TY - JOUR
T1 - Discordance Between Standard Equations for Determination of LDL Cholesterol in Patients With Atherosclerosis
AU - Sajja, Aparna
AU - Li, Hsin Fang
AU - Spinelli, Kateri J.
AU - Blumenthal, Roger S.
AU - Virani, Salim S.
AU - Martin, Seth S.
AU - Gluckman, Ty J.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr Virani has received grant support from the Department of Veterans Affairs, World Heart Federation, and Tahir and Jooma Family; and has received honorarium from the American College of Cardiology (as associate editor for Innovations, acc.org ). Dr Martin has received research support from the American Heart Association, PCORI (Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute), National Institutes of Health, the David and June Trone Family Foundation, and Pollin Digital Health Innovation Fund; has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, 89bio, Amgen, Esperion, iHealth, Kaneka, and Sanofi; has a patent pending for a system, of which he is a coinventor, to estimate low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels; and is a founder of and holds equity in Corrie Health, which intends to further develop the platform. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation
PY - 2022/2/15
Y1 - 2022/2/15
N2 - Background: Accurate estimation of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is important for guiding cholesterol-lowering therapy. Different methods currently exist to estimate LDL-C. Objectives: This study sought to assess discordance of estimated LDL-C using the Friedewald, Sampson, and Martin/Hopkins equations. Methods: Electronic health record data from patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and triglyceride (TG) levels of <400 mg/dL between October 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019, were retrospectively analyzed. LDL-C was estimated using the Friedewald, Sampson, and Martin/Hopkins equations. Patients were categorized as concordant if LDL-C was <70 mg/dL with each pairwise comparison of equations and as discordant if LDL-C was <70 mg/dL for the index equation and ≥70 mg/dL for the comparator. Results: The study included 146,106 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (mean age: 68 years; 56% male; 91% White). The Martin/Hopkins equation consistently estimated higher LDL-C values than the Friedewald and Sampson equations. Discordance rates were 15% for the Friedewald vs Martin/Hopkins comparison, 9% for the Friedewald vs Sampson comparison, and 7% for the Sampson vs Martin/Hopkins comparison. Discordance increased at lower LDL-C cutpoints and in those with elevated TG levels. Among patients with TG levels of ≥150 mg/dL, a >10 mg/dL difference in LDL-C was present in 67%, 27%, and 23% of patients when comparing the Friedewald vs Martin/Hopkins, Friedewald vs Sampson, and Sampson vs Martin/Hopkins equations, respectively. Conclusions: Clinically meaningful differences in estimated LDL-C exist among equations, particularly at TG levels of ≥150 mg/dL and/or lower LDL-C levels. Reliance on the Friedewald and Sampson equations may result in the underestimation and undertreatment of LDL-C in those at increased risk.
AB - Background: Accurate estimation of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is important for guiding cholesterol-lowering therapy. Different methods currently exist to estimate LDL-C. Objectives: This study sought to assess discordance of estimated LDL-C using the Friedewald, Sampson, and Martin/Hopkins equations. Methods: Electronic health record data from patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and triglyceride (TG) levels of <400 mg/dL between October 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019, were retrospectively analyzed. LDL-C was estimated using the Friedewald, Sampson, and Martin/Hopkins equations. Patients were categorized as concordant if LDL-C was <70 mg/dL with each pairwise comparison of equations and as discordant if LDL-C was <70 mg/dL for the index equation and ≥70 mg/dL for the comparator. Results: The study included 146,106 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (mean age: 68 years; 56% male; 91% White). The Martin/Hopkins equation consistently estimated higher LDL-C values than the Friedewald and Sampson equations. Discordance rates were 15% for the Friedewald vs Martin/Hopkins comparison, 9% for the Friedewald vs Sampson comparison, and 7% for the Sampson vs Martin/Hopkins comparison. Discordance increased at lower LDL-C cutpoints and in those with elevated TG levels. Among patients with TG levels of ≥150 mg/dL, a >10 mg/dL difference in LDL-C was present in 67%, 27%, and 23% of patients when comparing the Friedewald vs Martin/Hopkins, Friedewald vs Sampson, and Sampson vs Martin/Hopkins equations, respectively. Conclusions: Clinically meaningful differences in estimated LDL-C exist among equations, particularly at TG levels of ≥150 mg/dL and/or lower LDL-C levels. Reliance on the Friedewald and Sampson equations may result in the underestimation and undertreatment of LDL-C in those at increased risk.
KW - Friedewald equation
KW - LDL-C
KW - Martin/Hopkins equation
KW - Sampson equation
KW - atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123785273&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.11.042
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.11.042
M3 - Article
C2 - 35144744
AN - SCOPUS:85123785273
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 79
SP - 530
EP - 541
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 6
ER -