Comparison of the effectiveness of Martin's equation, Friedewald's equation, and a Novel equation in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol estimation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Song Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8241859 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAs the approach to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering becomes increasingly intensive, accurate assessment of LDL-C at very low levels warrants closer attention in individualized clinical efficacy and safety evaluation. We aimed to assess the accuracy of LDL-C estimation at very low levels by the Friedewald equation, the de facto clinical standard, and compare its accuracy with a novel, big data-derived LDL-C estimate.MethodsIn 191,333 individuals with Friedewald LDL-C < 70 mg/dL, we compared the accuracy of Friedewald and novel LDL-C values in relation to direct measurements by Vertical Auto Profile ultracentrifugation. We examined differences (estimate minus ultracentrifugation) and classification according to levels initiating additional safety precautions per clinical practice guidelines.ResultsFriedewald values were less than ultracentrifugation measurement, with a median difference (25th to 75th percentile) of -2.4 (-7.4 to 0.6) at 50-69 mg/dL, -7.0 (-16.2 to -1.2) at 25-39 mg/dL, and -29.0 (-37.4 to -19.6) at < 15 mg/dL. The respective values by novel estimation were -0.1 (-1.5 to 1.3), -1.1 (-2.5 to 0.3), and -2.7 (-4.9 to 0.0) mg/dL. Among those with Friedewald LDL-C < 15, 15 to < 25, and 25 to < 40 mg/dL, the classification was discordantly low in 94.9%, 82.6%, and 59.9% of individuals as compared with 48.3%, 42.4%, and 22.4% by novel estimation.ConclusionsEstimation of even lower LDL-C values (by Friedewald and novel methods) is even more inaccurate. More often than not, a Friedewald value < 40 mg/dL is underestimated, which translates into unnecessary safety alarms that could be reduced in half by estimation using our novel method.
| S-EPMC5399386 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIn clinical and research settings worldwide, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is typically estimated using the Friedewald equation. This equation assumes a fixed factor of 5 for the ratio of triglycerides to very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (TG:VLDL-C); however, the actual TG:VLDL-C ratio varies significantly across the range of triglyceride and cholesterol levels.ObjectiveTo derive and validate a more accurate method for LDL-C estimation from the standard lipid profile using an adjustable factor for the TG:VLDL-C ratio.Design, setting, and participantsWe used a convenience sample of consecutive clinical lipid profiles obtained from 2009 through 2011 from 1,350,908 children, adolescents, and adults in the United States. Cholesterol concentrations were directly measured after vertical spin density-gradient ultracentrifugation, and triglycerides were directly measured. Lipid distributions closely matched the population-based National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Samples were randomly assigned to derivation (n = 900,605) and validation (n = 450,303) data sets.Main outcomes and measuresIndividual patient-level concordance in clinical practice guideline LDL-C risk classification using estimated vs directly measured LDL-C (LDL-CD).ResultsIn the derivation data set, the median TG:VLDL-C was 5.2 (IQR, 4.5-6.0). The triglyceride and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels explained 65% of the variance in the TG:VLDL-C ratio. Based on strata of triglyceride and non-HDL-C values, a 180-cell table of median TG:VLDL-C values was derived and applied in the validation data set to estimate the novel LDL-C (LDL-CN). For patients with triglycerides lower than 400 mg/dL, overall concordance in guideline risk classification with LDL-CD was 91.7% (95% CI, 91.6%-91.8%) for LDL-CN vs 85.4% (95% CI, 85.3%-85.5%) for Friedewald LDL-C (LDL-CF) (P < .001). The greatest improvement in concordance occurred in classifying LDL-C lower than 70 mg/dL, especially in patients with high triglyceride levels. In patients with an estimated LDL-C lower than 70 mg/dL, LDL-CD was also lower than 70 mg/dL in 94.3% (95% CI, 93.9%-94.7%) for LDL-CN vs 79.9% (95% CI, 79.3%-80.4%) for LDL-CF in samples with triglyceride levels of 100 to 149 mg/dL; 92.4% (95% CI, 91.7%-93.1%) for LDL-CN vs 61.3% (95% CI, 60.3%-62.3%) for LDL-CF in samples with triglyceride levels of 150 to 199 mg/dL; and 84.0% (95% CI, 82.9%-85.1%) for LDL-CN vs 40.3% (95% CI, 39.4%-41.3%) for LDL-CF in samples with triglyceride levels of 200 to 399 mg/dL (P < .001 for each comparison).Conclusions and relevanceA novel method to estimate LDL-C using an adjustable factor for the TG:VLDL-C ratio provided more accurate guideline risk classification than the Friedewald equation. These findings require external validation, as well as assessment of their clinical importance. The implementation of these findings into clinical practice would be straightforward and at virtually no cost.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01698489.
| S-EPMC4226221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn cardiovascular disease prevention, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) values guide treatment for lowering cholesterol level. After 50 years of clinical laboratories using the Friedewald LDL-C equation, the Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists recently recommended adoption of the new and more accurate Sampson / U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) LDL-C equation. Here, we estimate the anticipated population-level impact of this equation change.MethodsWe compared lipid profiles from the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS) year 2019 to those from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) years 2017 to 2020. Then, based on 10,828 participants in the latter, we calculated the impact of changing the LDL-C equation from the Friedewald to the Sampson.ResultsSampson- and Friedewald-equation LDL-C values are strongly correlated (r = 0.99, P < 0.001), but differences between them increase with both higher triglyceride and lower LDL-C values. We evaluated the impact of these discordances using LDL-C treatment thresholds from the 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society lipid guidelines. Among patients who take cholesterol-lowering medications, the Sampson equation reclassifies 3.3% more patients (95% confidence interval 2.2% to 4.9%), or about 123,000 individuals, as meeting the criteria for treatment intensification.ConclusionAlthough changing the LDL-C equation used from the Friedewald to the Sampson affects only a small proportion of the population, an estimated 123,000 Canadians who are taking cholesterol-lowering medications may need to intensify treatment to lower their cholesterol level, due to small absolute changes around guideline threshold values of LDL-C.
| S-EPMC9869357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRecent studies have shown that Friedewald underestimates low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) at lower levels, which could result in undertreatment of high-risk patients. A novel method (Martin/Hopkins) using a patient-specific conversion factor provides more accurate LDL-C levels. However, this method has not been tested in proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor-treated patients.ObjectiveTo investigate accuracy of 2 different methods for estimating LDL-C levels (Martin/Hopkins and Friedewald) compared with gold standard preparative ultracentrifugation (PUC) in patients with low LDL-C levels in the Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Patients With Elevated Risk (FOURIER) trial.Design, setting, and participantsThe FOURIER trial was a randomized clinical trial of evolocumab vs placebo added to statin therapy in 27 564 patients with stable atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The patients' LDL-C levels were assessed at baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 24 weeks, and every 24 weeks thereafter, and measured directly by PUC when the level was less than 40 mg/dL per the Friedewald method (calculated as non-HDL-C level - triglycerides/5). In the Martin/Hopkins method, patient-specific ratios of triglycerides to very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C) ratios were determined and used to estimate VLDL-C, which was subtracted from the non-HDL-C level to obtain the LDL-C level.Main outcomes and measuresLow-density lipoprotein cholesterol calculated by the Friedewald and Martin/Hopkins methods, with PUC as the reference method.ResultsFor this analysis, the mean (SD) age was 62.7 (9.0) years; 2885 of the 12 742 patients were women (22.6%). A total of 56 624 observations from 12 742 patients had Friedewald, Martin/Hopkins, and PUC LDL-C measurements. The median difference from PUC LDL-C levels for Martin/Hopkins LDL-C levels was -2 mg/dL (interquartile range [IQR], -4 to 1 mg/dL) and for Friedewald LDL-C levels was -4 mg/dL (IQR, -8 to -1 mg/dL; P < .001). Overall, 22.9% of Martin/Hopkins LDL-C values were more than 5 mg/dL different than PUC values, and 2.6% were more than 10 mg/dL different than PUC levels. These were significantly less than respective proportions with Friedewald estimation (40.1% and 13.3%; P < .001), mainly because of underestimation by the Friedewald method. The correlation with PUC LDL-C was significantly higher for Martin/Hopkins vs Friedewald (ρ, 0.918 [95% CI 0.916-0.919] vs ρ, 0.867 [0.865-0.869], P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn patients achieving low LDL-C with PCSK9 inhibition, the Martin/Hopkins method for LDL-C estimation more closely approximates gold standard PUC than Friedewald estimation does. The Martin/Hopkins method may prevent undertreatment because of LDL-C underestimation by the Friedewald method.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01764633.
| S-EPMC6143070 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLow-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a target for cardiovascular prevention. Contemporary equations for LDL-C estimation have limited accuracy in certain scenarios (high triglycerides [TG], very low LDL-C).ObjectivesWe derived a novel method for LDL-C estimation from the standard lipid profile using a machine learning (ML) approach utilizing random forests (the Weill Cornell model). We compared its correlation to direct LDL-C with the Friedewald and Martin-Hopkins equations for LDL-C estimation.MethodsThe study cohort comprised a convenience sample of standard lipid profile measurements (with the directly measured components of total cholesterol [TC], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and TG) as well as chemical-based direct LDL-C performed on the same day at the New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medicine (NYP-WCM). Subsequently, an ML algorithm was used to construct a model for LDL-C estimation. Results are reported on the held-out test set, with correlation coefficients and absolute residuals used to assess model performance.ResultsBetween 2005 and 2019, there were 17,500 lipid profiles performed on 10,936 unique individuals (4,456 females; 40.8%) aged 1 to 103. Correlation coefficients between estimated and measured LDL-C values were 0.982 for the Weill Cornell model, compared to 0.950 for Friedewald and 0.962 for the Martin-Hopkins method. The Weill Cornell model was consistently better across subgroups stratified by LDL-C and TG values, including TG >500 and LDL-C <70.ConclusionsAn ML model was found to have a better correlation with direct LDL-C than either the Friedewald formula or Martin-Hopkins equation, including in the setting of elevated TG and very low LDL-C.
| S-EPMC7526877 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dyslipidemia treatment is of major importance in reducing the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), which is still the most common cause of death worldwide. During the last decade, a novel lipid-lowering drug category has emerged, i.e., proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors. Apart from the two available anti-PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies (alirocumab and evolocumab), other nucleic acid-based therapies that inhibit or "silence" the expression of PCSK9 are being developed. Among them, inclisiran is the first-in-class small interfering RNA (siRNA) against PCSK9 that has been approved by both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. Importantly, inclisiran therapy may improve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target achievement by offering a prolonged and significant LDL-C-lowering effect with the administration of only two doses per year. The present narrative review discusses the ORION/VICTORION clinical trial program that has been designed to investigate the impact of inclisiran on atherogenic lipoproteins and major adverse cardiac events in different patient populations. The results of the completed clinical trials are presented, focusing on the effects of inclisiran on LDL-C and lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)) levels as well as on other lipid parameters such as apolipoprotein B and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C). Ongoing clinical trials with inclisiran are also discussed.
| S-EPMC10143414 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLow-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), a key cardiovascular disease marker, is often estimated by the Friedewald or Martin equation, but calculating LDL-C is less accurate in patients with a low LDL-C level or hypertriglyceridemia (triglyceride [TG] levels ≥400 mg/dL).ObjectiveTo design a more accurate LDL-C equation for patients with a low LDL-C level and/or hypertriglyceridemia.Design, setting, and participantsData on LDL-C levels and other lipid measures from 8656 patients seen at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center between January 1, 1976, and June 2, 1999, were analyzed by the β-quantification reference method (18 715 LDL-C test results) and were randomly divided into equally sized training and validation data sets. Using TG and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol as independent variables, multiple least squares regression was used to develop an equation for very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, which was then used in a second equation for LDL-C. Equations were tested against the internal validation data set and multiple external data sets of either β-quantification LDL-C results (n = 28 891) or direct LDL-C test results (n = 252 888). Statistical analysis was performed from August 7, 2018, to July 18, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresConcordance between calculated and measured LDL-C levels by β-quantification, as assessed by various measures of test accuracy (correlation coefficient [R2], root mean square error [RMSE], mean absolute difference [MAD]), and percentage of patients misclassified at LDL-C treatment thresholds of 70, 100, and 190 mg/dL.ResultsCompared with β-quantification, the new equation was more accurate than other LDL-C equations (slope, 0.964; RMSE = 15.2 mg/dL; R2 = 0.9648; vs Friedewald equation: slope, 1.056; RMSE = 32 mg/dL; R2 = 0.8808; vs Martin equation: slope, 0.945; RMSE = 25.7 mg/dL; R2 = 0.9022), particularly for patients with hypertriglyceridemia (MAD = 24.9 mg/dL; vs Friedewald equation: MAD = 56.4 mg/dL; vs Martin equation: MAD = 44.8 mg/dL). The new equation calculates the LDL-C level in patients with TG levels up to 800 mg/dL as accurately as the Friedewald equation does for TG levels less than 400 mg/dL and was associated with 35% fewer misclassifications when patients with hypertriglyceridemia (TG levels, 400-800 mg/dL) were categorized into different LDL-C treatment groups.Conclusions and relevanceThe new equation can be readily implemented by clinical laboratories with no additional costs compared with the standard lipid panel. It will allow for more accurate calculation of LDL-C level in patients with low LDL-C levels and/or hypertriglyceridemia (TG levels, ≤800 mg/dL) and thus should improve the use of LDL-C level in cardiovascular disease risk management.
| S-EPMC7240357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is an important modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. It is unclear whether the percentage LDL-C lowering with pharmacotherapies differs on the basis of baseline LDL-C levels. To evaluate the association between baseline LDL-C levels and the percentage LDL-C reduction with a statin, ezetimibe, and a PCSK9 inhibitor. This secondary exploratory study analyzed data from 3 randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials (Aggrastat to Zocor-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 21 [A to Z-TIMI 21], Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial [IMPROVE-IT], and Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With Elevated Risk [FOURIER]) of lipid-lowering therapies (statin, ezetimibe, and a PCSK9 inhibitor) and included participants with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Analyses took place form April to October 2020. In A to Z-TIMI 21, 1:1 randomization to simvastatin, 40 mg, daily for 30 days followed by 80 mg daily thereafter vs placebo for 4 months followed by simvastatin, 20 mg, daily thereafter. In IMPROVE-IT, 1:1 randomization to ezetimibe, 10 mg, daily plus simvastatin, 40 mg, daily vs placebo plus simvastatin, 40 mg, daily. In FOURIER, 1:1 randomization to evolocumab, 140 mg, every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly vs matching placebo. The percentage LDL-C reduction at either 1 month (A to Z-TIMI 21, IMPROVE-IT) or 3 months (FOURIER) as a function of baseline LDL-C level. Data were modeled using a generalized linear regression model. A total of 3187 patients from A to Z-TIMI 21, 10 680 patients from IMPROVE-IT, and 25 847 patients from FOURIER were analyzed. There was a higher percentage reduction in LDL-C levels with evolocumab in patients with lower baseline LDL-C levels, ranging from 59.4% (95% CI, 59.1%-59.8%) in patients with a baseline LDL-C level of 130 mg/dL to 66.1% (95% CI, 65.6%-66.6%) in patients with a baseline LDL-C level of 70 mg/dL (P < .001). In contrast, across the same range of baseline LDL-C level, there was a more modest difference for simvastatin (44.6% [95% CI, 43.9%-45.2%] vs 47.8% [95% CI, 46.4%-49.2%]; P < .001) and minimal difference with ezetimibe (25.0% [95% CI, 23.3%-26.6%] vs 26.2% [95% CI, 24.2%-28.1%]; P = .007). The percentage LDL-C reduction with statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibition is not attenuated in patients starting with lower baseline LDL-C levels and is 6.6% greater for PCSK9 inhibition. These data are encouraging for the use of intensive LDL-C-lowering therapy even for patients with lower LDL-C levels.
| S-EPMC7666429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsLow-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) lowering is imperative in cardiovascular disease prevention. We aimed to compare accuracy of three clinically-implemented LDL-C equations in a clinical trial of cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibition.Methods and resultsMen and women aged 18-75 years with dyslipidaemia were recruited from 17 sites in the Netherlands and Denmark. Patients were randomly assigned to one of nine groups using various combinations of the CETP inhibitor TA-8995 (obicetrapib), statin therapy, and placebo. In pooled measurements over 12 weeks, we calculated LDL-C by the Friedewald, Martin/Hopkins, and Sampson equations, and compared values with preparative ultracentrifugation (PUC) LDL-C overall and with a special interest in the low LDL-C/high triglycerides subgroup. There were 242 patients contributing 921 observations. Overall median LDL-C differences between estimates and PUC were small: Friedewald, 0.00 (25th, 75th: -0.10, 0.08) mmol/L [0 (-4, 3) mg/dL]; Martin/Hopkins, 0.02 (-0.08, 0.10) mmol/L [1 (-3, 4) mg/dL]; and Sampson, 0.05 (-0.03, 0.15) mmol/L [2 (-1, 6) mg/dL]. In the subgroup with estimated LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L (<70 mg/dL) and triglycerides 1.7-4.5 mmol/L (150-399 mg/dL), the Friedewald equation underestimated LDL-C with a median difference versus PUC of -0.25 (-0.33, -0.10) mmol/L [-10 (-13, -4) mg/dL], whereas the median difference by Martin/Hopkins was 0.00 (-0.08, 0.10) mmol/L [0 (-3, 4) mg/dL] and by Sampson was -0.06 (-0.13, 0.00) mmol/L [-2 (-5, 0) mg/dL]. In this subgroup, the proportion of LDL-C observations <1.8 mmol/L (<70 mg/dL) that were correctly classified compared with PUC was 71.4% by Friedewald vs. 100.0% by Martin/Hopkins and 93.1% by Sampson.ConclusionIn European patients with dyslipidaemia receiving a CETP inhibitor, we found improved LDL-C accuracy using contemporary equations vs. the Friedewald equation, and the greatest accuracy was observed with the Martin/Hopkins equation.RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01970215.
| S-EPMC9892865 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (TC/HDL-C) ratio, estimated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and non-HDL-C are routinely available from the standard lipid profile. We aimed to assess the extent of patient-level discordance of TC/HDL-C with LDL-C and non-HDL-C, because discordance suggests the possibility of additional information.Methods and resultsWe compared population percentiles of TC/HDL-C, Friedewald-estimated LDL-C, and non-HDL-C in 1 310 432 US adults from the Very Large Database of Lipids. Lipid testing was performed by ultracentrifugation (Vertical Auto Profile, Atherotech, AL). One in 3 patients had ≥25 percentile units discordance between TC/HDL-C and LDL-C, whereas 1 in 4 had ≥25 percentile units discordance between TC/HDL-C and non-HDL-C. The proportion of patients with TC/HDL-C > LDL-C by ≥25 percentile units increased from 3% at triglycerides <100 mg/dL to 51% at triglycerides 200 to 399 mg/dL. On a smaller scale, TC/HDL-C > non-HDL-C discordance by ≥25 percentile units increased from 6% to 21%. In those with <15th percentile levels of LDL-C (<70 mg/dL) or non-HDL-C (<93 mg/dL), a respective 58% and 46% were above the percentile-equivalent TC/HDL-C of 2.6. Age, sex, and directly measured components of the standard lipid profile explained >86% of the variance in percentile discordance between TC/HDL-C versus LDL-C and non-HDL-C.ConclusionsIn this contemporary, cross-sectional, big data analysis of US adults who underwent advanced lipid testing, the extent of patient-level discordance suggests that TC/HDL-C may offer potential additional information to LDL-C and non-HDL-C. Future studies are required to determine the clinical implications of this observation.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01698489.
| S-EPMC4550508 | biostudies-literature