Cargando…

Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa

BACKGROUND: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC) is a modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, therefore needs to be assessed and monitored. Direct homogeneous assays and various formulas exist to determine LDLC. We aimed to compare the directly measured LDL (dLDLC) w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Osegbe, Ifeyinwa, Ugonabo, Martin, Chukwuka, Chinwe, Meka, Ijeoma, Nwosu, Nnamdi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5320873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28367026
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.199632
_version_ 1782509624927191040
author Osegbe, Ifeyinwa
Ugonabo, Martin
Chukwuka, Chinwe
Meka, Ijeoma
Nwosu, Nnamdi
author_facet Osegbe, Ifeyinwa
Ugonabo, Martin
Chukwuka, Chinwe
Meka, Ijeoma
Nwosu, Nnamdi
author_sort Osegbe, Ifeyinwa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC) is a modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, therefore needs to be assessed and monitored. Direct homogeneous assays and various formulas exist to determine LDLC. We aimed to compare the directly measured LDL (dLDLC) with ten formulas for estimating LDLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a 2-year retrospective study of fasting lipid profile results obtained from HIV-positive patients attending an outpatient clinic at the University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria, using homogeneous direct assays. Estimated LDLC was determined using ten formulas. Pearson's correlation, Bland–Altman plots, and linear regression were performed. Statistical significance was P < 0.05. RESULTS: Three thousand four hundred and eighty-two lipid results with mean ± standard deviation (SD) dLDLC of 2.1 ± 1.1 mmol/L were included in this study. There was a strong, positive correlation between Friedewald's LDLC and dLDLC n = 3412, r = 0.84, P < 0.001, but linear regression demonstrated a proportional bias P = 0.005. Ahmadi's equation showed the worst correlation n = 3482, r = 0.35, P < 0.001, but when applied to samples with triglyceride (TG) <1.13 mmol/L (100 mg/dl), the correlation showed a strong, positive relationship n = 1395, r = 0.80, P < 0.001, and no proportional bias P = 0.86. Teerankanchana's equation was the only formula that showed no difference between its LDLC and dLDLC (n = 3482, P = 0.056). It also demonstrated strong, positive correlation (n = 3482, r = 0.84, P < 0.001) and had a mean difference ± SD of −0.68 ± 0.63. CONCLUSION: Teerankanchana's formula showed good correlation and minimal bias with dLDLC at all TG levels. Moreover, linear regression showed no difference in the two. It seems to be the most suitable formula for estimating LDLC in our HIV-positive population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5320873
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53208732017-04-01 Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa Osegbe, Ifeyinwa Ugonabo, Martin Chukwuka, Chinwe Meka, Ijeoma Nwosu, Nnamdi J Lab Physicians Original Article BACKGROUND: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC) is a modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, therefore needs to be assessed and monitored. Direct homogeneous assays and various formulas exist to determine LDLC. We aimed to compare the directly measured LDL (dLDLC) with ten formulas for estimating LDLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a 2-year retrospective study of fasting lipid profile results obtained from HIV-positive patients attending an outpatient clinic at the University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria, using homogeneous direct assays. Estimated LDLC was determined using ten formulas. Pearson's correlation, Bland–Altman plots, and linear regression were performed. Statistical significance was P < 0.05. RESULTS: Three thousand four hundred and eighty-two lipid results with mean ± standard deviation (SD) dLDLC of 2.1 ± 1.1 mmol/L were included in this study. There was a strong, positive correlation between Friedewald's LDLC and dLDLC n = 3412, r = 0.84, P < 0.001, but linear regression demonstrated a proportional bias P = 0.005. Ahmadi's equation showed the worst correlation n = 3482, r = 0.35, P < 0.001, but when applied to samples with triglyceride (TG) <1.13 mmol/L (100 mg/dl), the correlation showed a strong, positive relationship n = 1395, r = 0.80, P < 0.001, and no proportional bias P = 0.86. Teerankanchana's equation was the only formula that showed no difference between its LDLC and dLDLC (n = 3482, P = 0.056). It also demonstrated strong, positive correlation (n = 3482, r = 0.84, P < 0.001) and had a mean difference ± SD of −0.68 ± 0.63. CONCLUSION: Teerankanchana's formula showed good correlation and minimal bias with dLDLC at all TG levels. Moreover, linear regression showed no difference in the two. It seems to be the most suitable formula for estimating LDLC in our HIV-positive population. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5320873/ /pubmed/28367026 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.199632 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Journal of Laboratory Physicians http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Osegbe, Ifeyinwa
Ugonabo, Martin
Chukwuka, Chinwe
Meka, Ijeoma
Nwosu, Nnamdi
Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa
title Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa
title_full Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa
title_fullStr Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa
title_short Comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: An evaluation of ten formulas for an HIV-positive population in Sub-Saharan Africa
title_sort comparison of calculated versus directly-measured low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: an evaluation of ten formulas for an hiv-positive population in sub-saharan africa
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5320873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28367026
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.199632
work_keys_str_mv AT osegbeifeyinwa comparisonofcalculatedversusdirectlymeasuredlowdensitylipoproteincholesterolanevaluationoftenformulasforanhivpositivepopulationinsubsaharanafrica
AT ugonabomartin comparisonofcalculatedversusdirectlymeasuredlowdensitylipoproteincholesterolanevaluationoftenformulasforanhivpositivepopulationinsubsaharanafrica
AT chukwukachinwe comparisonofcalculatedversusdirectlymeasuredlowdensitylipoproteincholesterolanevaluationoftenformulasforanhivpositivepopulationinsubsaharanafrica
AT mekaijeoma comparisonofcalculatedversusdirectlymeasuredlowdensitylipoproteincholesterolanevaluationoftenformulasforanhivpositivepopulationinsubsaharanafrica
AT nwosunnamdi comparisonofcalculatedversusdirectlymeasuredlowdensitylipoproteincholesterolanevaluationoftenformulasforanhivpositivepopulationinsubsaharanafrica