Key result
Four LDL subfractionation methods show complete phenotype agreement in 64% of healthy adults.
Why the study?
Do 4 common methods of LDL subfractionation agree in determining LDL phenotypes in healthy adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=228)
Yes
Do 4 common methods of LDL subfractionation agree in determining LDL phenotypes in healthy adults?
There is substantial agreement in reported LDL phenotypes among 4 common LDL subfraction measurement technologies, supporting their consistency in clinical use.
BACKGROUND: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering is the primary objective of patient management for cardiovascular disease. However, large numbers of patients who have achieved their LDL-C goal remain at risk for cardiovascular events. Low-density lipoprotein subfractions may provide insight into this residual risk. Thus, LDL subfraction standardization and consistency are critical to these efforts. AIM: This study aimed to determine the agreement of the analytical results among 4 methods commonly used for LDL subfractionation, namely, segmented gradient gel electrophoresis (sGGE), ultracentrifugation-vertical auto profile (VAP), nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and ion mobility (IM). METHODS: Blood samples were collected from 228 apparently healthy adults and sent to 4 clinical reference laboratories for analysis. The LDL phenotype was reported as pattern A (larger, less dense particles) or pattern B (smaller, more dense particles), respectively, and was the primary measure of comparison. An intermediate pattern (A/B) was also reported for sGGE and VAP. RESULTS: We observed complete agreement in the LDL phenotype among the 4 methods in 64% of subjects and agreement among at least 3 of the 4 methods in 87% of subjects. Agreement among pairs of methods ranged from 73% to 98% depending on how differences in reporting of subjects with intermediate results were considered. When subjects having intermediate A/B pattern were excluded, sGGE and IM had the highest agreement (98%) of any pair of methods. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial agreement in the reported LDL phenotype among 4 LDL subfraction measurement technologies as performed by different clinical reference laboratories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sninsky et al. (2013) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy adults (n=228). LDL subfractionation methods (sGGE, VAP, NMR, IM) was evaluated on Agreement in LDL phenotype among the 4 methods. Four methods of LDL subfractionation (sGGE, VAP, NMR, and IM) showed complete agreement in LDL phenotype in 64% of healthy adults, and agreement among at least 3 methods in 87%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: