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

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Video Abstracts
  • In-Press Preview
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Editorials
  • Commentaries
  • Editor's notes
  • Reviews
  • Viewpoints
  • 100th anniversary
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
Top
  • View PDF
  • Download citation information
  • Send a comment
  • Terms of use
  • Standard abbreviations
  • Need help? Email the journal
  • Top
  • Abstract
  • Version history
  • Article usage
  • Citations to this article (312)

Advertisement

Research Article Free access | 10.1172/JCI108767

The Measurement of Apolipoprotein A-I and A-II Levels in Men and Women by Immunoassay

Marian C. Cheung and John J. Albers

Department of Medicine and the Northwest Lipid Research Clinic, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195

Find articles by Cheung, M. in: PubMed | Google Scholar

Department of Medicine and the Northwest Lipid Research Clinic, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195

Find articles by Albers, J. in: PubMed | Google Scholar

Published July 1, 1977 - More info

Published in Volume 60, Issue 1 on July 1, 1977
J Clin Invest. 1977;60(1):43–50. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI108767.
© 1977 The American Society for Clinical Investigation
Published July 1, 1977 - Version history
View PDF
Abstract

To study apolipoprotein A-II, a simple, precise, and accurate immunodiffusion assay was developed and applied in a population sample of industrial employees. Apolipoprotein A-II (A-II) did not increase with age in men (r = −0.20, n = 172), but showed a slight increase with age in women (0.1 mg/dl per yr, r = 0.20, n = 188). A-II correlated significantly with apolipoprotein A-I (A-I) (r = 0.71) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (men, r = 0.64; women, r = 0.49). The A-I/A-II ratio was significantly related to HDL cholesterol (men, r = 0.29; women, r = 0.44). Women on no medication (n = 92) had A-II levels similar to men (34±5 and 33±5 mg/dl, mean±SD, respectively), whereas women on oral contraceptives or estrogens had significantly higher levels (39±6 mg/dl, n = 75, P < 0.01). The plasma A-I/A-II weight ratio was 3.6±0.4 for men and 3.8±0.5 for women. In the d = 1.10-1.21 subfraction, both males and females had similar A-I, A-II, and HDL cholesterol levels (men: mean, 97, 27, and 32 mg/dl, respectively; women: mean, 104, 28, and 36 mg/dl, respectively). Women had approximately twice the amount of A-I, A-II, and HDL cholesterol than men in the d = 1.063-1.10 fraction (men: mean, 10, 2, and 10 mg/dl, respectively; women: mean, 24, 4, and 19 mg/dl, respectively). The A-I/A-II weight ratio in the d = 1.063-1.10 fraction (men, 5.1±0.7; women, 6.1±1.3) was significantly greater (P < 0.01) than that in the d = 1.10-1.21 fraction (men, 3.7±0.2; women, 3.8±0.2). Furthermore, the weight ratio of cholesterol to total apoprotein A in the d = 1.063-1.10 fraction (men, 0.75±0.09; women, 0.67±0.05) was significantly higher (P < 0.01) than that found in the d = 1.10-1.21 fraction (men, 0.26±0.04, women, 0.28±0.05). Thus, the compositions of HDL hydrated density subclasses are significantly different from each other. These results suggest that the differences in HDL between men and women are due primarily to differences in the relative proportions of HDL subclasses rather than to the intrinsic differences in HDL structure.

Images.

Browse pages

Click on an image below to see the page. View PDF of the complete article

icon of scanned page 43
page 43
icon of scanned page 44
page 44
icon of scanned page 45
page 45
icon of scanned page 46
page 46
icon of scanned page 47
page 47
icon of scanned page 48
page 48
icon of scanned page 49
page 49
icon of scanned page 50
page 50
Version history
  • Version 1 (July 1, 1977): No description

Article tools

  • View PDF
  • Download citation information
  • Send a comment
  • Terms of use
  • Standard abbreviations
  • Need help? Email the journal

Metrics

  • Article usage
  • Citations to this article (312)

Go to

  • Top
  • Abstract
  • Version history
Advertisement
Advertisement

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

Sign up for email alerts