Direct Versus Calculated LDL Cholesterol and C-Reactive Protein in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment in the Framingham Offspring Study.

BACKGROUND: Increases in circulating LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) concentrations are significant risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). We assessed direct LDL-C and hsCRP concentrations compared to standard risk factors in the Framingham Offspring Study. METHODS: We used stored frozen plasma samples (-80 °C) obtained after an overnight fast from 3147 male and female participants (mean age, 58 years) free of CVD at cycle 6 of the Framingham Offspring Study. Overall, 677 participants (21.5%) had a CVD end point over a median of 16.0 years of follow-up. Total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), HDL cholesterol (HDL-C), direct LDL-C (Denka Seiken and Kyowa Medex methods), and hsCRP (Dade Behring method) concentrations were measured by automated analysis. LDL-C was also calculated by both the Friedewald and Martin methods. RESULTS: Considering all CVD outcomes on univariate analysis, significant factors included standard risk factors (age, hypertension, HDL-C, hypertension treatment, sex, diabetes, smoking, and TC concentration) and nonstandard risk factors (non-HDL-C, direct LDL-C and calculated LDL-C, TG, and hsCRP concentrations). On multivariate analysis, only the Denka Seiken direct LDL-C and the Dade Behring hsCRP were still significant on Cox regression analysis and improved the net risk reclassification index, but with modest effects. Discordance analysis confirmed the benefit of the Denka Seiken direct LDL-C method for prospective hard CVD endpoints (new-onset myocardial infarction, stroke, and/or CVD death). CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the Denka Seiken direct LDL-C and Dade Behring hsCRP measurements add significant, but modest, information about CVD risk, compared to standard risk factors and/or calculated LDL-C.

Difference in bias approach for commutability assessment: application to frozen pools of human serum measured by 8 direct methods for HDL and LDL cholesterol.

BACKGROUND: We used a difference in bias approach to evaluate the commutability of 4 frozen serum pools for 8 direct methods for measurement of HDL and LDL cholesterol (HDLC and LDLC). METHODS: Freshly collected nonfrozen sera from 138 diseased and 37 nondiseased patients and 4 frozen pools from the CDC Lipid Standardization Program were measured by direct methods and by the beta-quantification reference measurement procedure of the CDC. We used an error components model to estimate the difference in the bias component of error plus its uncertainty for frozen pools vs patient samples between the direct method and the reference procedure. Frozen pools with bias differences less than a critical value determined by either medical requirements for bias or the random error components of the measurement procedures were considered commutable. RESULTS: On the basis of medical requirement criteria, 1 of the 4 frozen pools was commutable for most of the HDLC methods for both diseased and nondiseased patients, and none was commutable for LDLC methods. On the basis of random error criteria, all of the frozen pools were generally commutable for all of the HDLC methods for both diseased and nondiseased patients, and 1 of the 4 frozen pools was generally commutable for most of the LDLC methods for both diseased and nondiseased patients. CONCLUSIONS: Commutability was assessed as the closeness of agreement of the difference in bias between a reference material and a set of patient samples. Criteria for commutability could be based on fixed medical requirements for bias or on random error components.

Direct assessment of plasma low density lipoprotein and high density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and coronary heart disease: results from the Framingham Offspring Study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated direct low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (C) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (C) versus standard methods using fasting plasma samples from participants in cycle 6 of the Framingham Offspring Study. METHODS: Direct LDL-C and HDL-C measurements were performed on fasting plasma from male (1335 controls, 173 CHD cases) and female (1606 controls, 74 cases) participants, and compared with LDL-C, as calculated with the Friedewald formula, and HDL-C, as measured after dextran-Mg(2+) precipitation. RESULTS: Values for direct LDL-C and HDL-C correlated well with standard methods (both about r(2)=0.94, p<0.001) with similar absolute values. Biases of >10% were present for 7.7% of samples for LDL-C, while for HDL-C this value was 8.5%. Despite higher use of cholesterol-lowering medication in CHD cases, calculated or direct LDL-C values were still well above recommended values [<2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL)] in CHD cases, especially in females. CONCLUSIONS: Direct assays for both LDL-C and HDL-C provide an acceptable guide for lipid treatment. In Framingham Offspring Study participants most CHD cases had LDL-C levels above the recommended target.