associated with metabolic disease. Therefore, there is an urgent need to understand the cellular and molecular processes that underlie cardiometabolic changes that occur during obesity so that optimal medical therapies can be designed to attenuate or prevent the sequelae of this disease. The vascular endothelium is in constant contact with the circulating milieu; thus, it is not surprising that obesity-driven elevations in lipids, glucose, and proinflammatory mediators induce endothelial dysfunction, vascular inflammation, and vascular remodeling in all segments of the vasculature. As cardiometabolic disease progresses, so do pathological changes in the entire vascular network, which can feed forward to exacerbate disease progression. Recent cellular and molecular data have implicated the vasculature as an initiating and instigating factor in the development of several cardiometabolic diseases. This Review discusses these findings in the context of atherosclerosis, IR and T2D, and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. In addition, novel strategies to therapeutically target the vasculature to lessen cardiometabolic disease burden are introduced.

During the fed state, intestine-derived apolipoprotein B-48–containing (apoB48-containing) chylomicrons are the primary source of dietary lipids. Conversely, during the fasting state, liver-derived apoB100-rich VLDL particles carry endogenous lipids to peripheral tissues (17). Chylomicrons and VLDL are triglyceride-rich lipoprotein (TRL) particles that distribute energy-rich free fatty acids (FFAs) to metabolically active tissues including the heart, AT, and skeletal muscle. Liberation of FFAs from TRLs occurs via the interaction of TRLs with lipoprotein lipase (LPL) present on the luminal surface of microvascular capillary endothelial cells (ECs) (18). LPL is transported from subendothelial space to the luminal surface of ECs through its interaction with the capillary EC protein glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchored HDL-binding protein 1 (GPIHBP1). GPIHBP1 is essential in anchoring LPL on the surface of capillaries during intravascular lipolysis of triglycerides (TGs) into FFAs and glycerol. Following lipolysis, FFAs can traverse the endothelium passively (flip-flop mechanism), through vectorial transport, or via receptor-mediated uptake. Many of these pathways of lipoprotein metabolism and FFA uptake mechanisms in ECs were recently reviewed in detail (19, 20).

The influx of TRL-derived FFAs in metabolic tissues appears within minutes after injection of labeled chylomicron/VLDL-TG and is largely dependent on LPL activity (21, 22); loss-of-function GPIHBP1 or LPL mutations lead to severe hypertriglyceridemia (23–25). LPL activity is negatively regulated by angiopoietin-like proteins (ANGPTL3/4/8) (26–29). ANGPTLs are secretory proteins that inhibit LPL directly by catalyzing the dissociation of catalytically active LPL homodimers into inactive monomers (30). These proteins are highly expressed in metabolic tissues and have recently emerged as modulators of LPL-mediated lipid partitioning under differing nutritional states. Genome-wide association, exome sequencing, and DiscovEHR human genetic studies associate loss-of-function mutations in ANGPTL3 or ANGPTL4 with lower plasma TGs and LDL, lower fasting blood glucose, increased insulin sensitivity, and reduced CVD incidence (31–36). Despite being secreted proteins, ANGPTL3 and ANGPTL4’s effects appear to be tissue specific. ANGPTL3 is exclusively expressed in the human and mouse liver, and ANGPTL3 deletion in mice leads to increased post-heparin plasma LPL and endothelial lipase activity, reduced levels of circulating TGs and LDL, and reduced atherosclerosis (37–40). ANGPTL4 is expressed and secreted from AT (both white and brown) and rodent and primate liver (32, 41–43). Recent studies showed that ANGPTL4 deficiency in either adipocytes (Ad-KO mice) or hepatocytes (Hmut [hepatocyte mutant] mice) lowers plasma TG and cholesterol levels by increasing LPL or hepatic lipase activity, respectively (43, 44). As a result, Ad-KO and Hmut mice are protected from atherosclerosis during hyperlipidemic conditions, despite no observable changes in systemic inflammation. In addition, Hmut mice have improved glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity, and reduced adiposity during high-fat diet–induced (HFD-induced) obesity. Together, these studies indicate that targeting ANGPTL4 in a tissue-specific manner can improve cardiometabolic health in rodent models of atherosclerosis and T2D. Although ANGPTL4 is expressed in ECs and is induced by hypoxia, the EC-specific role of ANGPTL4 in TG partitioning and atherosclerosis has yet to be studied.

Chylomicron remnants and atherosclerosis. After peripheral lipolysis, a major portion of remnant chylomicrons still contain substantial amounts of lipid. Chylomicron remnants found in human atheromas may contribute to atherosclerosis through several mechanisms (45–47). First, studies have reported that completely lipolyzed chylomicron remnants (~50 nm diameter) can contain approximately 40-fold greater cholesterol than LDL (48, 49). Second, a recent study revealed that the aorta of LPL-deficient mice can take up chylomicron remnants via a receptor-mediated pathway and transfer FFAs from endocytosed chylomicrons to lipid droplets in ECs (50). These findings are interesting, as the aortic endothelium has negligible levels of GPIHBP1 and low levels of LPL. Although provocative, the role of chylomicron remnant particles in atherosclerosis requires further study.

Endothelium-mediated LDL uptake and atherosclerosis progression. It is appreciated that LDL uptake, entry, and retention in the vessel wall are a key initiating factor in development of atherosclerosis (51). Early studies demonstrated that LDL’s passage from blood into and across the endothelium occurs via an LDL receptor–independent mechanism and may involve non-clathrin-coated vesicles, namely caveolae (52). Interestingly, genetic loss of the caveolae coat protein, caveolin-1 (CAV-1), reduces LDL uptake into ECs and retards atherosclerosis in the presence of elevated TG and cholesterol levels (53, 54). Moreover, recent investigation has begun to uncover novel mechanisms of receptor-mediated LDL transcytosis during the initiation and progression of atherosclerosis (55).

A study combining genome-wide siRNA screening with high-content confocal imaging identified activin A receptor–like type 1 (ALK1) as a novel low-affinity, high-capacity receptor for LDL particles in ECs that promote LDL transcytosis during hyperlipidemic conditions (56). Accordingly, EC-specific ALK1 depletion in mice reduced LDL uptake into vessels in vivo. More recently, the high-affinity HDL-binding receptor scavenger receptor class B type 1 (SR-B1) was identified as a novel player in LDL transcytosis in the aortic endothelium, and EC-specific deficiency of SR-B1 reduces atherosclerosis in atheroprone mice (57, 58). Interestingly, ALK1 (59) and SR-B1 have been localized in caveolae, suggesting that ALK1, SR-B1, and CAV-1 may mediate LDL transcytosis across endothelium in a complementary way. Indeed, future studies and therapeutic strategies are needed to test this supposition as a novel mechanism to treat atherosclerosis in conjunction with lipid-lowering approaches.

ApoM at the interface of lipoprotein metabolism and vascular function. ApoM is synthesized in the liver and binds primarily to HDL and to a lesser extent to VLDL, LDL, and chylomicrons (60). ApoM-containing HDL is atheroprotective and promotes cholesterol efflux from macrophages and HDL formation (61). Recent studies have shown that apoM/HDL serves as a major molecular chaperone in plasma for the biologically active lipid sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) (62). S1P promotes EC barrier function and endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) activation and protects against inflammation and atherosclerosis, and many of these actions are mediated physiologically by the apoM/S1P complex (63). In addition to its vascular actions, apoM/S1P also regulates insulin sensitivity and TG metabolism in AT, as discussed elsewhere in detail (63, 64).

Figure 1 summarizes the major findings regarding the relationship between EC lipoprotein processing and atherosclerosis to date.

Figure 1

Schematic overview of systemic lipoprotein metabolism. Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins such as VLDL and chylomicron (CM) are produced by the liver and gut, respectively, which distribute FFAs to various metabolic tissue(s) like muscle, heart, and adipose by interacting with the GPIHBP1-bound endothelial LPL enzyme. LPL activity is regulated by secreted ANGPTL3, ANGPTL4, and ANGPTL8. In subsequent peripheral lipolysis, VLDL and CM are converted into intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL) and chylomicron remnants (CMRs). In the liver, HL liberates FFAs from IDL and converts them into LDL particles. HL activity is inhibited by ANGPTL4. The liver clears a large portion of remnants (LDL and CMRs) via hepatic receptors (LDLR and LRP1). Under hyperlipidemic conditions, some fractions of LDL or CMRs accumulate and oxidize in the subendothelial space of a large artery, which is subsequently taken up by macrophages that develop into foam cells within atherosclerotic plaques. Liver-derived Apo M complexed with sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) on HDL may modulate atherosclerotic plaque progression, first by interacting with endothelial S1P receptors (S1PRs) to maintain vascular integrity and suppress inflammation (lower left), and second, by reducing cholesterol overload of macrophages through the promotion of cholesterol efflux (center of figure).

Statin therapy combined with other cholesterol-lowering strategies is the mainstay in reducing risk of atherosclerosis and its sequelae. However, some individuals still demonstrate a high risk of atherosclerotic incidents despite low to moderate levels of LDL cholesterol. Thus, “residual risk” in these patients implies that mechanisms beyond cholesterol are important in atherosclerosis disease progression (65). Epidemiologically, TRLs are strong independent predictors of atherosclerotic CVD (66). Consistently, lowering circulating TG levels with icosapent ethyl (purified eicosapentaenoic acid [EPA]) in patients on a maximally tolerated dose of statins significantly reduced risk of CV events/death by 25% compared with placebo in CVD patients or patients with diabetes who had elevated fasting TGs (135–499 mg/dL) and one additional risk factor (67). These results provide supporting evidence that perturbed TG production and clearance, as is common in obesity and T2D, increase CVD susceptibility. However, these results may be unique to purified icosapent, as other large studies do not support use of mixed omega-3 carboxylic acids for reducing major CV events in high-risk patients (68). In addition to its TG-lowering actions, EPA improves flow-mediated dilation (an index of endothelial function) by reducing inflammation and enhancing NO bioavailability in patients with mild hypertriglyceridemia (69).

Considering the role of the microvasculature in mediating TG clearance, pharmacological targets that promote vascular partitioning of TGs have been explored in preclinical models of cardiometabolic disease and in clinical trials (70–73). Along these lines, a recent phase II clinical trial demonstrated that an antisense oligonucleotide targeting hepatic ANGPTL3 (vupanorsen) led to reduction in circulating TGs and LDL in healthy and T2D individuals (71). In addition, the FDA recently approved evinacumab (trade name Evkeeza), a monoclonal antibody against human ANGPTL3, following phase III clinical trial results demonstrating impressive (49%) reduction in circulating LDL in patients with severe, inherited forms of hypercholesterolemia (72, 73). Although exciting, whether targeting of ANGPTL3 to enhance TRL clearance can reduce CV events in patients on lipid-lowering therapy with atherosclerotic CVD remains undetermined.

In addition to indirect effects of EC processing of TRL, emerging evidence suggests that the microvasculature has a direct role in maintaining the function of highly metabolic organs under normal physiological conditions. Importantly, disruption of microvascular function has been implicated in disease progression of obesity-induced IR and T2D. Below, we summarize recent studies supporting these concepts.

The vasculature and adipose tissue expansion. The relationship between the vasculature network and AT under normal physiology and diet-induced obesity has been well described (74, 75). Briefly, AT is highly vascularized with a dense capillary network that is essential for tissue homeostasis. During adipogenesis, the vasculature can deliver stem cells to AT as well as mobilize adipocyte progenitor cells and preadipocytes from mural and perivascular compartments, respectively (76–78). Therefore, the vasculature supports AT homeostasis and directly contributes to AT expansion.

During initial stages of energy surplus, AT expands to store excess energy in the form of TGs. Physiological or “healthy” AT expansion is a coordinated response that involves remodeling of extracellular matrix (ECM) and angiogenesis to allow for adequate adipocyte expansion and maintain oxygen/nutrient delivery, respectively. Local hypoxia is a potent stimulus for angiogenesis leading to release of several proangiogenic factors from adipocytes through the action of HIF1α (79, 80). Of the angiogenic factors released from adipocytes, VEGFA/VEGFR2 signaling accounts for the most angiogenic activity (81). Endothelial VEGFA/VEGFR2 signaling, through paracrine action on progenitor cells, is also important in “beiging” of superficial white AT (WAT) to resemble more metabolically active brown AT (BAT) in rodent models of obesity (82). HIF1α signaling was also implicated in the activation of local immune cells, as well as the recruitment of circulating immune cells to AT (80). Importantly, macrophages facilitate ECM remodeling, removal of apoptotic or necrotic cells, and VEGFA secretion to further support angiogenesis. Under states of chronic energy surplus, AT expansion becomes pathological and is characterized by impaired angiogenesis, unresolved inflammation, tissue fibrosis, and an accumulation of necrotic/apoptotic cells. In addition, inflamed AT is insulin resistant, and thus exhibits elevated levels of intracellular lipolysis during the fasting and fed states that contribute to ectopic lipid deposition, inflammation, and IR in other tissues.

Considering that angiogenesis is essential for AT expansion, targeting of neovascularization at different stages of diet-induced obesity has been explored. Several early studies demonstrated that inhibiting angiogenesis in AT resulted in AT regression and improvements in metabolic function in rodent models of advanced obesity (83, 84). Recent studies challenge this, since physiological angiogenesis during the progression of diet-induced obesity protects AT from hypoxia and inflammation, ectopic lipid deposition, and systemic IR (81). Most studies (85, 86), but not all (87), support these latter findings. Specifically, deleting Vegfa from adipocytes promoted poor AT vascularization during high-fat feeding in mice and was associated with AT inflammation and worse systemic IR in comparison with wild-type littermates (86). Reciprocally, VEGFA overexpression in both BAT and WAT rendered protection against diet-induced AT inflammation and systemic metabolic derangements (81, 85, 86). More recently, adenoviral gene delivery of Vegfb was demonstrated to attenuate AT inflammation and prevent systemic IR without influencing body weight in mice fed a HFD (88). More interestingly, delayed Vegfb gene delivery impeded progression of metabolic dysfunction in mice exposed to HFD for 2 months before gene delivery. Mechanistically, VEGFB’s beneficial effects occur through its interaction with the decoy receptor VEGFR1, thus improving VEGFA’s binding affinity for VEGFR2. Considering dichotomous outcomes depending on the timing of intervention, translation of preclinical findings to humans will be challenging, especially since patients with IR are often already overweight or obese.

Endothelium-derived NO, blood flow, and metabolism. The endothelium elegantly balances the release of vasodilatory and vasoconstrictive substances to allow for tight regulation of vascular resistance, and thus tissue perfusion. The most well characterized of these factors is endothelium-derived NO, which promotes cGMP signaling, resulting in dilation of vascular smooth muscle in resistance vessels (89). Logically, blood flow mediates oxygen and nutrient delivery to metabolic tissues at rest, during exercise, and during the postprandial period (90, 91). Along these lines, eNOS-KO mice, deficient in the main enzyme generating circulating NO, display impaired skeletal muscle glucose and FFA uptake during an acute exercise bout, which is directly related to reduction in tissue blood perfusion (90). Interestingly, insulin signaling via endothelial insulin receptors (INSRs) leads to eNOS activation and subsequent recruitment of skeletal muscle capillaries during the postprandial period, which contributes to insulin and glucose delivery to skeletal muscle (92). Several studies have demonstrated impairments in endothelial insulin signaling during high-fat feeding in rodents (93–95). Interestingly, endothelial IR may occur prior to systemic IR in mice exposed to a HFD (93), and accumulating evidence suggests that perturbations in endothelial insulin signaling can directly contribute to whole-body IR (92, 96). Mechanistically, some groups have argued that impairments in skeletal muscle capillary recruitment secondary to reduced eNOS activity are largely responsible for this relationship, while others have proposed impaired insulin delivery through the nonfenestrated endothelium to underlying parenchyma cells as an alternative mechanism (see below).

In addition to regulating blood flow, NO can have both short- and long-term effects on systemic metabolism. For example, NO/cGMP signaling contributes to skeletal (97) and heart (98) muscle glucose uptake through partial activation of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK), which then leads to glucose transporter 4 (GLUT-4) translocation to the cellular membrane of myocytes. Interestingly, in ECs, AMPK activation was demonstrated to activate eNOS (99, 100), thus supporting a bidirectional relationship between energy sensing and NO signaling. In addition, NO can toggle the enzymatic activity of key metabolic proteins through posttranslational mechanisms. Specifically, cysteine-S-nitrosylation at Cys²³⁸ in liver very long acyl-CoA dehydrogenase (VLCAD), a crucial enzyme in β-oxidation of fatty acids, improves its catalytic efficiency (101). Furthermore, NO was demonstrated to exert long-term effects on energy homeostasis through the regulation of key energy sensors and transcription factors. In skeletal muscle, together with AMPK, NO/cGMP signaling increases the activity of PPARγ coactivator 1α (PGC1α) (102), a transcription factor that stimulates mitochondrial biogenesis and oxidative metabolism (103). Consistently, eNOS-KO mice have defective skeletal muscle β-oxidation (104) and reduced activity of several key enzymes involved in oxidative metabolism (90). In AT, endothelium-derived NO was demonstrated to stimulate PPARα and -γ gene transcription, which was associated with increased metabolic activity and differentiation (105). As follows, eNOS overexpression protects mice from weight gain during high-fat feeding (105). However, due to the complexities of NO biology, the translational aspect of these studies is challenging (see below).

Transendothelial insulin transport. Along with blood flow and tissue perfusion, transendothelial transport (TET) of insulin contributes to insulin delivery to underlying parenchymal cells in tissue where nonfenestrated endothelial networks exist. Notably, intact INSR signaling appears to be of paramount importance for mediating TET in both cell culture and animal models. In vitro, inhibiting downstream components of the insulin signaling pathway dramatically impairs insulin uptake in aortic ECs (106). In rodent models, endothelium-specific INSR deletion slows the kinetics of insulin delivery to underlying peripheral tissue in certain areas of the brain, which predisposes animals to overeating and systemic IR when they are challenged with HFD (96). Interestingly, evidence suggests that CAV-1 is involved in apical-to-basolateral transport of insulin, and this process is partially dependent on intact insulin signaling (107). A recent study demonstrated that endothelial NOTCH signaling reduces CAV-1 levels as well as other proteins involved in caveolae formation during high-fat feeding (108). In this study, endothelium-specific NOTCH deletion rendered protection from HFD-induced IR in skeletal muscle and AT. Interestingly, CAV-1 was demonstrated to stabilize INSRs in AT (109); thus, caveolae formation may not be necessary for insulin transport in the endothelium. In addition to receptor-mediated processes, others have proposed that insulin TET occurs via a nonsaturable, INSR-independent fluid-phase process (110, 111). Indeed, it is possible that both receptor-dependent and -independent mechanisms are operative in vivo, as endothelium-specific INSR deletion only delays insulin signaling kinetics, rather than eliciting complete loss of insulin responsiveness in parenchymal tissue following insulin injection (96).

Endothelium-mediated fatty acid uptake. As mentioned above, FFAs can be liberated from TRLs via local endothelial LPL activity. In addition, lipolysis of adipocyte TGs leads to elevated circulating FFAs bound to albumin. As with insulin delivery, FFAs must traverse the endothelium before delivery to underlying parenchymal cells in tissues with nonfenestrated capillaries. Once believed to be a completely passive process, recent in vivo evidence has bolstered the idea that active/facilitated endothelial transport is also operative in delivery of FFAs to underlying parenchymal cells. For example, mice with endothelium-specific CD36 deletion have reduced tissue FFA uptake during fasting, which in turn renders protection against HFD-induced glucose intolerance and IR in comparison with control littermate mice (112). Alternatively, studies using NanoSIMS technology (CAMECA) to visualize the uptake of chylomicron-derived FFAs across capillaries demonstrated an extremely rapid uptake process that was not influenced by CD36 deficiency (22). At first glance, these studies seem contradictory, but they support early observations that LPL-mediated VLDL hydrolysis or albumin-bound FFA fractions utilize CD36 for FFA uptake, whereas chylomicron hydrolysis and subsequent FFA transport to cardiac tissue are not mediated by CD36 (113). The mechanisms determining the route of FFA entry are unclear, but may arise from differences in receptor affinities, concentrations of FFA in its various bound states, or the receptor density of other EC fatty acid–binding proteins (FABPs). Along these lines, the fatty acid chaperone proteins FABP4 and FABP5 are abundantly expressed in the capillary endothelium of cardiac and skeletal muscle, and deleting or downregulating these proteins impairs cardiac and skeletal muscle FFA uptake (114, 115). As the heart largely relies on FFAs to meet its large energetic demands, impairing endothelium-mediated cardiac FFA transport/uptake has been associated with cardiac hypertrophy and dysfunction (115, 116). Beyond chaperone proteins, recent work has demonstrated that fatty acid transport protein 4 (FATP4) is localized to the endoplasmic reticulum in ECs and mediates cellular uptake of FFAs via acyl-CoA synthetase (ACS) activity and mitochondrial ATP production (117). These studies align with the hypothesis of vectorial transport (118) (or acylation) in that FFA “activation” via the ATP-dependent covalent addition of a CoA group by ATP-dependent ACS proteins decreases the intracellular FFA concentration and drives FFA uptake by the law of mass action. FATP3 and other acyl-CoA synthetases (acyl-CoA synthetase long chain family member 1 [ACSL1]) expressed in capillary ECs likely mediate FFA uptake via similar mechanisms (117).

Early studies demonstrated that PPARγ regulates an EC transcriptional program (FABP4, CD36, and GPIHBP1) that largely dictates tissue uptake and clearance of FFAs during fasting and the postprandial period (119). More interesting was the fact that endothelium-specific PPARγ-KO mice were protected from HFD-induced IR, despite increased liver adiposity. Other studies show that the transcription factors mesenchyme homeobox 2 (Meox2) and transcription factor 15 (Tcf15) regulate the expression of CD36, FATBP4, FATBP5, and GPIHBP1, but not FATP3 and FATP4, in cardiac capillary ECs (115). As expected, partial deletion of Meox2 and Tcf15 reduced cardiac FFA uptake and promoted cardiac dysfunction and fibrosis in mice. Similarly, disrupting NOTCH signaling in ECs severely blunted cardiac uptake of FFAs secondary to downregulation of endothelial lipase, FABP4, FABP5, and CD36, while increasing the expression of the LPL inhibitor ANGPTL4 (116). The reduction in cardiac FFA uptake led to a compensatory increase in glucose uptake, cardiac hypertrophy, and a dramatic reduction in systolic performance.

Although FFA uptake through different pathways is well described, the fate of FFAs once internalized is less clear. Recent data showed that ECs contain the machinery to transiently form and turn over lipid droplets (LDs) in response to FFA loading in both micro- and macrovascular vessels (120). In microvascular ECs, LD synthesis buffers lipotoxicity mainly through the actions of diacylglycerol O-acyltransferase 1 (DGAT1). Alternatively, LD hydrolysis, which is rate-limited by adipose triglyceride lipase (ATGL), provides FFAs for mitochondrial oxidation or delivery to parenchymal cells (120). Interestingly, EC lipolysis of LDs is negatively regulated by CAV-1 in microvessels (121). To date, the function of LD metabolism in large-vessel ECs remains unclear. Global ATGL loss can trigger EC dysfunction in large vessels (122), suggesting that LD turnover may also be important in large-vessel EC homeostasis.

Interestingly, hormone peptides (apelin [ref. 123]), growth factors (VEGFB [ref. 124], angiopoietin-2 [ref. 125]), and metabolites (3-hydroxybutyrate [ref. 127]) released from metabolic tissues can alter the expression level or localization of several FFA transporters, demonstrating coordinated regulation between the endothelium, the circulating milieu, and the underlying parenchymal cells. For example, 3-hydroxyisobutyrate (3-HIB) is a metabolite released from excessive branched-chain amino acid metabolism in skeletal muscle of genetically diabetic mice. In a paracrine manner, 3-HIB promotes transendothelial FFA transport via activation of FATP4, and consequently contributes to muscle lipid accumulation and IR in skeletal muscle (126). Conversely, angiopoietin-2 released from superficial AT (SAT) during nutrient overload prevents ectopic lipid accumulation in other insulin-sensitive tissues by activating endothelial α₅β₁ integrin signaling to enhance FFA uptake in SAT. Notably, several of these factors have other physiological functions besides influencing EC-mediated FFA uptake, such as the role of VEGFB in AT angiogenesis (88). Thus, targeting these factors may not be therapeutically efficacious in comorbid disease states, and deeper molecular understanding of signaling events that dictate aberrant EC FFA delivery in a tissue- and disease-specific context is needed.

Figure 2 summarizes the major findings of the role of the microvasculature in mediating metabolic homeostasis.

Figure 2

Schematic overview of endothelial microvasculature in fatty acid uptake and systemic metabolism. FFAs, either bound to albumin, or derived from LPL-mediated hydrolysis of circulating TRLs, traverse the endothelium by passive diffusion (flip-flop), receptor-mediated uptake (via CD36), and/or vectorial transport (via FATP4). FATP3 and ACSL1 and other acyl-CoA synthases likely facilitate vectorial transport, and mitochondrial ATP also appears to be important. ECs contain machinery to esterify FFAs into LDs, a DGAT1-dependent process that may protect ECs from ER stress. Conversely, LDs may be hydrolyzed, a largely ATGL-dependent process that liberates FFAs for mitochondrial oxidation and/or parenchymal delivery. Circulating bioactive molecules such as apelin can regulate FABP4 transcription, and bioactive molecules released from muscle cells, including 3-HIB and VEGFB, can regulate FATP3 and FATP4 expression. In addition, adipose tissue–derived ANGPT2 can activate endothelial α5β1 signaling to trigger FFA transport via CD36 and FATP3 into superficial adipose tissue. Adipose tissue–derived VEGFA signals via EC VEGFR2 to support both WAT and BAT angiogenesis and also plays a role in WAT “beiging” via EC VEGFR2 signaling and PDGF-CC release, which in turn activates preadipocytes to transform into BAT. In addition to FFA uptake, ECs participate in systemic metabolism. EC INSR signaling mediates insulin delivery to parenchymal cells via phosphorylation and activation of eNOS, leading to the production of NO, a potent vasodilator. INSR signaling also cooperates with CAV-1 to facilitate insulin TET via caveolae-dependent and -independent mechanisms. Insulin TET may also occur via a nonsaturable, INSR-independent fluid-phase process. In addition to insulin TET, NO increases blood flow and tissue perfusion to facilitate glucose and FFA delivery to parenchymal cells. Beyond blood flow, NO can partially activate AMPK via cGMP signaling, leading to GLUT-4 translocation to the plasma membranes of muscle cells. Moreover, via cysteine-S-nitrosylation reactions, NO modulates several key metabolic enzymes. Last, NO/cGMP signaling participates in the long-term regulation of mitochondrial metabolism via interactions with AMPK and PGC1α, a master transcriptional regulator of mitochondrial biogenesis and oxidative metabolism.

HF is a major public health problem affecting approximately 6 million people in the United States. Community-based studies indicate that roughly 50% of HF patients present with the clinical diagnosis of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), while the remaining patient population present with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (127, 128). While clinical symptoms and mortality are similar among patients with HFpEF and HFrEF, these HF phenotypes display pronounced differences in patient demographics and underlying pathophysiology of left ventricular (LV) remodeling (129, 130). Specifically, myocardial infarction is less common in HFpEF compared with HFrEF, whereas older age, female sex, hypertension, obesity, and T2D are more common in HFpEF (131). In terms of cardiac structure/function, HFpEF is characterized by diastolic dysfunction, LV hypertrophy, myocyte stiffening, fibrosis, and microvascular dysfunction/rarefaction (131). Despite the increase in HFpEF incidence (132), there are limited data to support effective therapies for metabolically driven HF, partly because of a lack of mechanistic understanding of the cellular and molecular pathways that underpin this complex clinical syndrome.

The microvasculature in HFpEF. Myocardial perfusion is largely dictated by coronary vascular resistance at the level of the microvasculature (133). Thus, microvascular dysfunction can lead to perfusion-demand mismatch and endocardial ischemia, even in the presence of angiographically normal coronary arteries (134). Invasive studies indicate that up to 80% of HFpEF patients have coronary microvascular dysfunction (135). Importantly, endocardial ischemia due to microvascular dysfunction can impair both active and passive relaxation of the ventricle during diastole. Specifically, myocyte relaxation is an energy-dependent process involving cytosolic calcium uptake by sarcoplasmic/endoplasmic reticulum calcium-ATPase (SERCA); thus a reduction in myocardial perfusion can impair this phase of diastole (136). On the other hand, chronic ischemia is associated with fibrosis development and increased passive stiffness of the heart (137, 138). Several studies have demonstrated that coronary microvascular dysfunction is associated with lower diastolic relaxation velocities and elevated filling pressures in HFpEF patients, either at rest or during exertion (139–142). In addition, the magnitude of cardiac fibrosis in HFpEF patients is associated with impaired diastolic relaxation (143), and some studies show that microvascular rarefaction is directly associated with cardiac fibrosis in these patients (138).

Epidemiologically, circulating inflammatory cytokines, obesity, and T2D portend greater risk of developing incident HFpEF than HFrEF (144, 145). Endomyocardial tissue biopsy samples from HFpEF patients show evidence of microvascular inflammation/oxidative stress, as well as increased numbers of immune cell infiltrates (CD3⁺, CD11a⁺, CD45⁺) (146, 147). Since microvascular disease is present in most HFpEF patients (135), impacts LV dysfunction/remodeling (142, 148, 149), and independently predicts all-cause mortality (140), it has been hypothesized that microvascular dysfunction caused by systemic inflammation mediates pathophysiological cardiac remodeling in HFpEF (150, 151).

Beyond initiating immune cell recruitment to the vasculature, inflammatory cytokines contribute to endothelial dysfunction by creating an imbalance between antiinflammatory/vasodilatory factors (i.e., decreased NO) and inflammatory/vasoconstrictive factors (i.e., increased endothelin-1) (152, 153). Multiple lines of evidence suggest that the reduction in endothelium-derived NO is particularly important in driving both systemic and local CV disturbances during HFpEF progression. In HFpEF patients, NO bioavailability is reduced compared with that in control subjects (154), possibly owing to eNOS uncoupling (148). Experimental data show that aged NO-deficient mice display hypertension (155, 156) and other features of clinical HFpEF (157), including systemic microvascular rarefaction (heart, skeletal muscle), LV hypertrophy, myocardial fibrosis, and exercise intolerance (90, 158, 159). In addition to its role in vasomotor tone and blood flow regulation, endothelium-derived NO activates cardiomyocyte cGMP and protein kinase G (PKG) to elicit antihypertrophic and antifibrotic actions during cardiac stress (160–162). Along these lines, lower myocardial PKG signaling was associated with larger and stiffer cardiomyocytes in HFpEF patients (163, 164). PKG can also modulate the stiffness of the giant cytoskeleton protein titin, which is responsible for early diastolic recoil and late diastolic distensibility of cardiomyocytes (150). In both rat and human samples, increased resting cardiomyocyte tension is attributable to hypophosphorylation of the N2B isoform of titin because of low PKG activity (163, 164). Given these preclinical and clinical observations, there have been efforts to target NO/cGMP/PKG signaling in HFpEF patients. Despite some positive results in smaller clinical trials (165, 166), therapies targeting this axis in HFpEF patients have reported mostly negative or neutral outcomes in larger clinical trials (167, 168). At a mechanistic level, this suggests that impaired NO signaling is a consequence of systemic inflammation and, therefore, attempts to increase NO bioavailability without also targeting inflammation may be insufficient to produce clinical improvement.

Recent findings suggest that integrated vascular, immune cell, and cardiomyocyte responses to multiple metabolic/hemodynamic perturbations may be of more importance in driving the HFpEF syndrome than the microvasculature alone. For example, a “two-hit” model of hypertension (induced by the NO synthase inhibitor l-NAME) and HFD-induced obesity/IR (169) was the first mouse model that largely recapitulated several aspects of the clinical HFpEF phenotype, whereas each intervention alone only elicited varying degrees of diastolic dysfunction and LV remodeling. Similarly, a multiple-hit model of chronic salt water, unilateral nephrectomy, and aldosterone infusion (SAUNA mice) elicited diastolic dysfunction, cardiac inflammation, and fibrosis (170). In SAUNA mice, macrophages recruited from bone marrow and spleen to the heart induced collagen deposition via TGF-β1 release and subsequent activation of fibroblasts and myofibroblasts. Notably, cardiac microvascular ECs were also activated and expressed TGF-β1 in SAUNA mice, thus indicating immune-vascular synergy in driving cardiac inflammation and collagen deposition.

Large-artery stiffness in HFpEF. Several studies have demonstrated that large-artery stiffening is present in HFpEF patients to levels beyond normal age-related changes, either at rest or during exertion (171–175). Notably, aortic stiffening directly increases afterload as peak blood pressure is increased to overcome the reduction in aortic compliance (176). In addition, stiffer arteries generate faster pulse waves, shifting the arrival of reflective waves from diastole to late systole, which increases afterload while decreasing diastolic perfusion pressures (176). Together, these changes stimulate LV remodeling (177) and accentuate diastolic dysfunction (178). Furthermore, ventricular-arterial coupling dynamics are worsened in HFpEF patients during exercise, with insufficient changes in arterial compliance and increases in wave reflection being strongly associated with elevations in LV filling pressure and depressed cardiac output reserve (175). Interestingly, a component of aortic stiffness and ventricular-arterial coupling dysfunction may be due to impaired endothelium-dependent vasodilation in HFpEF patients, as sodium nitrite improved resting and exercise arterial load in a small clinical study (175).

The lymphatic system in HFpEF. The lymphatic system is responsible for returning most of the fluid filtered through semipermeable capillaries into the interstitial space back to the central venous system (179). Excess interstitial fluid accumulation (edema) is a result of an imbalance between fluid efflux from the vasculature and clearance by the lymphatic system. Edema in the periphery, abdominal viscera, and lungs is a characteristic feature of advanced HF that drives symptoms and adverse outcomes (180). Several hemodynamic and cellular mechanisms contribute to tissue edema in HF and were recently described in detail elsewhere (180, 181). In summary, vasoconstriction, sodium reabsorption, and microvascular dysfunction (rarefaction/activation) increase central venous pressure (CVP) that drives excess filtration. As the lymphatic network is a low-pressure system, elevation in CVP also impairs lymphatic drainage back into the central venous system. Impaired hemodynamic responses during exercise, such as elevated right- and left-sided pressures and impaired right ventricular–pulmonary artery coupling, exacerbate fluid filtration/clearance mismatch to promote pulmonary congestion, as demonstrated in approximately half of stable HFpEF patients (182). Moreover, several features of the lymphatic system are dysfunctional in HF patients, including impaired lymph vessel integrity/compliance, lymph valve dysfunction, impaired lymphangiogenesis, and lymph vessel rarefaction (181). Notably, a recent study showed lymph vessel rarefaction in skin biopsies from HFpEF patients, with residual lymph vessels being dilated and exhibiting less expression of markers of lymphatic differentiation and function in comparison with age-matched control participants (183). These changes in lymph vessel number/morphology were associated with impaired peripheral lymphatic drainage in HFpEF patients. Taken together, therapeutic targeting of the lymphatic system may offer additional benefits to standard therapy in the treatment of HFpEF. Likewise, stimulating lymphangiogenesis via coadministration of recombinant VEGFC156S during chronic angiotensin II (Ang II) infusion in mice largely attenuated cardiac remodeling; reduced cardiac inflammation, fibrosis, and chronic elevations in blood pressure; and improved kidney function in comparison with animals receiving Ang II alone (184). It will be exciting to test VEGFC156S therapy in models more closely aligning with HFpEF.

Current approaches to treat metabolic HFpEF. Considering the preclinical modeling strategies in the previous section, therapies targeting both metabolic and vascular stress may prove more efficacious than single-target therapies. Along these lines, the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin was shown to reduce plasma glucose as well as blood pressure in hypertensive patients with T2D (185). Physiologically, empagliflozin stimulates osmotic natriuresis and reduces blood volume in stable, chronic HF patients with T2D (183). Recent and exciting findings from the phase III clinical trial EMPEROR-PRESERVE demonstrated that empagliflozin reduces the risk of the composite endpoint of CVD death or hospitalization for HF by 21% in adults with HFpEF with or without diabetes compared with placebo-treated patients (187). Interestingly, empagliflozin attenuated many features of clinical HFpEF in a three-hit mouse model; this was attributed to lessening inflammasome activation by increasing β-hydroxybutyrate and improving of mitochondrial function (188). Thus, beneficial mechanisms beyond reductions in blood volume are likely to occur with empagliflozin therapy, which may include improvement in vascular function and attenuation of proinflammatory signaling in microvasculature (189).

Targeting the VEGFA/VEGFR2 signaling axis in cardiometabolic disease. VEGFA/VEGFR2 signaling, microvascular density, and tissue perfusion are markedly reduced in several organs in aged mice (190). A recent study demonstrated, using transgenic mice or gene therapy, that a modest VEGFA increase in aged mice to levels observed in younger mice was able to alleviate age-related declines in systemic metabolism, reduce inflammation, and extend lifespan (190). Since age-related changes in the microvasculature are accelerated in cardiometabolic diseases, therapeutic targeting of the VEGFA/VEGFR2 axis may abrogate several features of cardiometabolic diseases. However, to date, evidence supporting the efficacy of VEGFA gene transfer in patients with ischemic disease has been limited (191) because of suboptimal vector delivery (192). Use of modified mRNA overcomes these issues, and modified mRNA encoding VEGFA has shown promise in preclinical models of post-infarct remodeling (193, 194) and diabetic wound healing (195), as well as small clinical trials in patients with T2D (193). Notably, intradermal delivery of modified mRNA encoding VEGFA was well tolerated in T2D patients and led to local increases in VEGFA protein and skin blood flow for up to 14 days after delivery. Currently, a phase IIa clinical trial has shown that direct injection of AZD8601, a synthetic mRNA encoding VEGFA₁₆₅, into the myocardium of HFrEF patients with modestly reduced EF (30%–50%) improves EF, reduces circulating N-terminal pro–brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and improves other patient-reported outcomes (197, 198). The future holds promise for further development and use of this technology in patients with metabolic disease and HFpEF.

The inability of AT to store excess nutrients in the form of TGs leads to local AT inflammation and ectopic fat deposition in other metabolic tissues. Fat deposition in non-adipose tissue is strongly associated with IR and proinflammatory signaling, both of which impair tissue clearance of circulating TG-rich lipoproteins and result in a state of systemic inflammation. Together, IR and systemic inflammation enhance CVD risk and the incidence of HFpEF. Deeper understanding of the vasculature’s complex bidirectional role in the pathophysiology of atherosclerosis and cardiometabolic disease will reveal new opportunities and insights into whether EC dysfunction is a cause or a consequence of the disease pathogenesis. Importantly, treating underlying metabolic/inflammatory pathways in addition to improving vascular function may be the most efficacious treatment strategy to quell the progression of cardiometabolic disease.

This work was supported by NIH grant R35HL139945; by NIH grant R01DK125492 and an American Heart Association Merit Award (to WCS); and by NIH grant K01DK124441 (to NEB).

Address correspondence to: William C. Sessa, Vascular Biology and Therapeutics Program, Department of Pharmacology, Yale University School of Medicine, Amistad Research Building, 10 Amistad Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA. Phone: 203.737.2291; Email: william.sessa@yale.edu.

Conflict of interest: WCS is cofounder of CavtheRx, a member of the scientific advisory board of Alucent and Antibe Therapeutics, and a consultant for the Internal Medicine Research Unit at Pfizer.

Copyright: © 2022, Boutagy et al. This is an open access article published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Reference information: J Clin Invest. 2022;132(6):e148556.https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI148556.

1. Hales CM, et al. Prevalence of obesity among adults and youth: United States, 2015-2016. NCHS Data Brief. 2017;(288):1–8.
   View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
2. Cawley J, Meyerhoefer C. The medical care costs of obesity: an instrumental variables approach. J Health Econ. 2012;31(1):219–230.
   View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
3. Wilson PW, et al. Overweight and obesity as determinants of cardiovascular risk: the Framingham experience. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(16):1867–1872.
   View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
4. Seidell JC. Obesity, insulin resistance and diabetes—a worldwide epidemic. Br J Nutr. 2000;83(s1):S5–S8.
   View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
5. Winkler G, et al. Elevated serum TNF-alpha level as a link between endothelial dysfunction and insulin resistance in normotensive obese patients. Diabet Med. 1999;16(3):207–211.
   View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
6. Soehnlein O, Libby P. Targeting inflammation in atherosclerosis—from experimental insights to the clinic. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2021;(8):589–610.
   View this article via: CrossRef Google Scholar
7. Ding Y, et al. Effects of simulated hyperglycemia, insulin, and glucagon on endothelial nitric oxide synthase expression. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2000;279(1):E11–E17.
   View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
8. Du XL, et al. Hyperglycemia inhibits endothelial nitric oxide synthase activity by posttranslational modification at the Akt site. J Clin Invest. 2001;108(9):1341–1348.
   View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
9. El-Osta A, et al. Transient high glucose causes persistent epigenetic changes and altered gene expression during subsequent normoglycemia. J Exp Med. 2008;205(10):2409–2417.
   View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
10. Zeiher AM, et al. Endothelium-mediated coronary blood flow modulation in humans. Effects of age, atherosclerosis, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension. J Clin Invest. 1993;92(2):652–662.
    View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
11. Lundman P, et al. Mild-to-moderate hypertriglyceridemia in young men is associated with endothelial dysfunction and increased plasma concentrations of asymmetric dimethylarginine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38(1):111–116.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
12. Ceriello A, et al. Evidence for an independent and cumulative effect of postprandial hypertriglyceridemia and hyperglycemia on endothelial dysfunction and oxidative stress generation: effects of short- and long-term simvastatin treatment. Circulation. 2002;106(10):1211–1218.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
13. Yudkin JS, et al. C-reactive protein in healthy subjects: associations with obesity, insulin resistance, and endothelial dysfunction: a potential role for cytokines originating from adipose tissue? Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 1999;19(4):972–978.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
14. Verma S, et al. Resistin promotes endothelial cell activation: further evidence of adipokine-endothelial interaction. Circulation. 2003;108(6):736–740.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
15. McVeigh GE, Cohn JN. Endothelial dysfunction and the metabolic syndrome. Curr Diab Rep. 2003;3(1):87–92.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
16. Pi X, et al. Emerging roles of vascular endothelium in metabolic homeostasis. Circ Res. 2018;123(4):477–494.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
17. Toth PP. Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins as a causal factor for cardiovascular disease. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2016;12:171–183.
    View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
18. Wang H, Eckel RH. Lipoprotein lipase: from gene to obesity. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2009;297(2):271–288.
    View this article via: PubMed CrossRef Google Scholar
19. Abumrad NA, et al. Endothelial cell receptors in tissue lipid uptake and metabolism. Circ Res. 2021;128(3):433–450.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
20. Tall AR, et al. Addressing dyslipidemic risk beyond LDL cholesterol. J Clin Invest. 2022;132(1):e148559.
    View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
21. He C, et al. NanoSIMS imaging reveals unexpected heterogeneity in nutrient uptake by brown adipocytes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2018;504(4):899–902.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
22. He C, et al. NanoSIMS analysis of intravascular lipolysis and lipid movement across capillaries and into cardiomyocytes. Cell Metab. 2018;27(5):1055–1066.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
23. Davies BS, et al. GPIHBP1 is responsible for the entry of lipoprotein lipase into capillaries. Cell Metab. 2010;12(1):42–52.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
24. Young SG, et al. GPIHBP1 and lipoprotein lipase, partners in plasma triglyceride metabolism. Cell Metab. 2019;30(1):51–65.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
25. Reina M, et al. Molecular basis of familial chylomicronemia: mutations in the lipoprotein lipase and apolipoprotein C-II genes. J Lipid Res. 1992;33(12):1823–1832.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
26. Backhed F, et al. The gut microbiota as an environmental factor that regulates fat storage. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(44):15718–15723.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
27. Koishi R, et al. Angptl3 regulates lipid metabolism in mice. Nat Genet. 2002;30(2):151–157.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
28. Shimizugawa T, et al. ANGPTL3 decreases very low density lipoprotein triglyceride clearance by inhibition of lipoprotein lipase. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(37):33742–33748.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
29. Zhu P, et al. Angiopoietin-like 4: a decade of research. Biosci Rep. 2012;32(3):211–219.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
30. Kristensen KK, et al. Unfolding of monomeric lipoprotein lipase by ANGPTL4: insight into the regulation of plasma triglyceride metabolism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020;117(8):4337–4346.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
31. Dijk W, Kersten S. Regulation of lipoprotein lipase by Angptl4. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2014;25(3):146–155.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
32. Dewey FE, et al. Inactivating variants in ANGPTL4 and risk of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(12):1123–1133.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
33. Liu DJ, et al. Exome-wide association study of plasma lipids in >300,000 individuals. Nat Genet. 2017;49(12):1758–1766.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
34. Kersten S. Angiopoietin-like 3 in lipoprotein metabolism. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2017;13(12):731–739.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
35. Lim GB. Dyslipidaemia: ANGPTL3: a therapeutic target for atherosclerosis. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2017;14(7):381.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
36. Gusarova V, et al. Genetic inactivation of ANGPTL4 improves glucose homeostasis and is associated with reduced risk of diabetes. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):2252.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
37. Conklin D, et al. Identification of a mammalian angiopoietin-related protein expressed specifically in liver. Genomics. 1999;62(3):477–482.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
38. Fujimoto K, et al. Angptl3-null mice show low plasma lipid concentrations by enhanced lipoprotein lipase activity. Exp Anim. 2006;55(1):27–34.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
39. Adam RC, et al. Angiopoietin-like protein 3 governs LDL-cholesterol levels through endothelial lipase-dependent VLDL clearance. J Lipid Res. 2020;61(9):1271–1286.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
40. Dewey FE, et al. Genetic and pharmacologic inactivation of ANGPTL3 and cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(3):211–221.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
41. Mandard S, et al. The fasting-induced adipose factor/angiopoietin-like protein 4 is physically associated with lipoproteins and governs plasma lipid levels and adiposity. J Biol Chem. 2006;281(2):934–944.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
42. Kersten S, et al. Characterization of the fasting-induced adipose factor FIAF, a novel peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor target gene. J Biol Chem. 2000;275(37):28488–28493.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
43. Singh AK, et al. Hepatocyte-specific suppression of ANGPTL4 improves obesity-associated diabetes and mitigates atherosclerosis in mice. J Clin Invest. 2021;131(17):e140989.
    View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
44. Aryal B, et al. Absence of ANGPTL4 in adipose tissue improves glucose tolerance and attenuates atherogenesis. JCI Insight. 2018;3(6):e97918.
    View this article via: JCI Insight CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
45. Chait A, et al. Remnants of the triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Diabetes. 2020;69(4):508–516.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
46. Wilhelm MG, Cooper AD. Induction of atherosclerosis by human chylomicron remnants: a hypothesis. J Atheroscler Thromb. 2003;10(3):132–139.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
47. Mamo JC, et al. Retention of chylomicron remnants by arterial tissue; importance of an efficient clearance mechanism from plasma. Atherosclerosis. 1998;141(suppl 1):S63–S69.
    View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
48. Proctor SD, et al. Arterial permeability and efflux of apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins assessed by in situ perfusion and three-dimensional quantitative confocal microscopy. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004;24(11):2162–2167.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
49. Fielding CJ. Lipoprotein receptors, plasma cholesterol metabolism, and the regulation of cellular free cholesterol concentration. FASEB J. 1992;6(13):3162–3168.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
50. Cabodevilla AG, et al. Eruptive xanthoma model reveals endothelial cells internalize and metabolize chylomicrons, leading to extravascular triglyceride accumulation. J Clin Invest. 2021;131(12):e145800.
    View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
51. Tabas I, et al. Subendothelial lipoprotein retention as the initiating process in atherosclerosis: update and therapeutic implications. Circulation. 2007;116(16):1832–1844.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
52. Vasile E, et al. Visualization of the binding, endocytosis, and transcytosis of low-density lipoprotein in the arterial endothelium in situ. J Cell Biol. 1983;96(6):1677–1689.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
53. Fernández-Hernando C, et al. Genetic evidence supporting a critical role of endothelial caveolin-1 during the progression of atherosclerosis. Cell Metab. 2009;10(1):48–54.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
54. Frank PG, et al. Genetic ablation of caveolin-1 confers protection against atherosclerosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004;24(1):98–105.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
55. Zhang X, et al. Endothelial transcytosis of lipoproteins in atherosclerosis. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2018;5:130.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
56. Kraehling JR, et al. Genome-wide RNAi screen reveals ALK1 mediates LDL uptake and transcytosis in endothelial cells. Nat Commun. 2016;7(1):1–15.
    View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
57. Armstrong SM, et al. A novel assay uncovers an unexpected role for SR-BI in LDL transcytosis. Cardiovasc Res. 2015;108(2):268–277.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
58. Huang L, et al. SR-B1 drives endothelial cell LDL transcytosis via DOCK4 to promote atherosclerosis. Nature. 2019;569(7757):565–569.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
59. Tao B, et al. BMP-9 and LDL crosstalk regulates ALK-1 endocytosis and LDL transcytosis in endothelial cells. J Biol Chem. 2020;295(52):18179–18188.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
60. Xu N, Dahlbäck Br. A novel human apolipoprotein (apoM). J Biol Chem. 1999;274(44):31286–31290.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
61. Christoffersen C, Nielsen LB. Apolipoprotein M: bridging HDL and endothelial function. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2013;24(4):295–300.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
62. Christoffersen C, et al. Endothelium-protective sphingosine-1-phosphate provided by HDL-associated apolipoprotein M. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(23):9613–9618.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
63. Mattisson IY, Christoffersen C. Apolipoprotein M and its impact on endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in the cardiovascular system. Atherosclerosis. 2021;334:76–84.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
64. Hla T, Dannenberg AJ. Sphingolipid signaling in metabolic disorders. Cell Metab. 2012;16(4):420–434.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
65. Matsuura Y, et al. Highlighting residual atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2019;39(1):e1–e9.
    View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
66. Nordestgaard BG. Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: new insights from epidemiology, genetics, and biology. Circ Res. 2016;118(4):547–563.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
67. Bhatt DL, et al. Cardiovascular risk reduction with icosapent ethyl for hypertriglyceridemia. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(1):11–22.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
68. Nicholls SJ, et al. Effect of high-dose omega-3 fatty acids vs corn oil on major adverse cardiovascular events in patients at high cardiovascular risk: the STRENGTH randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324(22):2268–2280.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
69. Fukumoto K, et al. Predictors of endothelial function improvement in patients with mild hypertriglyceridemia without evidence of coronary artery disease treated with purified eicosapentaenoic acid. Atherosclerosis. 2020;309:27–32.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
70. Graham MJ, et al. Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of ANGPTL3 antisense oligonucleotides. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(3):222–232.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
71. Gaudet D, et al. Vupanorsen, an N-acetyl galactosamine-conjugated antisense drug to ANGPTL3 mRNA, lowers triglycerides and atherogenic lipoproteins in patients with diabetes, hepatic steatosis, and hypertriglyceridaemia. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(40):3936–3945.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
72. Rosenson RS, et al. Evinacumab in patients with refractory hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(24):2307–2319.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
73. Raal FJ, et al. Evinacumab for homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(8):711–720.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
74. Cao Y. Angiogenesis and vascular functions in modulation of obesity, adipose metabolism, and insulin sensitivity. Cell Metab. 2013;18(4):478–489.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
75. Crewe C, et al. The ominous triad of adipose tissue dysfunction: inflammation, fibrosis, and impaired angiogenesis. J Clin Invest. 2017;127(1):74–82.
    View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
76. Gavin KM, et al. De novo generation of adipocytes from circulating progenitor cells in mouse and human adipose tissue. FASEB J. 2016;30(3):1096–1108.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
77. Tang W, et al. White fat progenitor cells reside in the adipose vasculature. Science. 2008;322(5901):583–586.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
78. Gupta RK, et al. Zfp423 expression identifies committed preadipocytes and localizes to adipose endothelial and perivascular cells. Cell Metab. 2012;15(2):230–239.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
79. Lee YS, et al. Increased adipocyte O2 consumption triggers HIF-1α, causing inflammation and insulin resistance in obesity. Cell. 2014;157(6):1339–1352.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
80. Halberg N, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha induces fibrosis and insulin resistance in white adipose tissue. Mol Cell Biol. 2009;29(16):4467–4483.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
81. Sun K, et al. Dichotomous effects of VEGF-A on adipose tissue dysfunction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(15):5874–5879.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
82. Seki T, et al. Endothelial PDGF-CC regulates angiogenesis-dependent thermogenesis in beige fat. Nat Commun. 2016;7(1):1–16.
    View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
83. Kolonin MG, et al. Reversal of obesity by targeted ablation of adipose tissue. Nat Med. 2004;10(6):625–632.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
84. Brakenhielm E, et al. Angiogenesis inhibitor, TNP-470, prevents diet-induced and genetic obesity in mice. Circ Res. 2004;94(12):1579–1588.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
85. Elias I, et al. Adipose tissue overexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor protects against diet-induced obesity and insulin resistance. Diabetes. 2012;61(7):1801–1813.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
86. Sung H-K, et al. Adipose vascular endothelial growth factor regulates metabolic homeostasis through angiogenesis. Cell Metab. 2013;17(1):61–72.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
87. Lu X, et al. Resistance to obesity by repression of VEGF gene expression through induction of brown-like adipocyte differentiation. Endocrinology. 2012;153(7):3123–3132.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
88. Robciuc MR, et al. VEGFB/VEGFR1-induced expansion of adipose vasculature counteracts obesity and related metabolic complications. Cell Metab. 2016;23(4):712–724.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
89. Förstermann U, Sessa WC. Nitric oxide synthases: regulation and function. Eur Heart J. 2012;33(7):829–837.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
90. Lee-Young RS, et al. Endothelial nitric oxide synthase is central to skeletal muscle metabolic regulation and enzymatic signaling during exercise in vivo. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2010;298(5):R1399–R1408.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
91. Clark MG, et al. Blood flow and muscle metabolism: a focus on insulin action. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2003;284(2):E241–E258.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
92. Kubota T, et al. Impaired insulin signaling in endothelial cells reduces insulin-induced glucose uptake by skeletal muscle. Cell Metab. 2011;13(3):294–307.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
93. Kim F, et al. Vascular inflammation, insulin resistance, and reduced nitric oxide production precede the onset of peripheral insulin resistance. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2008;28(11):1982–1988.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
94. Kim F, et al. Toll-like receptor-4 mediates vascular inflammation and insulin resistance in diet-induced obesity. Circ Res. 2007;100(11):1589–1596.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
95. Jiang ZY, et al. Characterization of selective resistance to insulin signaling in the vasculature of obese Zucker (fa/fa) rats. J Clin Invest. 1999;104(4):447–457.
    View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
96. Konishi M, et al. Endothelial insulin receptors differentially control insulin signaling kinetics in peripheral tissues and brain of mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(40):E8478–E8487.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
97. Higaki Y, et al. Nitric oxide increases glucose uptake through a mechanism that is distinct from the insulin and contraction pathways in rat skeletal muscle. Diabetes. 2001;50(2):241–247.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
98. Li J, et al. Role of the nitric oxide pathway in AMPK-mediated glucose uptake and GLUT4 translocation in heart muscle. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2004;287(5):E834–E841.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
99. Zhang Y, et al. AMP-activated protein kinase is involved in endothelial NO synthase activation in response to shear stress. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2006;26(6):1281–1287.
    View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
100. Levine YC, et al. Agonist-modulated regulation of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) in endothelial cells. Evidence for an AMPK -> Rac1 -> Akt -> endothelial nitric-oxide synthase pathway. J Biol Chem. 2007;282(28):20351–20364.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
101. Doulias P-T, et al. Nitric oxide regulates mitochondrial fatty acid metabolism through reversible protein S-nitrosylation. Sci Signal. 2013;6(256):rs1.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
102. Lira VA, et al. Nitric oxide and AMPK cooperatively regulate PGC-1α in skeletal muscle cells. J Physiol. 2010;588(18):3551–3566.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
103. Ventura-Clapier R, et al. Transcriptional control of mitochondrial biogenesis: the central role of PGC-1alpha. Cardiovasc Res. 2008;79(2):208–217.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
104. Le Gouill E, et al. Endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) knockout mice have defective mitochondrial β-oxidation. Diabetes. 2007;56(11):2690–2696.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
105. Sansbury BE, et al. Overexpression of endothelial nitric oxide synthase prevents diet-induced obesity and regulates adipocyte phenotype. Circ Res. 2012;111(9):1176–1189.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
106. Wang H, et al. Insulin signaling stimulates insulin transport by bovine aortic endothelial cells. Diabetes. 2008;57(3):540–547.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
107. Wang H, et al. Caveolin-1 is required for vascular endothelial insulin uptake. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2011;300(1):E134–E144.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
108. Hasan SS, et al. Endothelial Notch signaling controls insulin transport in muscle. EMBO Mol Med. 2020;12(4):e09271.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
109. Cohen AW, et al. Caveolin-1-deficient mice show insulin resistance and defective insulin receptor protein expression in adipose tissue. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2003;285(1):C222–C235.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
110. Williams IM, et al. Insulin exits skeletal muscle capillaries by fluid-phase transport. J Clin Invest. 2018;128(2):699–714.
     View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
111. Steil GM, et al. Transendothelial insulin transport is not saturable in vivo. No evidence for a receptor-mediated process. J Clin Invest. 1996;97(6):1497–1503.
     View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
112. Son N-H, et al. Endothelial cell CD36 optimizes tissue fatty acid uptake. J Clin Invest. 2018;128(10):4329–4342.
     View this article via: JCI CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
113. Bharadwaj KG, et al. Chylomicron- and VLDL-derived lipids enter the heart through different pathways: in vivo evidence for receptor- and non-receptor-mediated fatty acid uptake. J Biol Chem. 2010;285(49):37976–37986.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
114. Iso T, et al. Capillary endothelial fatty acid binding proteins 4 and 5 play a critical role in fatty acid uptake in heart and skeletal muscle. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2013;33(11):2549–2557.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
115. Coppiello G, et al. Meox2/Tcf15 heterodimers program the heart capillary endothelium for cardiac fatty acid uptake. Circulation. 2015;131(9):815–826.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
116. Jabs M, et al. Inhibition of endothelial notch signaling impairs fatty acid transport and leads to metabolic and vascular remodeling of the adult heart. Circulation. 2018;137(24):2592–2608.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
117. Ibrahim A, et al. Local mitochondrial ATP production regulates endothelial fatty acid uptake and transport. Cell Metab. 2020;32(2):309–319.e7.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
118. Overath P, et al. Fatty acid degradation in Escherichia coli. An inducible acyl-CoA synthetase, the mapping of old-mutations, and the isolation of regulatory mutants. Eur J Biochem. 1969;7(4):559–574.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
119. Kanda T, et al. PPARgamma in the endothelium regulates metabolic responses to high-fat diet in mice. J Clin Invest. 2008;119(1):110–124:36233.
     View this article via: JCI PubMed Google Scholar
120. Kuo A, et al. Lipid droplet biogenesis and function in the endothelium. Circ Res. 2017;120(8):1289–1297.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
121. Kuo A, et al. Caveolin-1 regulates lipid droplet metabolism in endothelial cells via autocrine prostacyclin-stimulated, cAMP-mediated lipolysis. J Biol Chem. 2018;293(3):973–983.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
122. Schrammel A, et al. Endothelial dysfunction in adipose triglyceride lipase deficiency. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2014;1841(6):906–917.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
123. Hwangbo C, et al. Endothelial APLNR regulates tissue fatty acid uptake and is essential for apelin’s glucose-lowering effects. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9(407):eaad4000.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
124. Hagberg CE, et al. Vascular endothelial growth factor B controls endothelial fatty acid uptake. Nature. 2010;464(7290):917–921.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
125. Bae H, et al. Angiopoietin-2-integrin α5β1 signaling enhances vascular fatty acid transport and prevents ectopic lipid-induced insulin resistance. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):1–17.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
126. Jang C, et al. A branched-chain amino acid metabolite drives vascular fatty acid transport and causes insulin resistance. Nat Med. 2016;22(4):421–426.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
127. Bhatia RS, et al. Outcome of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in a population-based study. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(3):260–269.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
128. Bursi F, et al. Systolic and diastolic heart failure in the community. JAMA. 2006;296(18):2209–2216.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
129. Udelson JE. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2011;124(21):e540–e543.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
130. Gladden JD, et al. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Pflugers Arch. 2014;466(6):1037–1053.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
131. Pfeffer MA, et al. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in perspective. Circ Res. 2019;124(11):1598–1617.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
132. Owan TE, et al. Trends in prevalence and outcome of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(3):251–259.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
133. Chilian WM. Coronary microcirculation in health and disease. Summary of an NHLBI workshop. Circulation. 1997;95(2):522–528.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
134. Camici PG, Crea F. Coronary microvascular dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(8):830–840.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
135. Rush CJ, et al. Prevalence of coronary artery disease and coronary microvascular dysfunction in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6(10):1130–1143.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
136. Zile MR, Brutsaert DL. New concepts in diastolic dysfunction and diastolic heart failure. Part II: causal mechanisms and treatment. Circulation. 2002;105(12):1503–1508.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
137. Dostal DE, Watson LE. Understanding diastolic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: choosing the right model. Hypertension. 2006;47(5):830–832.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
138. Mohammed SF, et al. Coronary microvascular rarefaction and myocardial fibrosis in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2015;131(6):550–559.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
139. Ahmad A, et al. Coronary microvascular dysfunction is associated with exertional haemodynamic abnormalities in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail. 2021;23(5):765–772.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
140. Taqueti VR, et al. Coronary microvascular dysfunction and future risk of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(10):840–849.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
141. Yang JH, et al. Endothelium-dependent and independent coronary microvascular dysfunction in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail. 2020;22(3):432–441.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
142. Shah SJ, et al. Prevalence and correlates of coronary microvascular dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: PROMIS-HFpEF. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(37):3439–3450.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
143. Kasner M, et al. Diastolic tissue Doppler indexes correlate with the degree of collagen expression and cross-linking in heart failure and normal ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57(8):977–985.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
144. Kalogeropoulos A, et al. Inflammatory markers and incident heart failure risk in older adults: the Health ABC (Health, Aging, and Body Composition) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(19):2129–2137.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
145. Savji N, et al. The association of obesity and cardiometabolic traits with incident HFpEF and HFrEF. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6(8):701–709.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
146. Westermann D, et al. Cardiac inflammation contributes to changes in the extracellular matrix in patients with heart failure and normal ejection fraction. Circ Heart Fail. 2011;4(1):44–52.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
147. Franssen C, et al. Myocardial microvascular inflammatory endothelial activation in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. JACC Heart Fail. 2016;4(4):312–324.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
148. Borlaug BA, et al. Global cardiovascular reserve dysfunction in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(11):845–854.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
149. Obokata M, et al. Myocardial injury and cardiac reserve in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(1):29–40.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
150. Paulus WJ, Tschöpe C. A novel paradigm for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: comorbidities drive myocardial dysfunction and remodeling through coronary microvascular endothelial inflammation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(4):263–271.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
151. Schiattarella GG, et al. Metabolic inflammation in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Cardiovasc Res. 2021;117(2):423–434.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
152. Widlansky ME, et al. The clinical implications of endothelial dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42(7):1149–1160.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
153. Pober JS, Sessa WC. Evolving functions of endothelial cells in inflammation. Nat Rev Immunol. 2007;7(10):803–815.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
154. Chirinos JA, et al. Heart failure, left ventricular remodeling, and circulating nitric oxide metabolites. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(10):e004133.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
155. Duplain H, et al. Insulin resistance, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension in mice lacking endothelial nitric oxide synthase. Circulation. 2001;104(3):342–345.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
156. Ribeiro MO, et al. Chronic inhibition of nitric oxide synthesis. A new model of arterial hypertension. Hypertension. 1992;20(3):298–303.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
157. Houstis NE, et al. Exercise intolerance in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosing and ranking its causes using personalized O₂ pathway analysis. Circulation. 2018;137(2):148–161.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
158. Flaherty MP, et al. eNOS deficient mice develop progressive cardiac hypertrophy with altered cytokine and calcium handling protein expression. Cardiovasc Toxicol. 2007;7(3):165–177.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
159. Kubis N, et al. Role of microvascular rarefaction in the increased arterial pressure in mice lacking for the endothelial nitric oxide synthase gene (eNOS3pt-/- ). J Hypertens. 2002;20(8):1581–1587.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
160. Hsu S, et al. Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibition blocks pressure overload-induced cardiac hypertrophy independent of the calcineurin pathway. Cardiovasc Res. 2009;81(2):301–309.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
161. Ranek MJ, et al. PKG1-modified TSC2 regulates mTORC1 activity to counter adverse cardiac stress. Nature. 2019;566(7743):264–269.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
162. Koitabashi N, et al. Cyclic GMP/PKG-dependent inhibition of TRPC6 channel activity and expression negatively regulates cardiomyocyte NFAT activation. Novel mechanism of cardiac stress modulation by PDE5 inhibition. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2010;48(4):713–724.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
163. Borbély A, et al. Hypophosphorylation of the stiff N2B titin isoform raises cardiomyocyte resting tension in failing human myocardium. Circ Res. 2009;104(6):780–786.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
164. van Heerebeek L, et al. Low myocardial protein kinase G activity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2012;126(7):830–839.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
165. Borlaug BA, et al. Inhaled sodium nitrite improves rest and exercise hemodynamics in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circ Res. 2016;119(7):880–886.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
166. Filippatos G, et al. Patient-reported outcomes in the SOluble guanylate Cyclase stimulatoR in heArT failurE patientS with PRESERVED ejection fraction (SOCRATES-PRESERVED) study. Eur J Heart Fail. 2017;19(6):782–791.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
167. Redfield MM, et al. Effect of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibition on exercise capacity and clinical status in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2013;309(12):1268–1277.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
168. Borlaug BA, et al. Effect of inorganic nitrite vs placebo on exercise capacity among patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the INDIE-HFpEF randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;320(17):1764–1773.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
169. Schiattarella GG, et al. Nitrosative stress drives heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Nature. 2019;568(7752):351–356.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
170. Hulsmans M, et al. Cardiac macrophages promote diastolic dysfunction. J Exp Med. 2018;215(2):423–440.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
171. Melenovsky V, et al. Cardiovascular features of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction versus nonfailing hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy in the urban Baltimore community: the role of atrial remodeling/dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(2):198–207.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
172. Desai AS, et al. Central aortic stiffness is increased in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. J Card Fail. 2009;15(8):658–664.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
173. Tartière-Kesri L, et al. Increased proximal arterial stiffness and cardiac response with moderate exercise in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(5):455–461.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
174. Weber T, et al. Pulsatile hemodynamics in patients with exertional dyspnea: potentially of value in the diagnostic evaluation of suspected heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(18):1874–1883.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
175. Reddy YN, et al. Arterial stiffening with exercise in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(2):136–148.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
176. Schiffrin EL. Vascular stiffening and arterial compliance. Implications for systolic blood pressure. Am J Hypertens. 2004;17(12 pt 2):39S–48S.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
177. Ohyama Y, et al. Association of aortic stiffness with left ventricular remodeling and reduced left ventricular function measured by magnetic resonance imaging: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9(7):e004426.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
178. Borlaug BA, et al. Impact of arterial load and loading sequence on left ventricular tissue velocities in humans. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50(16):1570–1577.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
179. Breslin JW, et al. Lymphatic vessel network structure and physiology. Compr Physiol. 2018;9(1):207–299.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
180. Itkin M, et al. Pathophysiology of the lymphatic system in patients with heart failure: JACC State-of-the-Art Review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;78(3):278–290.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
181. Fudim M, et al. Lymphatic dysregulation in patients with heart failure: JACC Review Topic of the Week. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;78(1):66–76.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
182. Reddy YN, et al. The haemodynamic basis of lung congestion during exercise in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(45):3721–3730.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
183. Rossitto G, et al. Reduced lymphatic reserve in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(24):2817–2829.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
184. Song L, et al. Lymphangiogenic therapy prevents cardiac dysfunction by ameliorating inflammation and hypertension. Elife. 2020;9:e58376.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
185. Tikkanen I, et al. Empagliflozin reduces blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(3):420–428.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
186. Griffin M, et al. Empagliflozin in heart failure: diuretic and cardiorenal effects. Circulation. 2020;142(11):1028–1039.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
187. Anker SD, et al. Empagliflozin in heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2021;385:1451–1461.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
188. Deng Y, et al. Targeting mitochondria-inflammation circuit by β-hydroxybutyrate mitigates HFpEF. Circ Res. 2021;128(2):232–245.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
189. Juni RP, et al. Cardiac microvascular endothelial enhancement of cardiomyocyte function is impaired by inflammation and restored by empagliflozin. JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2019;4(5):575–591.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
190. Grunewald M, et al. Counteracting age-related VEGF signaling insufficiency promotes healthy aging and extends life span. Science. 2021;373(6554):eabc8479.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
191. Giacca M, Zacchigna S. VEGF gene therapy: therapeutic angiogenesis in the clinic and beyond. Gene Ther. 2012;19(6):622–629.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
192. Ylä-Herttuala S, et al. Angiogenic gene therapy in cardiovascular diseases: dream or vision? Eur Heart J. 2017;38(18):1365–1371.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
193. Carlsson L, et al. Biocompatible, purified VEGF-A mRNA improves cardiac function after intracardiac injection 1 week post-myocardial infarction in swine. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2018;9:330–346.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
194. Zangi L, et al. Modified mRNA directs the fate of heart progenitor cells and induces vascular regeneration after myocardial infarction. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31(10):898–907.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
195. Sun N, et al. Modified VEGF-A mRNA induces sustained multifaceted microvascular response and accelerates diabetic wound healing. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):1–11.
     View this article via: PubMed Google Scholar
196. Gan L-M, et al. Intradermal delivery of modified mRNA encoding VEGF-A in patients with type 2 diabetes. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):1–9.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
197. Anttila V, et al. Synthetic mRNA encoding VEGF-A in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: design of a phase 2a clinical trial. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. 2020;18:464–472.
     View this article via: CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar
198. Anttila V, et al. mRNA Encoding VEGF-A in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Results of the Phase 2a EPICCURE Clinical Trial. Presented at Late-Breaking Science Abstracts and Featured Science Abstracts from the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions 2021 and Late-Breaking Abstracts in Resuscitation Science from the Resuscitation Science Symposium 2021. Circulation. 2021;144:e564–e593.