TABLE 3.

Relation of Δuric acid and apoCIII with the HFCS-induced increases in non–HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and apoB¹

		Model 23		Model 34		Model 45
Risk factor/index	Model 12: dose	Dose	Δuric acid6	Dose	ΔapoCIII	Dose	Δuric acid6	ΔapoCIII
ΔFST non–HDL cholesterol
% Variance7: covariate	15	4	8	8	138	2	6	118
P value	<0.0001	0.033	0.0017	0.0016	<0.0001	0.11	0.0025	<0.0001
% Variance: model	29	38		43		49
ΔPP non–HDL cholesterol
% Variance: covariate	24	9	7	8	129	2	6	119
P value	<0.0001	0.0007	0.0036	0.0010	<0.0001	0.063	0.0022	<0.0001
% Variance: model	37	43		49		55
ΔFST LDL cholesterol
% Variance: covariate	18	4	11	12	78	2	9	58
P value	<0.0001	0.023	0.0003	0.0003	0.0051	0.066	0.0005	0.0080
% Variance: model	28	39		35		44
ΔPP LDL cholesterol
% Variance: covariate	20	7	6	12	88	4	5	68
P value	<0.0001	0.0051	0.0066	0.0002	0.0026	0.018	0.0043	0.011
% Variance: model	35	38		39		44
ΔFST apoB
% Variance: covariate	14	3	8	7	108	1	7	88
P value	0.0002	0.050	0.0017	0.0030	0.0006	0.16	0.0026	0.0009
% Variance: model	28	37		38		45
ΔPP apoB
% Variance: covariate	20	5	10	7	89	1	9	79
P value	<0.0001	0.0097	0.0006	0.0033	0.0026	0.19	0.0005	0.0019
% Variance: model	30	37		38		47

¹apoB, apolipoprotein B; apoCIII, apolipoprotein CIII; FST, fasting; HFCS, high-fructose corn syrup; PP, postprandial; Δ, absolute change.

²Model 1: general linear model with dose (0%, 10%, 17.5%, 25%) as a continuous covariate and adjustment for sex, BMI, and [outcome] at baseline.

³Model 2: model 1 plus Δuric acid as a continuous covariate.

⁴Model 3: model 1 plus ΔapoCIII as a continuous covariate.

⁵Model 4: model 1 plus Δuric acid and ΔapoCIII as continuous covariates.

⁶ΔFST and Δ24-h mean uric acid yielded nearly identical results in models 2 and 4. Only FST uric acid results are presented.

⁷% Variance: proportion of variance explained by variable or model = (type III sum of squares/corrected total sum of squares) × 100.

⁸Results shown for ΔFST apoCIII.

⁹Results shown for ΔPP apoCIII.