Cargando…

Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients

BACKGROUND: Alternatives to the Friedewald low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) equation have been proposed. OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of available LDL-C equations with ultracentrifugation measurement. METHODS: We used the second harvest of the Very Large Database of Lipids (VLDbL),...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Samuel, Christeen, Park, Jihwan, Sajja, Aparna, Michos, Erin D., Blumenthal, Roger S., Jones, Steven R., Martin, Seth S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Ubiquity Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10289049/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37361322
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/gh.1214
_version_ 1785062201260769280
author Samuel, Christeen
Park, Jihwan
Sajja, Aparna
Michos, Erin D.
Blumenthal, Roger S.
Jones, Steven R.
Martin, Seth S.
author_facet Samuel, Christeen
Park, Jihwan
Sajja, Aparna
Michos, Erin D.
Blumenthal, Roger S.
Jones, Steven R.
Martin, Seth S.
author_sort Samuel, Christeen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Alternatives to the Friedewald low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) equation have been proposed. OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of available LDL-C equations with ultracentrifugation measurement. METHODS: We used the second harvest of the Very Large Database of Lipids (VLDbL), which is a population-representative convenience sample of adult and pediatric patients (N = 5,051,467) with clinical lipid measurements obtained via the vertical auto profile (VAP) ultracentrifugation method between October 1, 2015 and June 30, 2019. We performed a systematic literature review to identify available LDL-C equations and compared their accuracy according to guideline-based classification. We also compared the equations by their median error versus ultracentrifugation. We evaluated LDL-C equations overall and stratified by age, sex, fasting status, and triglyceride levels, as well as in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, kidney disease, inflammation, and thyroid dysfunction. RESULTS: Analyzing 23 identified LDL-C equations in 5,051,467 patients (mean±SD age, 56±16 years; 53.3% women), the Martin/Hopkins equation most accurately classified LDL-C to the correct category (89.6%), followed by the Sampson (86.3%), Chen (84.4%), Puavilai (84.1%), Delong (83.3%), and Friedewald (83.2%) equations. The other 17 equations were less accurate than Friedewald, with accuracy as low as 35.1%. The median error of equations ranged from –10.8 to 18.7 mg/dL, and was best optimized using the Martin/Hopkins equation (0.3, IQR–1.6 to 2.4 mg/dL). The Martin/Hopkins equation had the highest accuracy after stratifying by age, sex, fasting status, triglyceride levels, and clinical subgroups. In addition, one in five patients who had Friedewald LDL-C <70 mg/dL, and almost half of the patients with Friedewald LDL-C <70 mg/dL and triglyceride levels 150–399 mg/dL, had LDL-C correctly reclassified to >70 mg/dL by the Martin/Hopkins equation. CONCLUSIONS: Most proposed alternatives to the Friedewald equation worsen LDL-C accuracy, and their use could introduce unintended disparities in clinical care. The Martin/Hopkins equation demonstrated the highest LDL-C accuracy overall and across subgroups.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10289049
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Ubiquity Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102890492023-06-24 Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients Samuel, Christeen Park, Jihwan Sajja, Aparna Michos, Erin D. Blumenthal, Roger S. Jones, Steven R. Martin, Seth S. Glob Heart Original Research BACKGROUND: Alternatives to the Friedewald low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) equation have been proposed. OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of available LDL-C equations with ultracentrifugation measurement. METHODS: We used the second harvest of the Very Large Database of Lipids (VLDbL), which is a population-representative convenience sample of adult and pediatric patients (N = 5,051,467) with clinical lipid measurements obtained via the vertical auto profile (VAP) ultracentrifugation method between October 1, 2015 and June 30, 2019. We performed a systematic literature review to identify available LDL-C equations and compared their accuracy according to guideline-based classification. We also compared the equations by their median error versus ultracentrifugation. We evaluated LDL-C equations overall and stratified by age, sex, fasting status, and triglyceride levels, as well as in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, kidney disease, inflammation, and thyroid dysfunction. RESULTS: Analyzing 23 identified LDL-C equations in 5,051,467 patients (mean±SD age, 56±16 years; 53.3% women), the Martin/Hopkins equation most accurately classified LDL-C to the correct category (89.6%), followed by the Sampson (86.3%), Chen (84.4%), Puavilai (84.1%), Delong (83.3%), and Friedewald (83.2%) equations. The other 17 equations were less accurate than Friedewald, with accuracy as low as 35.1%. The median error of equations ranged from –10.8 to 18.7 mg/dL, and was best optimized using the Martin/Hopkins equation (0.3, IQR–1.6 to 2.4 mg/dL). The Martin/Hopkins equation had the highest accuracy after stratifying by age, sex, fasting status, triglyceride levels, and clinical subgroups. In addition, one in five patients who had Friedewald LDL-C <70 mg/dL, and almost half of the patients with Friedewald LDL-C <70 mg/dL and triglyceride levels 150–399 mg/dL, had LDL-C correctly reclassified to >70 mg/dL by the Martin/Hopkins equation. CONCLUSIONS: Most proposed alternatives to the Friedewald equation worsen LDL-C accuracy, and their use could introduce unintended disparities in clinical care. The Martin/Hopkins equation demonstrated the highest LDL-C accuracy overall and across subgroups. Ubiquity Press 2023-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10289049/ /pubmed/37361322 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/gh.1214 Text en Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Samuel, Christeen
Park, Jihwan
Sajja, Aparna
Michos, Erin D.
Blumenthal, Roger S.
Jones, Steven R.
Martin, Seth S.
Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients
title Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients
title_full Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients
title_fullStr Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients
title_short Accuracy of 23 Equations for Estimating LDL Cholesterol in a Clinical Laboratory Database of 5,051,467 Patients
title_sort accuracy of 23 equations for estimating ldl cholesterol in a clinical laboratory database of 5,051,467 patients
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10289049/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37361322
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/gh.1214
work_keys_str_mv AT samuelchristeen accuracyof23equationsforestimatingldlcholesterolinaclinicallaboratorydatabaseof5051467patients
AT parkjihwan accuracyof23equationsforestimatingldlcholesterolinaclinicallaboratorydatabaseof5051467patients
AT sajjaaparna accuracyof23equationsforestimatingldlcholesterolinaclinicallaboratorydatabaseof5051467patients
AT michoserind accuracyof23equationsforestimatingldlcholesterolinaclinicallaboratorydatabaseof5051467patients
AT blumenthalrogers accuracyof23equationsforestimatingldlcholesterolinaclinicallaboratorydatabaseof5051467patients
AT jonesstevenr accuracyof23equationsforestimatingldlcholesterolinaclinicallaboratorydatabaseof5051467patients
AT martinseths accuracyof23equationsforestimatingldlcholesterolinaclinicallaboratorydatabaseof5051467patients