Table 1.
Studies regarding dietary compounds effects on cholesterol efflux capacity of HDL-C *.
| Author, Year | Dietary Compounds |
Dose/Time | Study Design n |
Main Results on Efflux Capacity on HDL-C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hernáez, 2017 [27] | TMD enriched with EVOO TMD enriched with nuts (walnuts, hazelnuts, and almonds) |
1 L/week 30 g/d (15 g walnuts, 7.5 g hazelnuts, 7.5 g almonds) 1 year |
A randomized controlled trial subsample PREDIMED study 296 subjects (TMD-EVOO; n = 100 and TMD-Nuts; n = 100, low-fat control diet; n = 96). |
↑ CEC TMD-EVOO interventions relative to baseline (0.01 ± 0.007; p = 0.018) ↑ CEC TMD-Nuts interventions relative to baseline (0.02 ± 0.09; p = 0.013) |
| Hernáez, 2019 [81] | EVOO Whole grains |
10 g/d (one spoonful) 25 g/d 1 year |
A randomized controlled trial subsample PREDIMED study 296 older adults’ high cardiovascular risk (50–80 years) |
↑ 0.7 % CEC (0.08–1.2; p = 0.026) with EVOO ↑0.6% CEC (0.1–1.1; p = 0.017) with whole grains. |
| Fernández-Castillejo, 2017 [83] | VOO (80 ppm) FVOO enriched with its own PC (500 ppm) FVOOT with its own PC plus thyme (500 ppm) |
25 mL/day 3 weeks |
Crossover, double-blind, controlled trial from the VOHF 33 hypercholesterolemic subjects |
↑ CEC post-intervention vs. pre-intervention values (4.1% ± 1.4; p = 0.042). ↑ HDL ApoA-I concentration (0.6 ± 0.1; p = 0.014). Independent of VOO type. CEC was related to concentration in HDL of ApoA-I (p = 0.004). |
| Farràs, 2017 [84] | VOO (80 ppm) FVOO enriched with its own PC (500 ppm) FVOOT with its own PC plus thyme (500 ppm) |
25 mL/day raw OO (between meals) 3 weeks 2 weeks wash-out periods |
Randomized, double-blind, crossover, controlled trial from the VOHF 33 hypercholesterolemic subjects |
FVOOT versus FVOO intervention ↑ CEC (1.3% ± 3.9 and 1.2% ± 3.8, respectively; p = 0.019) FVOOT versus VOO ↓ (−0.03% + 5.4) FVOOT post-intervention versus baseline. ↑ CEC (29.7% ± 5.6 vs. 28.3% ± 6.7; p = 0.086) |
| Tindall, 2019 [87] | Walnuts Vegetable oils |
WD WFMD ORAD |
Randomized, crossover, controlled-feeding study 34 individuals at risk of cardiovascular disease (aged 30–65 years) |
~ CEC mediated for ABCA1 (p = 0.1) or global efflux in all diets (WD 3.5% ± 0.2, WFMD 3.5% ± 0.2, ORAD 3.8% ± 0.2; p = 0.1). ↓ global efflux after the WFMD compared with WD and ORAD (p = 0.01). |
| Manninen, 2019 [89] | Fish Camelina sativa oil |
20 mL of CSO * 4 meals/week of lean Fish 1 g EPA + DHA per day of fatty fish Control * * CSO and control allow one fish per week 12 weeks |
Randomized controlled trial 79 impaired glucose metabolism subjects (40–75 years) |
~ CEC of HDL (p = 0.123) had no significant effect after 12 weeks of fatty fish ingestion. |
| Yang, 2019 [90] | Fish LCMUFA, omega-3 FA, MUFA |
12 g saury oil, control oil (sardine + olive oil) | Randomized, doble blind, crossover trial 30 healthy normolipidemic subjects [>18 years, (34.8 ± 12.5)] 8 weeks |
↑ 6.2% HDL-C levels, ↑ 8% CEC |
| Richter, 2017 [88] | Soya protein (isoflavone) |
0, 25 and 50 g/day soya protein 8 weeks |
Randomized, placebo-controlled, three period crossover study 20 adults with moderately elevated blood pressure (35–60 years) |
~ CEC No significant effects in CE ex vivo. ↓ 12.7 % ABCA1-specific efflux (p = 0.02) from baseline following supplementation with the control Change not significant compared with ABCA1 efflux by 50 g/day of soya protein (3.1%; p = 0.4). |
| Millar, 2018 [92] | Grape | 60 g/day of freeze-dried grape powder (GRAPE, 195 mg polyphenols) 60 g/day of placebo powder (without polyphenols) 4 weeks 3 weeks washout |
Randomized, double-blind, crossover placebo-controlled study 20 adults with MS (aged 32–70 years) |
~ CEC after interventions with grape and placebo (15.1% ± 5.0 and 14.4 ± 5.5; respectively). Grape not affect HDL CEC compared with placebo (0.7 ± 4.2; p = 0.47) |
| Marín-Echeverri, 2018 [93] | Agraz (fruit) | 200 mL freeze-dried agraz reconstituted/day Placebo (similar beverage without any polyphenols) 12 weeks |
Double-blind crossover study 40 women with MS |
~ CEC (0.5% ± 2.9; p = 0.324) after comparing the end of both intervention periods (placebo versus agraz) |
| Talbot, 2018 [97] |
Cocoa (theobromine) |
20 mL drink (500 mg of theobromine) 20 mL placebo drink per day 4 weeks |
Randomized, double-blind, controlled, crossover study 44 overweight and obese subjects (aged 45–70 years) |
Not affect fasting CEC after theobromine intervention (+0.4% point; −2.81, 3.57; p = 0.81). ~ CEC after theobromine on fasting and postprandial CEC (97.5% ± 9.2 to 99.1 ± 11.7). |
| Nicod, 2014 [91] | Polyphenols (red wine, cocoa, or green tea) |
50 μM total polyphenols (gallic acid equivalents) 24 h |
In vitro study Caco-2 monolayer model | No change of cholesterol efflux, via SR-B1 (cholesterol is taken up by SR-B1) |
| Voloshyna, 2013 [78] | Resveratrol | 10, 25 μM 4 h (CEC of ApoA-1) 6 h (CEC to HDL) |
In vitro study TPH-1 monocytes and macrophages, HAEC, PBMC, HMDM 18 h |
↑ ABCA1 message (10 μM) in TPH1 and HAEC vs. control (168.2 ± 13.3; 141.3 ± 15.4%; p < 0.001) ↑ ABCG1 expression in TPH-1 (169.9 ± 15.1%; p < 0.001) ↑ LXRα mRNA (10 μM) in TPH-1 and HAEC vs. control (148.9 ± 13.3% vs. 125.8 ± 10.3%; p < 0.05) ↑ 4.6% CEC to ApoA-1 in TPH-1 (20 μM/mL, 4 h) vs. 3.8% control (p < 0.05). ↑ 136.2 (±8.5%; p < 0.001) PPARγ expression vs. control |
| Sun, 2015 [75] | Quercetin | 0, 25,50, 100, 200 μM 0, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32 h |
In vitro study TPH-1 derived foam cells |
200 uM, 32 h ↑ ApoA-I dependent CEC after 200 μM, 32 h vs. without treatment (>30% vs. 10%; p < 0.001) ↑ PPARγ expression and activation (p < 0.001) in 200 μM, 32 h. |
| Cui, 2017 [76] | Quercetin | Quercetin 12.5 mg/Kg/d in 0.5% CMCNa 2.5, 5.0, 10.0 μM 8 weeks |
In vivo study Experimental animal model (apoE-deficient mice fed a high-fat diet) 24 mice CMCNa group (n = 12), quercetin group (n = 12). |
↑ 31.8% CEC from macrophages in the quercetin-treated mice vs. controls (p < 0.01) ↑22% HDL in quercetin group (p < 0.01) ↑ CEC in a concentration-depend manner 5.0 and 10.0 μM (p < 0.01) |
| Zhong, 2017 [79] | Curcumin | 10, 20, 40 μM 12 h |
In vitro study Murine macrophage RAW264.7 cell line and monocyte TPH-1 cell line |
↑ CEC in macrophage in a dose-dependent manner (10, 20, 40 μM) vs. untreated group (p < 0.05). ↑ ABCA1 and SRB1 expression and protein level (10, 20, 40 μM) vs. control group (p < 0.05). ~ SRB1 expression. |
Abbreviations and symbols: TMD, traditional Mediterranean diet; EVOO, extra virgin olive oil; PREDIMED, PREvención con DIeta MEDiterránea; TMD-EVOO, traditional Mediterranean diet enriched with extra virgin olive oil; TMD-Nuts, traditional Mediterranean diet enriched with nuts; CEC, cholesterol efflux capacity; TPH-1, human acute monocyte leukemia cells line; VOO, virgin olive oil; FVOO, functional virgin olive oil; PC, phenolic compounds; FVOOT, functional virgin olive oil plus thyme; VOHF, virgin olive oil and HDL functionality; Fu5 AH, macrophages and rat hepatoma cell; HMDM, human monocyte-derived macrophages; ABCA-1, ATP binding cassette subfamily A member 1; ABCG-1, ATP binding cassette subfamily G member 1; WD, walnut diet; WFMD, walnut fatty acid-matched diet; ORAD, oleic acid replaces ALA diet; CSO, camelia sativa oil; EPA, eicosapentanoic acid; DHA, docosahexaenoic acid; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; MS, metabolic syndrome; ApoA-I, apolipoprotein A-I; HAEC, human aortic endothelial cells; PBMC, human peripheral blood mononuclear cells; LXRα, liver X receptor alfa; PPARγ, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor; Caco-2; human colon carcinoma cell line; SRB1, scavenger receptor class B type 1; CMCNa, carboxymethyl cellulose sodium; LCMUFA, long-chain monounsaturated fatty acid; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acid; FA, fatty acid; ALA; alpha-linolenic acid. ~ not significant differences. * In vitro studies were performed independent of the study design for the CEC assessment (different cell lines included). ↓: decreasing; ↑: increasing.