Johns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease, Baltimore, Maryland.
JAMA. 2013 Nov 20;310(19):2061-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.280532.
In 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.
To 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 PARTICIPANTS: We 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.
Individual patient-level concordance in clinical practice guideline LDL-C risk classification using estimated vs directly measured LDL-C (LDL-CD).
In 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).
A 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.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01698489.
在全球的临床和研究环境中,通常使用 Friedewald 方程来估算低密度脂蛋白胆固醇 (LDL-C)。该方程假设甘油三酯与极低密度脂蛋白胆固醇 (TG:VLDL-C) 的比值为 5,但实际上该比值在甘油三酯和胆固醇水平的整个范围内差异很大。
利用 TG:VLDL-C 比值的可调因子,从标准血脂谱中推导出更准确的 LDL-C 估算方法。
设计、地点和参与者:我们使用了 2009 年至 2011 年期间从美国的 1350908 名儿童、青少年和成年人中连续获得的便利临床血脂谱,进行了一项研究。胆固醇浓度在垂直旋转密度梯度超速离心后直接测量,甘油三酯直接测量。脂质分布与基于人群的国家健康和营养检查调查 (NHANES) 非常匹配。样本被随机分配到推导 (n = 900605) 和验证 (n = 450303) 数据集。
使用估计的 LDL-C 与直接测量的 LDL-C (LDL-CD) 对临床实践指南 LDL-C 风险分类的个体患者水平一致性。
在推导数据集中,中位数 TG:VLDL-C 为 5.2 (IQR,4.5-6.0)。甘油三酯和非高密度脂蛋白胆固醇 (HDL-C) 水平解释了 TG:VLDL-C 比值变化的 65%。基于甘油三酯和非 HDL-C 值的分层,衍生出一个包含 180 个单元格的 TG:VLDL-C 中位数的表格,并在验证数据集中应用于估计新的 LDL-C (LDL-CN)。对于甘油三酯低于 400 mg/dL 的患者,LDL-CD 在 LDL-CN 与 Friedewald LDL-C (LDL-CF) 之间的总体指南风险分类一致性为 91.7% (95%CI,91.6%-91.8%),而 LDL-CF 为 85.4% (95%CI,85.3%-85.5%) (P <.001)。一致性的最大改善发生在 LDL-C 低于 70 mg/dL 的分类中,特别是在甘油三酯水平较高的患者中。在估计 LDL-C 低于 70 mg/dL 的患者中,在甘油三酯水平为 100 至 149 mg/dL 的样本中,LDL-CD 也低于 70 mg/dL,LDL-CN 为 94.3% (95%CI,93.9%-94.7%),而 LDL-CF 为 79.9% (95%CI,79.3%-80.4%);在甘油三酯水平为 150 至 199 mg/dL 的样本中,LDL-CN 为 92.4% (95%CI,91.7%-93.1%),而 LDL-CF 为 61.3% (95%CI,60.3%-62.3%);在甘油三酯水平为 200 至 399 mg/dL 的样本中,LDL-CN 为 84.0% (95%CI,82.9%-85.1%),而 LDL-CF 为 40.3% (95%CI,39.4%-41.3%) (P <.001,每一次比较)。
使用 TG:VLDL-C 比值可调因子估算 LDL-C 的新方法比 Friedewald 方程提供了更准确的指南风险分类。这些发现需要进一步的外部验证,以及对其临床重要性的评估。将这些发现应用于临床实践将非常简单,而且几乎不需要成本。
clinicaltrials.gov 标识符:NCT01698489。