Performance of equations for calculated LDL-C in hypertriglyceridaemia: Which one correlates best with directly measured LDL-C?

Abstract

BackgroundThe gold standard for measuring LDL-C is impractical and direct measurements have numerous shortcomings. Older predictive equations are used only with triglycerides (TG’s) below 4.52 mmol/L. We evaluated the newer equations validated for use in hypertriglyceridaemia by comparison with direct LDL-C. Materials and methodsDatasets from two platforms (Abbott Architect and Roche Cobas) comprised of a large cohort of 64,765 individuals were used to compare the Sampson-National Institutes of Health 2 (S-NIH2) and Extended Martin-Hopkins (E-MH) equations for LDL-C with direct LDL-C (dLDL-C) assays. ResultsWith TG’s of 4.52–9.04 mmol/L the S-NIH2 equation tended to calculate lower values than measured by dLDL-C and the E-MH equation calculated higher values. Both equations correlated better with the dLDL-C measured on Abbott than Roche with the E-MH equation having more values falling within acceptable concordance levels on both platforms. ConclusionThe E-MH equation correlates better with dLDL-C than the S-NIH2 on both platforms with TG levels up to 9.04 mmol/L. With hypertriglyceridaemia, the E-MH equation is less likely than the S-NIH2 equation to underestimate LDL-C when compared to the dLDL-C and will be less likely to underdiagnose patients with LDL-C levels requiring treatment according to current guidelines.