Key result
Postprandial LDL-C measurement in T2DM patients disagreed with fasting levels across 3 methods, showing maximum mean differences of -0.36 mmol/L (95% LOA -0.89 to 0.17) with the Friedewald equation.
Why the study?
Does postprandial LDL-C measurement agree with fasting LDL-C measurement across different laboratory methods in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Observational (n=74)
Does postprandial LDL-C measurement agree with fasting LDL-C measurement across different laboratory methods in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Effect estimate: Mean difference -0.36 mmol/L (95% CI -0.89 to 0.17)
Postprandial LDL-C concentrations are lower than fasting levels in patients with T2DM regardless of the measurement method, indicating that postprandial samples may misclassify cardiovascular risk and should not be used.
Postprandial LDL-C may misclassify CV risk in T2DM; hypothesis-generating for fasting requirements across methods.
BACKGROUND LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) is a modifiable cardiovascular disease risk factor. We used 3 LDL-C methods to study the agreement between fasting and postprandial LDL-C in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients. METHODS We served 74 T2DM patients a standardized meal and sampled blood at fasting and 1.5, 3.0, 4.5, and 6.0 h postprandially. We measured LDL-C by use of modified β quantification (MBQ), the Friedewald equation (FE), and a direct homogeneous assay (DA). We evaluated agreement using 95% limits of agreement (LOA) within ±0.20 mmol/L (±7.7 mg/dL). RESULTS LDL-C concentrations at all postprandial times disagreed with those at fasting for all methods. In 66 patients who had complete measurements with all LDL-C methods, maximum mean differences (95% LOA) in postprandial vs fasting LDL-C were −0.16 mmol/L (−0.51; 0.19) [−6.2 mg/dL (−19.7; 7.3)] with MBQ at 3 h; −0.36 mmol/L (−0.89; 0.17) [−13.9 mg/dL (−34; 6.6)] with FE at 4.5 h; and −0.24 mmol/L (−0.62; 0.05) [−9.3 mg/dL (−24; 1.9)] with DA at 6.0 h. In postprandial samples, FE misclassified 38% of patients (two-thirds of statin users) into lower Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) risk categories. Greater disagreement between fasting and postprandial LDL-C was observed in individuals with postprandial triglyceride concentrations >2.08 mmol/L (>184 mg/dL) and in women (interactions: P ≤ 0.038). CONCLUSIONS Differences up to 0.89 mmol/L (34 mg/dL) between fasting and postprandial LDL-C concentrations, with postprandial LDL-C concentrations usually being lower, were found in T2DM by 3 different LDL-C methods. Such differences are potentially relevant clinically and suggest that, irrespective of measurement method, postprandial LDL-C concentrations should not be used to assess cardiovascular disease risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lund et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (n=74). Postprandial LDL-C measurement vs. Fasting LDL-C measurement was evaluated on Agreement between fasting and postprandial LDL-C using 95% limits of agreement within ±0.20 mmol/L (Mean difference -0.36 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.17). Postprandial LDL-C measurement in T2DM patients disagreed with fasting levels across 3 methods, showing maximum mean differences of -0.36 mmol/L (95% LOA -0.89 to 0.17) with the Friedewald equation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: