Validation of the Friedewald formula for the determination of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol compared with beta-quantification in a large population

Lipoprotein data from 9477 subjects, covering a wide range of total plasma cholesterol levels, were used to examine the validity of the Friedewald formula for estimating plasma concentrations of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) using high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglyceride (TG) concentrations. Values of LDL-C obtained from the Friedewald formula were compared with values of LDL-C derived from preparative ultracentrifugation used as a reference method. We found that the bias associated with the Friedewald formula was not related to plasma LDL-C levels and was smaller than −4.0% even for plasma LDL-C values <3.0 mmol/l. Moreover, in the subgroup of individuals with plasma TG levels ≤4.5 mmol/l, the Friedewald formula underestimated LDL-C levels with a bias between −3.1% and −1.9% according to TG quartiles. Interestingly, the Friedewald formula showed no significant bias in patients with plasma TG levels between 4.51 and 8.82 mmol/l, suggesting that the calculated LDL-C are reliable and could be clinically useful in patients with plasma TG levels higher than 4.5 mmol/l which is the reference cut-point value used by most clinical laboratories. Finally, multiple regression analyses showed that the very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C)/TG ratio represented nearly 63% (P < 0.0001) of the variance of the bias associated with the Friedewald formula. We concluded that the Friedewald formula may be reliable at low LDL-C levels and at TG levels up to 9 mmol/l but may be used with caution when the VLDL-C/TG ratio is high as observed in patients with type III dysbetalipoproteinemia.     

血清低密度脂蛋白胆固醇直接测定与Friedewald公式计算结果比较

总结了应用聚乙烯硫酸（ＰＶＳ）沉淀法测定１２３１例标本的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇（ＬＤＬ－Ｃ）值并与Ｆｒｉｅｄｅｗａｌｄ公式计算的结果比较，按甘油三酯（ＴＧ）浓度分组，对比两法ＬＤＬ－Ｃ值的差异及影响ＬＤＬ－Ｃ值的因素。结果显示在低浓度ＴＧ时两法基本一致，高ＴＧ时两法差别较大。ＴＧ＞４．５２ｍｍｏｌ／Ｌ（４００ｍｇ／ｄｌ）时Ｆｒｉｅｄｅｗａｌｄ公式计算结果偏低。以直接测定ＬＤＬ－Ｃ值计算ＶＬＤＬ－Ｃ／ＴＧ比例平均为１：６．３，不同于Ｆｒｉｅｄｅｗａｌｄ公式中的１：５。     

Interference in a homogeneous assay for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by lipoprotein X.

BACKGROUND: Homogeneous assays for cholesterol in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) are currently in wide use for guideline-based diagnosis and monitoring of dyslipaemic or coronary conditions. In some sera from patients with impaired liver function, we measured implausibly low LDL concentrations using a sugar compound-based assay [LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C), Roche Diagnostics]. We investigated whether an interfering factor, possibly associated with cholestasis, is consistently responsible for this disturbance. METHODS: We compared results of the LDL-C assay in samples with implausible (n=158) and plausible (n=65) LDL concentrations with those of another assay based on two selective detergents (LDLD, Beckman Coulter) and with sequential density ultracentrifugation. We measured total bilirubin, triglycerides, bile acids and lipoprotein X (Lp X) concentrations in samples with the described disturbance and examined the effect of bile salt addition to normal samples. RESULTS: The LDL-C assay was negatively biased compared to the LDLD assay (bias -0.63 mmol/L) and sequential density ultracentrifugation (bias -0.85 mmol/L) in samples with an implausible lipoprotein profile, but showed good method agreement in all other samples. The bile acid concentration did not correlate with the LDL bias, and addition of bile acids showed no interference with the LDL-C assay. The Lp X concentration correlated with the bias between the LDL-C and LDLD assays (R=0.66, p<0.0001); there was no interference with the LDLD assay, even at high Lp X concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the LDL-C assay is subject to interference by Lp X and can provide grossly negatively biased results in cholestatic conditions. In such patients, LDL measurement with an assay based on a different method should be performed.     

Effects of total cholesterol and triglyceride on the percentage difference between the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration measured directly and calculated using the Friedewald formula.

BACKGROUND: We elucidate how the triglyceride (TG) and total cholesterol (TC) concentrations affect the percentage difference (%DeltaLDL) between the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentration evaluated by direct measurement (DLDL-C) and calculated using the Friedewald formula (FLDL-C), under conditions allowing the calculation. METHODS: Serum concentrations of TC, TG, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and DLDL-C were measured and the FLDL-C and %DeltaLDL were calculated for 38,243 Koreans who had TG values <4.52 mmol/L. The DLDL-C was measured using the homogeneous Kyowa Medex assay (Kyowa, Tokyo, Japan). The %DeltaLDL was calculated using the equation: [(FLDL-C-DLDL-C)/DLDL-C]x100. RESULTS: The mean %DeltaLDL-C was -9.1+/-6.4%. The %DeltaLDL differed by more than +/-5% in 75.4% of the subjects, and the FLDL-C was lower than the DLDL-C in 96.3%. The mean %DeltaLDL-C for the group with the highest TG and lowest TC was 11.8-fold that for the group with the lowest TG and highest TC. CONCLUSIONS: Under conditions satisfying the requirements of the Friedewald formula, the DLDL-C and FLDL-C differed significantly over the concentration ranges of both TC and TG. In an evaluation of patients with hyperlipidemia, the Friedewald calculation may underestimate the risk for coronary heart disease.     

低密度脂蛋白胆固醇保护性试剂匀相测定法的临床评价

目的对低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)保护性试剂匀相测定法进行临床评价.方法分析了保护性试剂匀相测定法的精密度、准确性、特异性和干扰因素,并随机选取了219份病人血清标本,比较分析用保护性试剂匀相测定法直接测定与Friedewald公式和Planella公式计算的LDL-C结果.结果保护性试剂匀相测定法具有较好的精密度(批内、批间CV和总CV均小于3%).线性范围至10.4mmol/L,最低检测浓度为0.08mmol/L,平均回收率为101.2%.基本不受极低密度脂蛋白(VLDL)、高密度脂蛋白(HDL)和血红蛋白的影响.在TG＜4.52mmol/L时,用匀相测定法与Friedewald公式和Planella公式的计算法结果之间相关性良好,两种公式计算法结果之间的也有较好相关性;而在TG＞4.52mmol/L时,匀相测定法与两种计算法之间的相关性差.结论保护性试剂匀相测定法简便、快速、结果准确,易于自动分析,适合在临床实验室常规检测应用.     

低密度脂蛋白胆固醇保护性试剂匀相测定法的临床评价

目的 对低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDT-C)保护性试剂匀相测定法进行临床评价。 方法 分析了保护性试剂匀相测定法的精密度、准确性、特异性和干扰因素.并随机选取了219份病人血清标本,比较分析用保护性试剂匀相测定法直接测定与Friedewald公式和Planella公式计算的LDL—C结果。 结果 保护性试剂匀相测定法具有较好的精密度(批内、批间CV和总CV均小于3％)。线性范围至10.4mmol/L,最低检测浓度为0.08mmol/L,平均同收率为101.2％:基本不受极低密度脂蛋白(VLDL)、高密度脂蛋白(HDL)和血红蛋白的影响。在TG<4.52mmol/L时,用匀相测定法与Friedewald公式和Planella公式的计算法结果之间相关性良好,两种公式计算法结果之间的也有较好相关性;而在TG>4.52mmoL/L时,匀相测定法与两种计算法之间的相关性差。结论 保护性试剂匀相测定法简便、快速、结果准确,易于自动分析,适合在临床实验室常规检测应用。     

Comparison of two homogeneous HDL cholesterol methods in a large population study

OBJECTIVES: High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) is an independent risk factor for coronary heart disease. Data are lacking on the performance of homogeneous methods using a large number of samples. DESIGN AND METHODS: We compared the performance of two HDL-C direct assays, the Dimension RxL (the Dade method) and the COBAS INTEGRA (the Roche method), for population screening. Performance was assessed using 4214 sera obtained from the International Collaborative Study on Atherosclerosis and Stroke In Asia (InterASIA) participants. RESULTS: The method comparison results demonstrated that both methods were highly correlated (r = 0.972). Deming regression analysis showed a slope of 1.009 +/- 0.007, an intercept of 0.048 +/- 0.009 and a S(y/x) of 0.08. The means were 1.29 +/- 0.33 and 1.23 +/- 0.33 mmol/l for the Roche and Dade methods, respectively, and the range of observed values were 0.30-3.05 and 0.19-2.86 mmol/l, respectively. The 95% confidence interval for the mean of the method differences was -0.10 to 0.22 mmol/l. Percentages of low (> or = 1.55 mmol/l), normal (1.03-1.54 mmol/l), and high risk (< 1.03 mmol/l) results were 15.5, 55.4, 29.0 for the Dade and 19.3, 59.3, 21.4 for the Roche method. The percentage of concordantly classified subjects at each cut point was 77.1%, 84.4%, and 95.5%. The percentage of overall consistency subjects was 85.4%. Thirteen percent of subjects were discordantly classified into the higher-risk group while the 1.6% of subjects were discordantly classified into the lower-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: Both homogeneous HDL-C methods were correlated and agree well with one another. The percentage of concordantly classified subjects was high. Thus, either method is suitable for large population studies.     

Multicentric evaluation of the homogeneous LDL-cholesterol Plus assay: comparison with beta-quantification and Friedewald formula

ObjectivesTo evaluate the analytical and clinical performance of a new version of the LDL-C Plus assay and compare it with the beta-quantification (BQ) method in a multicenter study.Design and methodsDirect LDL-C was measured in 169 fresh pooled samples and in 830 clinical samples with known LDL-C by BQ. The reactivity of lipoproteins and the effect of hemoglobin, bilirubin and chylomicrons (CM) were studied.ResultsDirect LDL-C total imprecision was < 2.2%; inaccuracy < ± 2.5% (unaffected by triglycerides up to 9.5 mmol/L); and total error 9.8%. Direct assay reacted with 95%, 50% and 25% of the cholesterol in the LDL, intermediate (IDL) and VLDL fractions, respectively. A significant association was observed with BQ. Icteric samples showed a negative bias and the effect of CM was variable. A positive bias was observed when VLDL-cholesterol/triglyceride ratio was > 0.57.ConclusionsLDL-C Plus assay represents a valid alternative to BQ for clinical laboratories.     

Comparing a novel equation for calculating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with the Friedewald equation: A VOYAGER analysis

Treating elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to risk-stratified target levels is recommended in several guidelines. Thus, accurate estimation of LDL-C is required. LDL-C is typically calculated using the Friedewald equation: (total cholesterol) – (non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [non-HDL-C]) – (triglycerides [TGs]/5). As the equation uses a fixed value equal to 5 as a divisor for TGs, it does not account for inter-individual variability, often resulting in underestimation of risk and potentially undertreatment. It is specifically inapplicable in patients with fasting triglycerides ≥400 mg/dL. A novel method of LDL-C calculation was derived and validated by Martin et al.: (non-HDL-C) – (triglycerides/adjustable factor). This equation uses an adjustable factor, the median TG:very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio in strata defined by levels of TG and non-HDLC, as divisor for TGs, and the adjustable factor ranging from 3 to 12 has been shown to provide more accurate estimates of LDL-C compared with the Friedewald equation using a direct assay as the gold standard.We used 70,209 baseline and on-treatment lipid values from the VOYAGER meta-analysis database to determine the difference in calculated LDL-C values using the Friedewald and novel equations. In patients with TGs <400 mg/dL, LDL-C values calculated using the novel equation were plotted against those calculated using the Friedewald equation. The novel equation generally resulted in LDL-C values greater than the Friedewald calculation, with differences increasing with decreasing LDL-C levels; 23% of individuals who reached a LDL-C target of 70 mg/dL with the Friedewald equation did not achieve this target when the novel equation was used to calculate LDL-C; these figures were 8% and 2% for <100 mg/dL and < 130 mg/dL targets, respectively. In patients with triglycerides ≥400 mg/dL, in whom the Friedewald equation is not valid, lipid values calculated using the novel equation were compared with those obtained by β-quantification. Values calculated with the novel equation did not appear to be closely related with those calculated by β-quantification in these patients. In conclusion, the novel equation provides a higher estimation of exact LDL-C values than the Friedewald equation, particularly in patients with low LDL-C levels, which may result in undertreatment of some patients whose LDL-C was calculated using the Friedewald method. However, neither may be suitable for patients with TG ≥400 mg/dL.     

Development of a homogeneous assay to measure remnant lipoprotein cholesterol

BACKGROUND: Quantification of triglyceride-rich lipoprotein (TRL) remnants is useful for risk assessment of coronary artery disease and the diagnosis of type III hyperlipoproteinemia. Although an immunoseparation procedure for remnant-like particle cholesterol has been evaluated extensively in recent years, available methods for measuring TRL remnants have not achieved wide use in routine laboratory practice, suggesting a need for a homogeneous assay that can measure TRL remnant cholesterol in serum or plasma without pretreatment. METHODS: We screened for suitable surfactants that exhibited favorable selectivity toward the VLDL remnant (VLDLR) fraction, including intermediate-density lipoproteins (IDLs). We investigated the principal characteristics of this assay by gel filtration of lipoproteins and their particle size distribution. We developed a simple assay and evaluated its performance with the Hitachi-7170 analyzer. RESULTS: Polyoxyethylene-polyoxybutylene block copolymer (POE-POB) exhibited favorable selectivity toward VLDLR and IDL fractions. POE-POB removed apolipoprotein (apo) E and apo C-III from IDL particles in the presence of cholesterol esterase (CHER), and the particle size distribution of IDLs became smaller after the reaction. These results revealed that IDL particles are specifically modified in the presence of CHER and POE-POB, making their component cholesterol available for enzymatic assay. Addition of phospholipase D improved the reactivity toward chylomicron remnants (CMRs). We found a high correlation [y = 1.018x- 0.01 mmol/L, r = 0.962 (n = 160)] between the proposed assay and the immunoseparation assay in serum from healthy individuals. CONCLUSION: The homogeneous assay described in this report can measure TRL remnant cholesterol, including CMRs, VLDLRs, and IDLs, with high sensitivity and specificity.     

Validation of the Friedewald formula for the measurement of low density lipoprotein cholesterol in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

The Friedewald formula has been widely used in the estimation of the serum LDL cholesterol concentration in diabetic patients. In patients with insulin-dependent diabetes we have compared the serum LDL cholesterol concentrations obtained when VLDL was isolated in the preparative ultracentrifuge and its cholesterol content directly determined with those when the 'Friedewald Formula' assumption that there is a fixed ratio between total serum triglycerides and VLDL cholesterol was used in the calculation of the LDL cholesterol value. Both methods gave similar results which were closely correlated (r = 0.98) with a slope of 0.98 on linear regression analysis for patients with serum triglycerides of less than 2.5 mmol/l. The inclusion of a small number of hypertriglyceridaemic patients (14%) had virtually no impact on these findings.     

Estimating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by the Friedewald equation is adequate for classifying patients on the basis of nationally recommended cutpoints

We compared low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) values obtained by the Friedewald formula--i.e., total cholesterol minus high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol minus very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) cholesterol (estimated as triglyceride divided by 5)--with those obtained by lipoprotein fractionation, using 4736 specimens. When triglycerides were less than 2.0 g/L, greater than 90% of estimated LDL cholesterol values were acceptable, within +/- 10% of measured values. At triglyceride concentrations of 2.0-4.0 g/L and 4.0-6.0 g/L, only 72% and 39%, respectively, of the estimates were acceptable. LDL values derived from an alternative formula, estimating VLDL as triglycerides divided by 6, were even less accurate. Nevertheless, the use of estimated LDL for risk classification based on the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel cutpoints of 1.30 and 1.60 g/L was considered acceptable. At triglyceride concentrations less than or equal to 5.0 g/L, 88% of classifications based on estimated LDL (using triglycerides divided by 5) were concordant with those by measured LDL. Eleven percent of classifications were shifted across one cutpoint, evenly distributed between high and low. Fewer than 1% of classifications, all with Type III hyperlipoproteinemia, were misclassified two cutpoints high. Refinements in the estimation model did not substantially improve LDL estimation or concordance of risk classification.     

Comparative study between anion-exchange HPLC and homogeneous assay methods in regard to the accuracy of high- and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurement

Objectives:A convenient method based on anion-exchange HPLC was recently developed to determine cholesterol levels of lipoproteins (HDL, LDL, IDL, VLDL, and chylomicron). The present study was performed to compare this HPLC method to homogenous assay in regard to measurement accuracy of HDL and LDL cholesterol.Design and methods:Serum samples (n = 105), including three samples from cholestasis patients, were measured by homogenous assay with Cholestest-LDL and CholestestN-HDL (Daiichi Chemicals, Tokyo) and by HPLC as reported previously (J Lipid Res 2003; 44: 1404–12).Results:The homogenous assay for HDL cholesterol correlated strongly with the HPLC method for HDL cholesterol (r = 0.976). Two samples from cholestasis patients could not be measured by homogenous assay but were measured by HPLC. The homogenous assay for LDL cholesterol correlated modestly with the HPLC method for LDL cholesterol (r = 0.823). Three outlier samples, from cholestasis patients with serum cholesterol levels > 17 mmol/L, were observed in this correlation analysis. Homogenous assay data showed that these LDL cholesterol levels were 15.2–34.7 mmol/L. However, HPLC data showed that these LDL cholesterol levels were 3.6–8.2 mmol/L, and that the major lipoprotein fractions were VLDL and IDL. The difference in LDL cholesterol levels (homogenous assay data minus HPLC data) was positively correlated with VLDL cholesterol levels.Conclusions:When measuring samples from cholestasis patients, homogenous assay may give inaccurate results. In contrast, the HPLC method is likely to be capable of accurately measuring HDL and LDL cholesterol levels without the involving VLDL.     

Serum amyloid A does not affect high-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurement by a homogeneous assay

BackgroundSerum amyloid A (SAA), which is one of the acute phase proteins, alters the structure of HDL by associating with it during circulation. We focused on whether SAA influences the values of HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) measurements when using a homogeneous assay.MethodsHDLs were isolated by ultracentrifugation from serum samples of 248 patients that were stratified into three groups based on their serum SAA concentrations (low: SAA ≤ 8 μg/mL; middle: 8 < SAA ≤ 100 μg/mL; and high: SAA > 100 μg/mL). HDL-C concentrations of the serum samples measured by the homogeneous assay were compared with the total cholesterol concentrations of HDL fractions isolated by ultracentrifugation.ResultsHDLs obtained from patients with low SAA concentrations were separated into their general particle sizes and classified as HDL₂ and HDL₃ by native-gel electrophoresis. On the other hand, HDLs obtained from patients with high SAA concentrations occasionally showed distributions different from the typical sizes of HDL₂ and HDL₃, such as extremely small or large particles. Nevertheless, HDL-C concentrations measured using the homogeneous assay were strongly correlated with those measured using the ultracentrifugation method, regardless of the SAA concentrations. However, the ratios of HDL-C concentrations obtained by the homogeneous assay to those obtained by the ultracentrifugation method for patients with high SAA concentrations were significantly lower than those of patients with low SAA concentrations.ConclusionsA large amount of SAA attached to HDL altered the HDL particle size but did not essentially affect HDL-C measurement by homogeneous assay.     

Surfactant-based homogeneous assay for the measurement of triglyceride concentrations in VLDL and intermediate-density lipoprotein

BACKGROUND: Existing studies have demonstrated the clinical significance of triglyceride content in VLDL (VLDL-TG) and intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL-TG). We developed a homogeneous assay protocol to directly measure VLDL-TG. METHODS: Possible reagents and conditions for measuring VLDL-TG were comprehensively tested, and the "best" combination was determined. Healthy persons were instructed to consume a fatty meal after 15-h overnight fasting. Serum VLDL-TG + IDL-TG concentrations were measured using the proposed method. Patients with serum LDL-cholesterol concentrations > or = 3.62 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) were administered simvastatin at a daily dose of 5 mg, and serum VLDL-TG concentrations were then measured. RESULTS: The combination of 2 nonionic surfactants played an important role in differentiating VLDL and IDL from other lipoproteins, probably via specific interactions with phospholipids and apolipoproteins. The regression line of the proposed method (y) and the ultracentrifugal assay (x) was: y = 0.98x + 0.31 mmol/L (r = 0.98; n = 73; P < 0.05). The difference between postprandial total TG and VLDL-TG concentrations was statistically significant (P < 0.05). After 8 weeks of therapy with simvastatin, total TG and LDL-cholesterol concentrations were 13.6% and 26.3% lower, respectively (P < 0.05), whereas VLDL-TG did not show any significant decrease. CONCLUSION: Our homogeneous method can measure TG content in VLDL and IDL.     

Estimation of LDL cholesterol based on the Friedewald formula and on apo B levels

OBJECTIVES: The plasma apolipoprotein B (apo B) concentrations have been considered to be a more accurate representation of atherogenic particles and it has been proposed that the formula LDL-C (mmol/L) = 0.41TC - 0.32TG + 1.70apo B - 0.27 is reliable for the estimation of LDL-C (Clin Chem 1997; 43: 808-15). We undertook the present study to investigate the reliability of this formula in a large number of hyperlipidemic patients. DESIGN AND METHODS: 1) The Friedewald formula (LDL-F) and the apo B-based formula (LDL-B) were compared with the beta-quantification reference procedure in 130 individuals with a wide range of total cholesterol (TC) and triglyceride (TG) levels, and 2) the LDL-C levels obtained by the Friedewald formula were compared with those calculated by the apo B-based formula in 1010 individuals attending our outpatient lipid clinic. RESULTS: The LDL-F and the LDL-B formulae for LDL-C estimation were found to be in good agreement with the beta-quantification (r = 0.96 and 0.97, respectively). The bias of each method plotted as a function of TG (up to 4.52 mmol/L) was found positive for the LDL-F, whereas the LDL-B was independent of the concentrations of TG. When a large number of individuals were examined, a good correlation between the two equations was found (n = 1010, r = 0.98). The difference between the two methods was not correlated with serum TG levels. However, it was correlated to serum TC, and apo B levels. CONCLUSIONS: The LDL-B formula is a more reliable and accurate method than the LDL-F formula, especially at TG levels >2.26 mmol/L, although it underestimates LDL-C concentrations. Furthermore, this equation can be used in hypertriglyceridemic patients (TG >4.52 mmol/L) in whom the Friedewald equation is inaccurate.