LDL-C calculated by Friedewald, Martin-Hopkins, or NIH equation 2 versus beta-quantification: pooled alirocumab trials

Evaluation of current indirect methods for measuring LDL-cholesterol

OBJECTIVES

Accurately quantifying low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is crucial for precise cardiovascular disease risk assessment and treatment decisions. The commonly used Friedewald equation (LDL-CFW) has faced criticism for its tendency to underestimate LDL-C, particularly at high triglycerides (TG) or low LDL-C, potentially leading to undertreatment. Newer equations, such as those by Martin and Hopkins (LDL-CMH) or Sampson (LDL-CSN), have been proposed as alternatives. Our study aimed to assess the validity of LDL-CFW, LDL-CMH, and LDL-CSN compared to ß-quantification (LDL-CUC), the reference method recommended by the Lipid Research Clinics.

METHODS

Using data from three studies comprising 5,738 datasets, LDL-C was determined with the four methods in samples with TG up to 5.65 mmol/L. We calculated median and mean differences, correlations, and used the Passing and Bablok regression for comparisons. Concordance/discordance analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

All equations provided generally accurate LDL-C estimations with slight differences among them. At TG<1.69 mmol/L, no clinically significant divergences were observed. As TG values increased, LDL-CFW offered the most accurate estimation, followed by LDL-CSN, while LDL-CMH exhibited increasingly strong positive bias. LDL-CFW was not inferior to LDL-CSN and LDL-CMH in terms of concordance/discordance.

CONCLUSIONS

LDL-CFW generally provided reliable estimates of LDL-C in most samples, showing non-inferiority to LDL-CSN or LDL-CMH, thereby confirming its legitimacy for routine use. Since current treatment recommendations are based on studies employing LDL-CFW, its replacement by alternatives is not justified.

Comparison between Friedewald's and Sampson's formulas in the estimation of high levels of measured LDL-cholesterol in youth with obesity

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To assess the performance of Friedewald's and Sampson's formulas in relation to high or borderline-high levels of measured LDL-Cholesterol (LDL-C) in youths with overweight/obesity (OW/OB).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A cross-sectional study was performed in 1694 youths (age 5-17 years) with OW/OB observed in Italian centers of Messina (group 1) and Naples (group 2). LDL-C levels were both measured and calculated using Friedewald's (LDL-CF) and Sampson's (LDL-CS) formulas. The two groups were similar for sex, age, BMI, BMI Z-score, and measured LDL-C. Levels of LDL-CF and LDL-CS were higher in group 1 than group 2. In the overall sample, 9.9 % youths had measured LDL-C ≥130 mg/dL and 27.8 % ≥ 110 mg/dL, without differences between centers. The two formulas showed comparable high sensitivity and specificity in relation to levels of measured LDL-C ≥130 mg/dL or ≥110 mg/dL. However, LDL-CF showed a higher positive predictive value than LDL-CS.

CONCLUSIONS

Both formulas estimate with high accuracy measured LDL-C levels in youths with OW/OB. Therefore, calculated LDL-C can be a useful tool for universal screening when direct LDL-C measurement is not available. The Friedewald's formula is more feasible in clinical practice for simplicity of calculation.

The role of systemic inflammation in remnant cholesterol associated cardiovascular risk: insights from the EPIC-Norfolk study

AIMS

Both plasma levels of remnant cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels are independent risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. However, only remnant cholesterol has consistently been associated with systemic inflammation. In this study, we aimed to assess the extent to which inflammation mediates the effect of remnant and LDL cholesterol on (non)fatal major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), comprising of coronary artery disease and ischemic stroke.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This prospective study included 16,445 participants without prior atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease from the EPIC-Norfolk study, with a mean age of 58.8±9.1 years, of which 9,357 (56.9%) were women. Every 1 mmol/L higher remnant cholesterol was associated with 29.5% higher high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 22.1, 37.4, p<0.001), whereas LDL-C was not significantly associated with hsCRP levels in the fully adjusted model. Additionally, each 1 mmol/L higher remnant cholesterol was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.31 (95% CI: 1.14, 1.50, p<0.001) for MACE, compared to a HR of 1.21 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.31, p<0.001) for LDL-C. Mediation analysis showed that hsCRP mediated 5.9% (95% CI: 1.2, 10.6%, p<0.001) of the effect of remnant cholesterol on MACE, whereas hsCRP did not mediate the effect of LDL-C.

CONCLUSIONS

Plasma remnant cholesterol levels are independently associated with systemic inflammation and cardiovascular events. Inflammation, as measured with hsCRP, contributed minorly to the association between remnant cholesterol and MACE. This underscores the need to address both remnant cholesterol and systemic inflammation separately in the clinical management of cardiovascular disease.

Effects of resveratrol supplementation on inflammatory markers, fatigue scale, fasting blood sugar and lipid profile in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients: a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Resveratrol, a polyphenol found in grapes, has been studied extensively for its potential benefits on metabolic markers and inflammation. While promising results have been observed in animal studies and some human trials, the overall evidence is mixed. Moreover, elevated inflammatory markers have been closely linked to more severe symptoms of Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Therefore, strategies to reduce systemic inflammation could potentially improve outcomes for MS patients. So we aimed to examine the effectiveness of resveratrol supplementation on inflammatory markers in patients with Multiple sclerosis (MS), in a randomized placebo-controlled double-blinded parallel clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 55 subjects with MS were enrolled in this study and randomly assigned to the two groups who were supplemented with resveratrol at a dose of 500 mg/day or received placebo capsules for 8 weeks. Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), Malondialdehyde (MDA), fasting blood sugar (FBS), triglycerides, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein - cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein - cholesterol (HDL-C), and the degree of fatigue were measured at baseline and after the intervention.

RESULTS

Resveratrol treatment significantly decreased TNF-α (P < 0.001), and MDA (P < 0.001) compared to the placebo. The respective increase and decrease in FBS and HDL levels were seen in both groups, while the change in participants receiving resveratrol was significantly less pronounced. Changes in the levels of TG and fatigue scale remained unchanged.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that resveratrol supplementation exerted anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant effects in patients with MS.Trial registration: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials identifier: IRCT20230315057731N1.

Advances in targeting LDL cholesterol: PCSK9 inhibitors and beyond

There is a direct relationship between the duration and level of exposure to low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels over one's lifespan and cardiovascular events. Early treatment to lower elevated LDL-C is crucial for better outcomes with multiple therapies currently available to reduce atherogenic lipoproteins. Statins remain the foundation of LDL-C lowering therapy as one of the most cost-effective drugs to reduce atherosclerotic events (ASCVD) and mortality. Nonetheless, LDL-driven goal attainment remains suboptimal globally, highlighting a considerable need for non-statin therapies to address residual risk related to statin intolerance, non-adherence, and inherited lipoprotein disorders. LDL-C lowering interventions beyond statins include ezetimibe, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies, inclisiran and bempedoic acid with specific guideline recommendations as to when to consider each. For patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia requiring more advanced therapy, lomitapide and evinacumab are available, providing mechanisms that are not LDL receptor dependent. Lipoprotein apheresis remains an effective option for clinical familial hypercholesterolemia as well as elevated lipoprotein (a). There are investigational therapies being explored to add to our current armamentarium including CETP inhibitors, a third-generation PCSK9 inhibitor (small recombinant fusion protein oral PCSK9 inhibitor) and gene editing which aims to directly restore or disrupt genes of interest at the DNA level. This article is a brief review of the pharmacotherapy options beyond statins for lowering LDL-C and their impact on ASCVD risk reduction. Our primary aim is to guide physicians on the role these therapies play in achieving appropriate LDL-C goals, with an algorithm of when to consider each based on efficacy, safety and outcomes.

The clinical impact of estimating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) using different equations in the general population

BACKGROUND

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Friedewald, Sampson, and Martin-Hopkins equations are used to calculate LDL-C. This study compares the impact of switching between these equations in a large geographically defined population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data for individuals who had a lipid panel ordered clinically between 2010 and 2019 were included. Comparisons were made across groups using the two-sample t-test or chi-square test as appropriate. Discordances between LDL measures based on clinically actionable thresholds were summarized using contingency tables.

RESULTS

The cohort included 198,166 patients (mean age 54 years, 54% female). The equations perform similarly at the lower range of triglycerides but began to diverge at a triglyceride level of 125 mg/dL. However, at triglycerides of 175 mg/dL and higher, the Martin-Hopkins equation estimated higher LDL-C values than the Samson equation. This discordance was further exasperated at triglyceride values of 400 to 800 mg/dL. When comparing the Sampson and Friedewald equations, at triglycerides are below 175 mg/dL, 9% of patients were discordant at the 70 mg/dL cutpoint, whereas 42.4% were discordant when triglycerides are between 175 and 400 mg/dL. Discordance was observed at the clinically actionable LDL-C cutpoint of 190 mg/dL with the Friedewald equation estimating lower LDL-C than the other equations. In a high-risk subgroup (ASCVD risk score > 20%), 16.3% of patients were discordant at the clinical cutpoint of LDL-C < 70 mg/dL between the Sampson and Friedewald equations.

CONCLUSIONS

Discordance at clinically significant LDL-C cutpoints in both the general population and high-risk subgroups were observed across the three equations. These results show that using different methods of LDL-C calculation or switching between different methods could have clinical implications for many patients.

A new equation for estimating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration based on machine learning

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a crucial marker of cardiovascular system damage. In the Chinese population, the estimation of LDL-C concentration by Friedewald, Martin-Hopkins or Sampson equations is not accurate. The aim of this study was to develop a group of new equations for calculating LDL-C concentration using machine learning techniques and to evaluate their efficacy. A total of 182,901 patient samples were collected with standard lipid panel measurements. These samples were collated and randomly divided into a training set and a test set. In the training set, a new equation was constructed using polynomial ridge-regression and compared to the Friedewald, Martin/Hopkins and extended Martin/Hopkins, or Sampson equations in the test set. Subsequently, an additional set of 17,285 patient samples were collected to evaluate the performance of the new equation in clinical practice. The new equation, a ternary cubic equation, was accurate and easy to use, with a goodness-of-fit R2 of 0.9815 and an uncertainty MSE of 37.4250 on the testing set. The difference between the calculated value by the new equation and the measured value of LDL-C was small (0.0424 ± 5.1161 vs Friedewald equation: -13.3647 ± 17.9198, vs Martin/Hopkins and extended Martin/Hopkins equation: -6.4737 ± 8.1036, vs Sampson equation: -8.9252 ± 12.6522, P < .001). It could accurately calculate LDL-C concentration even at high triglyceride and low LDL-C. Furthermore, the new equation could also precisely calculate LDL-C concentration in actual clinical use (R2 = 0.9780, MSE = 24.8482). The new equation developed in this study can accurately calculate LDL-C concentration within the full concentration range of triglyceride and LDL-C, and can serve as a supplement to the direct determination of LDL-C concentration for the prevention, treatment, evaluation, and monitoring of atherosclerotic diseases, compared to the Friedewald, Martin/Hopkins and extended Martin/Hopkins, or Sampson equations.

Attainment of LDL-Cholesterol Goals in Patients with Previous Myocardial Infarction: A Real-World Cross-Sectional Analysis

BACKGROUND

The European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend an LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) < 55 mg/dL for patients with established cardiovascular disease. While the Friedewald equation to estimate LDL-C is still widely used, the newer Martin-Hopkins equation has shown greater accuracy.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess: A) the proportion of patients reaching LDL-C goal and the therapies used in a tertiary center; B) the impact of using the Martin-Hopkins method instead of Friedewald's on the proportion of controlled patients.

METHODS

A single-center cross-sectional study including consecutive post-myocardial infarction patients followed by 20 cardiologists in a tertiary hospital. Data was collected retrospectively from clinical appointments that took place after April 2022. For each patient, the LDL-C levels and attainment of goals were estimated from an ambulatory lipid profile using both Friedewald and Martin-Hopkins equations. A two-tailed p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all tests.

RESULTS

Overall, 400 patients were included (aged 67 ± 13 years, 77% male). Using Friedewald's equation, the median LDL-C under therapy was 64 (50-81) mg/dL, and 31% had LDL-C within goals. High-intensity statins were used in 64% of patients, 37% were on ezetimibe, and 0.5% were under PCSK9 inhibitors. Combination therapy of high-intensity statin + ezetimibe was used in 102 patients (26%). Applying the Martin-Hopkins method would reclassify a total of 31 patients (7.8%). Among those deemed controlled by Friedewald's equation, 27 (21.6%) would have a Martin-Hopkins' LDL-C above goals.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than one-third of post-myocardial infarction patients had LDL-C within the goal. Applying the Martin-Hopkins equation would reclassify one-fifth of presumably controlled patients into the non-controlled group.

Evinacumab Reduces Triglyceride-Rich Lipoproteins in Patients with Hyperlipidemia: A Post-Hoc Analysis of Three Randomized Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

Natural selection (Mendelian randomization) studies support a causal relationship between elevated triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This post-hoc analysis assessed the efficacy of evinacumab in reducing TRLs in patient cohorts from three separate clinical trials with evinacumab.

METHODS

Patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HoFH) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥ 70 mg/dL were enrolled in a phase III trial (R1500-CL-1629; NCT03399786). Patients diagnosed with refractory hypercholesterolemia, with LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL or ≥ 100 mg/dL for those with or without ASCVD, respectively, were enrolled in a phase II trial (R1500-CL-1643; NCT03175367). Patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia (fasting TGs ≥ 500 mg/dL) were enrolled in a phase II trial (R1500-HTG-1522; NCT03452228). Patients received evinacumab intravenously (5 or 15 mg/kg) every 4 weeks, or subcutaneously (300 or 450 mg) every week or every 2 weeks. Efficacy outcomes included change in TRLs (calculated as total cholesterol minus high-density lipoprotein cholesterol minus LDL-C) and other lipid parameters from baseline to 12, 16, or 24 weeks for trial 1522, 1643, and 1629, respectively.

RESULTS

At baseline, TRL levels were higher for patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia entering the 1522 trial vs. other cohorts. Reductions in TRLs were observed across all studies with evinacumab, with > 50% reduction from baseline observed at the highest doses evaluated in patients with HoFH or refractory hypercholesterolemia. Within all three trials, evinacumab was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite limitations in direct comparisons between study groups, these data indicate that TRL levels could be a future target for lipid-lowering therapies.

An improved method for estimating low LDL-C based on the enhanced Sampson-NIH equation

BACKGROUND

The accurate measurement of Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is critical in the decision to utilize the new lipid-lowering therapies like PCSK9-inhibitors (PCSK9i) for high-risk cardiovascular disease patients that do not achieve sufficiently low LDL-C on statin therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To improve the estimation of low LDL-C by developing a new equation that includes apolipoprotein B (apoB) as an independent variable, along with the standard lipid panel test results.

METHODS

Using β-quantification (BQ) as the reference method, which was performed on a large dyslipidemic population (N = 24,406), the following enhanced Sampson-NIH equation (eS LDL-C) was developed by least-square regression analysis: [Formula: see text] RESULTS: The eS LDL-C equation was the most accurate equation for a broad range of LDL-C values based on regression related parameters and the mean absolute difference (mg/dL) from the BQ reference method (eS LDL-C: 4.51, Sampson-NIH equation [S LDL-C]: 6.07; extended Martin equation [eM LDL-C]: 6.64; Friedewald equation [F LDL-C]: 8.3). It also had the best area-under-the-curve accuracy score by Regression Error Characteristic plots for LDL-C < 100 mg/dL (eS LDL-C: 0.953; S LDL-C: 0.920; eM LDL-C: 0.915; F LDL-C: 0.874) and was the best equation for categorizing patients as being below or above the 70 mg/dL LDL-C treatment threshold for adding new lipid-lowering drugs by kappa score analysis when compared to BQ LDL-C for TG < 800 mg/dL (eS LDL-C: 0.870 (0.853-0.887); S LDL-C:0.763 (0.749-0.776); eM LDL-C:0.706 (0.690-0.722); F LDL-C:0.687 (0.672-0.701). Approximately a third of patients with an F LDL-C < 70 mg/dL had falsely low test results, but about 80% were correctly reclassified as higher (≥ 70 mg/dL) by the eS LDL-C equation, making them potentially eligible for PCSK9i treatment. The M LDL-C and S LDL-C equations had less false low results below 70 mg/dL than the F LDL-C equation but reclassification by the eS LDL-C equation still also increased the net number of patients correctly classified.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the eS LDL-C equation as a confirmatory test improves the identification of high-risk cardiovascular disease patients, who could benefit from new lipid-lowering therapies but have falsely low LDL-C, as determined by the standard LDL-C equations used in current practice.

Cardiovascular Risk Assessment and Control in Outpatients Evaluated by 24-hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Different LDL-C Equations

INTRODUCTION

Office blood pressure (OBP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) calculated by the Friedewald formula (F) are the cornerstones of the cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment and management based on the SCORE2/SCORE2-OP model proposed by the 2021 ESC Guidelines on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention.

AIM

We compared the CVR stratification estimated by the old SCORE and the SCORE2/SCORE2-OP using OBP and ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM), and we evaluated the prevalence of LDL-C control, after calculating it using three validated equations, in outpatients referred for arterial hypertension.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study on 1539 consecutive patients with valid ABPM. LDL-C was calculated using the Friedewald formula (F), its modification by Martin (M), and the Sampson (S) equation. SCORE and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP were estimated using OBP, mean daytime (+ 5 mmHg adjustment), and mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure (+ 10 mmHg adjustment). Individual CVR by 2021 ESC Guidelines (and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP) was compared to the 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines (and SCORE). Differences in the prevalence of LDL-C control according to the three methods to calculate LDL-C were also analysed.

RESULTS

Mean age was 60 ± 12 years, with male prevalence (54%). Mean LDL-C values were 118 ± 38 mg/dL (F), 119 ± 37 mg/dL (M), and 120 ± 38 mg/dL (S), respectively. Within the same population, SCORE and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP significantly varied, but no differences emerged after comparing the average SCORE2/SCORE2-OP calculated with OBP (6% IQR 3-10), mean 24-hour systolic BP (7% IQR 4-11), and mean daytime systolic BP (7% IQR 4-11). SCORE2/SCORE2-OP and 2021 ESC Guidelines reclassified the CVR independently of the method used for BP measurement. The low-moderate risk group decreased by 32%, whereas the high and veryhighrisk groups increased by 18% and 12%, respectively. We found a significant reduction in reaching the LDL-C goals regardless of the equation used to calculate it, except for those > 65 years, in whom results were confirmed only by using the M.

CONCLUSION

SCORE2/SCORE2-OP and 2021 ESC Guidelines recommendations led to a non-negligible CVR reclassification and subsequent lack of LDL-C goal, regardless of estimating SCORE2 using OBP or ABPM. Calculating the LDL-C with the M may be the best choice in specific settings.

Assessing the Practical Differences in LDL-C Estimates Calculated by Friedewald, Martin/Hopkins, or NIH Equation 2: An Observation Cross-Sectional Study

Objective

Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) remains a clinically important cholesterol target in primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The present study aimed to assess the practical differences among three equations utilized for the estimation of LDL-C: the Friedewald, the Martin/Hopkins, and the NIH equation 2.

Methods

Blood lipid measurements from 4,556 noninstitutionalized participants, aged 12 to 80, were obtained from the 2017-2020 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey study. We 1) assessed the differences between three calculated LDL-C estimates, 2) examined the correlations between LDL-C estimates using correlation coefficients and regression, and 3) investigated the degree of agreement in classifying individuals into the LDL-C category using weighted Kappa and percentage of agreement.

Results

The differences in LDL-C estimates between equations varied by sex and triglyceride levels (p<0.001). Overall, the mean of absolute differences between Friedewald and Martin/Hopkins was 3.17 mg/dL (median=2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] [3.07-3.27]). The mean of absolute differences between Friedewald and NIH Equation 2 was 2.08 mg/dL (median=2.0, 95% CI [2.03-2.14]). Friedewald correlated highly with Martin/Hopkins (r=0.991, rho=0.989) and NIH Equation 2 (r=0.998, rho=0.997). Cohen's weighted Kappa=0.92 between Friedewald and Martin/Hopkins, and 0.95 between Friedewald and NIH equation 2. The percentage of agreement in classifying individuals into the same LDL-C category was 93.0% between Friedewald and Martin/Hopkins, and 95.4% between Friedewald and NIH equation 2.

Conclusion

Understanding the practical differences in LDL-C calculations can be helpful in facilitating decision-making during a paradigm shift.

Triglyceride-Rich Lipoprotein Metabolism: Key Regulators of Their Flux

The residual risk for arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease after optimal statin treatment may amount to 50% and is the consequence of both immunological and lipid disturbances. Regarding the lipid disturbances, the role of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs) and their remnants has come to the forefront in the past decade. Triglycerides (TGs) stand as markers of the remnants of the catabolism of TRLs that tend to contain twice as much cholesterol as compared to LDL. The accumulation of circulating TRLs and their partially lipolyzed derivatives, known as "remnants", is caused mainly by ineffective triglyceride catabolism. These cholesterol-enriched remnant particles are hypothesized to contribute to atherogenesis. The aim of the present narrative review is to briefly summarize the main pathways of TRL metabolism, bringing to the forefront the newly discovered role of apolipoproteins, the key physiological function of lipoprotein lipase and its main regulators, the importance of the fluxes of these particles in the post-prandial period, their catabolic rates and the role of apo CIII and angiopoietin-like proteins in the partition of TRLs during the fast-fed cycle. Finally, we provide a succinct summary of the new and old therapeutic armamentarium and the outcomes of key current trials with a final outlook on the different methodological approaches to measuring TRL remnants, still in search of the gold standard.

Comparison of existing methods of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol estimation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Introduction

Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is an important risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Direct LDL-C measurement is not widely performed. LDL-C is routinely calculated using the Friedewald equation (FLDL), which is inaccurate at high triglyceride (TG) or low LDL-C levels. We aimed to compare this routine method with other estimation methods in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), who typically have elevated TG levels and ASCVD risk.

Method

We performed a retrospective cohort study on T2DM patients from a multi-institutional diabetes registry in Singapore from 2013 to 2020. LDL-C values estimated by the equations: FLDL, Martin/Hopkins (MLDL) and Sampson (SLDL) were compared using measures of agreement and correlation. Subgroup analysis comparing estimated LDL-C with directly measured LDL-C (DLDL) was conducted in patients from a single institution. Estimated LDL-C was considered discordant if LDL-C was <1.8mmol/L for the index equation and ≥1.8mmol/L for the comparator.

Results

A total of 154,877 patients were included in the final analysis, and 11,475 patients in the subgroup analysis. All 3 equations demonstrated strong overall correlation and goodness-of-fit. Discordance was 4.21% for FLDL-SLDL and 6.55% for FLDL-MLDL. In the subgroup analysis, discordance was 21.57% for DLDL-FLDL, 17.31% for DLDL-SLDL and 14.44% for DLDL-MLDL. All discordance rates increased at TG levels >4.5mmol/L.

Conclusion

We demonstrated strong correlations between newer methods of LDL-C estimation, FLDL, and DLDL. At higher TG concentrations, no equation performed well. The Martin/Hopkins equation had the least discordance with DLDL, and may minimise misclassification compared with the FLDL and SLDL.

Concordance of LDL-C Estimating Equations with Direct Enzymatic Measurement in Diabetic and Prediabetic Subjects

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a well-established biomarker in the management of dyslipidemia. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the concordance of LDL-C-estimating equations with direct enzymatic measurement in diabetic and prediabetic populations. The data of 31,031 subjects included in the study were divided into prediabetic, diabetic, and control groups according to HbA1c values. LDL-C was measured by direct homogenous enzymatic assay and calculated by Martin-Hopkins, Martin-Hopkins extended, Friedewald, and Sampson equations. The concordance statistics between the direct measurements and estimations obtained by the equations were evaluated. All equations evaluated in the study had lower concordance with direct enzymatic measurement in diabetic and prediabetic groups compared to the non-diabetic group. Even so, the Martin-Hopkins extended approach demonstrated the highest concordance statistic in diabetic and prediabetic patients. Further, Martin-Hopkins extended was found to have the highest correlation with direct measurement compared with other equations. Over the 190 mg/dL LDL-C concentrations, the equation with the highest concordance was again Martin-Hopkins extended. In most scenarios, the Martin-Hopkins extended performed best in prediabetic and diabetic groups. Additionally, direct assay methods can be used at low values of the non-HDL-C/TG ratio (<2.4), as the performance of the equations in LDL-C estimation decreases as non-HDL-C/TG decreases.

Best practice for LDL-cholesterol: when and how to calculate

The lipid profile is important in the risk assessment for cardiovascular disease. The lipid profile includes total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, triglycerides (TGs) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (LDL-C). LDL-C has traditionally been calculated using the Friedewald equation (invalid with TGs greater than 4.5 mmol/L and is based on the assumption that the ratio of TG to cholesterol in very- low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) is 5 when measured in mg /dL). LDL-C can be quantified with a reference method, beta-quantification involving ultracentrifugation and this is unsuitable for routine use. Direct measurement of LDL-C was expected to provide a solution with high TGs. However, this has some challenges because of a lack of standardisation between the reagents and assays from different manufacturers as well as the additional costs. Furthermore, mild hypertriglyceridaemia also distorts direct LDL-C measurements. With the limitations of the Friedewald equation, alternatives have been derived. Newer equations include the Sampson-National Institutes of Health (NIH) equation 2 and the Martin-Hopkins equation. The Sampson-NIH2 equation was derived using beta-quantification in a population with high TG and multiple least squares regression to calculate VLDL-C, using TGs and non-HDL-C as independent variables. These data were used in a second equation to calculate LDL-C. The Sampson-NIH2 equation can be used with TGs up to 9 mmol/L. The Martin-Hopkins equation uses a 180 cell stratification of TG/non-HDL-C to determine the TG:VLDL-C ratio and can be used with TGs up to 4.5 mmol/L. Recently, an extended Martin-Hopkins equation has become available for TGs up to 9.04 mmol/L.This article discusses the best practice approach to calculating LDL-C based on the available evidence.

Comparison of Three Methods for LDLC Calculation for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Categorisation in Three Distinct Patient Populations

BACKGROUND

Limitations of the Friedewald equation for low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (F-LDLC) calculation led to the Martin-Hopkins (M-LDLC) and Sampson-National Institutes of Health (S-LDLC) equations. We studied these newer calculations of LDLC for correlation and discordance for stratification into the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) 2021 Dyslipidemia Guidelines' cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk categories.

METHODS

We performed analyses on lipid profiles from 3 populations: records of a hospital biochemistry laboratory (population 1), lipid clinic patients without select monogenic dyslipidemias (population 2A), and lipid clinic patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH; population 2B).

RESULTS

There was very strong correlation among the 3 calculated LDLC. In populations 1 and 2A, M-LDLC and S-LDLC were progressively higher than F-LDLC as triglyceride (TG) levels increased from normal to ∼ 5 mmol/L. In population 2B, M-LDLC was higher than F-LDLC, but S-LDLC was progressively lower than F-LDLC. Using the CCS 2021 guidelines' 4 CVD risk categories, 7.0% (population 2A) to 7.2% (population 1) of cases for M-LDLC vs F-LDLC and 3.9% (population 2A) to 4.4% (population 1) of cases for S-LDLC vs F-LDLC were reclassified to an adjacent CVD risk category, mostly from a lower to a higher risk category.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from F-LDLC to S-LDLC or M-LDLC can reclassify up to ∼ 4.4% or 7.2% of patients, respectively, to another CCS CVD risk category. The difference between F-LDLC and M-LDLC or S-LDLC is greater with higher TG, and with lower LDLC. We recommend that clinical laboratories switch to reporting results from either M-LDLC or S-LDLC, but S-LDLC should not be used in FH patients, pending further studies.

Accuracy and Clinical Impact of Estimating Low-Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol at High and Low Levels by Different Equations

New more effective lipid-lowering therapies have made it important to accurately determine Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) at both high and low levels. LDL-C was measured by the β-quantification reference method (BQ) (N = 40,346) and compared to Friedewald (F-LDL-C), Martin (M-LDL-C), extended Martin (eM-LDL-C) and Sampson (S-LDL-C) equations by regression analysis, error-grid analysis, and concordance with the BQ method for classification into different LDL-C treatment intervals. For triglycerides (TG) < 175 mg/dL, the four LDL-C equations yielded similarly accurate results, but for TG between 175 and 800 mg/dL, the S-LDL-C equation when compared to the BQ method had a lower mean absolute difference (mg/dL) (MAD = 10.66) than F-LDL-C (MAD = 13.09), M-LDL-C (MAD = 13.16) or eM-LDL-C (MAD = 12.70) equations. By error-grid analysis, the S-LDL-C equation for TG > 400 mg/dL not only had the least analytical errors but also the lowest frequency of clinically relevant errors at the low (<70 mg/dL) and high (>190 mg/dL) LDL-C cut-points (S-LDL-C: 13.5%, F-LDL-C: 23.0%, M-LDL-C: 20.5%) and eM-LDL-C: 20.0%) equations. The S-LDL-C equation also had the best overall concordance to the BQ reference method for classifying patients into different LDL-C treatment intervals. The S-LDL-C equation is both more analytically accurate than alternative equations and results in less clinically relevant errors at high and low LDL-C levels.

Comparison of Estimated LDL Cholesterol Equations with Direct Measurement in Patients with Angiographically Confirmed Coronary Artery Disease

Background and aims: Our goals in the study were to (1) quantify the discordance in LDL-C levels between equations (the Friedewald, Sampson, and Martin/Hopkins equations) and compare them with direct LDL-C (dLDL-C); and (2) explore the proportion of misclassified patients by calculated LDL-C using these three different equations. Methods: A total of 30,349 consecutive patients with angiographically confirmed coronary artery disease (CAD) were prospectively enrolled. Concordance was defined as if the LDL-C was <1.8 mmol/L with each pairwise comparison of LDL-C equations. Estimated LDL-C that fell into the same category as dLDL-C at the following levels: <1.4, 1.4 to 1.7, 1.8 to 2.5, 2.6 to 2.9, and ≥3.0 mmol/L was considered to have been correctly categorized. Results: The concordance was 96.3% (Sampson vs. Martin/Hopkins), 95.0% (Friedewald vs. Sampson), and 91.4% (Friedewald vs. Martin/Hopkins), respectively. This proportion fell to 82.4% in those with hypertriglyceridemia (TG ≥ 1.7 mmol/L). With an accurate classification rate of 73.6%, the Martin/Hopkins equation outperformed the Sampson equation (69.5%) and the Friedewald equation (59.3%) by a wide margin. Conclusions: Comparing it to the validated Martin/Hopkins equation, the Friedewald equation produced the lowest levels of LDL-C, followed by the Sampson equation. In the classification of LDL-C, the Martin/Hopkins equation has also been shown to be more accurate. There is a significant difference between the equations and the direct measurement method, which may lead to overtreatment or undertreatment.

The Impact of Low-Density Lipoprotein Equation Changes on Cholesterol Treatment in Canada

Background

In 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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

Sampson- 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.

Conclusion

Although 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.

How should low-density lipoprotein cholesterol be calculated in 2022?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The reference method for low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) quantitation is β-quantification, a technically demanding method that is not convenient for routine use. Indirect calculation methods to estimate LDL-C, including the Friedewald equation, have been used since 1972. This calculation has several recognized limitations, especially inaccurate results for triglycerides (TG) >4.5 mmol/l (>400 mg/dl). In view of this, several other equations were developed across the world in different datasets.The purpose of this review was to analyze the best method to calculate LDL-C in clinical practice by reviewing studies that compared equations with measured LDL-C.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified 45 studies that compared these formulae. The Martin/Hopkins equation uses an adjustable factor for TG:very low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol ratios, validated in a large dataset and demonstrated to provide more accurate LDL-C calculation, especially when LDL <1.81 mmol/l (<70 mg/dl) and with elevated TG. However, it is not in widespread international use because of the need for further validation and the use of the adjustable factor. The Sampson equation was developed for patients with TG up to 9 mmol/l (800 mg/dl) and was based on β-quantification and performs well on high TG, postprandial and low LDL-C samples similar to direct LDL-C.

SUMMARY

The choice of equation should take into the level of triglycerides. Further validation of different equations is required in different populations.

Directly Measured vs. Calculated Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Does Not Identify Additional Individuals With Coronary Artery Disease and Diabetes at Higher Risk of Adverse Events: Insight From a Large Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Cohort in Asia

Background

The objective of our study was to assess whether calculated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is inferior to direct LDL-C (dLDL-C) in identifying patients at higher risk of all-cause mortality, recurrent acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE).

Methods

A total of 9,751 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the Fuwai PCI registry were included. DLDL-C was measured by the selective solubilization method (Kyowa Medex, Tokyo, Japan). Correct classification was defined as the proportion of estimated LDL-C in the same category as dLDL-C based on dLDL-C levels: less than 1.4, 1.4–1.8, 1.8–2.6, 2.6–3.0, and 3.0 mmol/L or greater.

Results

Underestimation of LDL-C was found in 9.7% of patients using the Martin/Hopkins equation, compared with 13.9% using the Sampson equation and 24.6% with the Friedewald equation. Cox regression analysis showed compared the correct estimation group, underestimation of LDL-C by the Martin/Hopkins equation did not reduce all-cause mortality (HR 1.26, 95% CI: 0.72–2.20, P = 0.4), recurrent AMI (HR 1.24, 95% CI: 0.69–2.21, P = 0.5), and MACE (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.83–1.26, P = 0.9). Similarly, the overestimated group did not exacerbate all-cause mortality (HR 0.9, 95% CI: 0.45–1.77, P = 0.8), recurrent AMI (HR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.28–1.44, P = 0.3), and MACE (HR 1.07, 95% CI: 0.86–1.32, P = 0.6). The results of the diabetes subgroup analysis were similar to those of the whole population.

Conclusion

Compared with dLDL-C measurement, misclassification by the Martin/Hopkins and Sampson equations was present in approximately 20% of patients. However, directly measured vs. calculated LDL-C did not identify any more individuals in the PCI population with increased risk of all-cause mortality, recurrent AMI, and MACE, even in high-risk patients such as those with diabetes.

Approach to patients with hypertriglyceridemia

Elevated triglyceride levels increase the risk of arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and severely elevated triglyceride levels also increase the risk of triglyceride-induced pancreatitis. Although substantially reducing triglyceride levels will prevent pancreatitis, whether lowering triglycerides per se will reduce CVD risk is unclear. In this review, we outline several principles that will help in deciding who and how to treat patients with elevated triglyceride levels in order to prevent both ASCVD and pancreatitis. Using these principles will help in making decisions regarding the treatment of elevated triglyceride levels.