Cited by 260Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsLipid metabolism and disorders

Quantifying Atherogenic Lipoproteins: Current and Future Challenges in the Era of Personalized Medicine and Very Low Concentrations of LDL Cholesterol. A Consensus Statement from EAS and EFLM

Open access
Langlois, Michel R, Chapman, M John, Cobbaert, Christa, Mora, Samia, Remaley, Alan T, Ros, Emilio, Watts, Gerald F, Borén, Jan +15 more·2018·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The European Atherosclerosis Society–European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Consensus Panel aims to provide recommendations to optimize atherogenic lipoprotein quantification for cardiovascular risk management. CONTENT: We critically examined LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B (apoB), and LDL particle number assays based on key criteria for medical application of biomarkers. (a) Analytical performance: Discordant LDL cholesterol quantification occurs when LDL cholesterol is measured or calculated with different assays, especially in patients with hypertriglyceridemia >175 mg/dL (2 mmol/L) and low LDL cholesterol concentrations <70 mg/dL (1.8 mmol/L). Increased lipoprotein(a) should be excluded in patients not achieving LDL cholesterol goals with treatment. Non-HDL cholesterol includes the atherogenic risk component of remnant cholesterol and can be calculated in a standard nonfasting lipid panel without additional expense. ApoB more accurately reflects LDL particle number. (b) Clinical performance: LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and apoB are comparable predictors of cardiovascular events in prospective population studies and clinical trials; however, discordance analysis of the markers improves risk prediction by adding remnant cholesterol (included in non-HDL cholesterol) and LDL particle number (with apoB) risk components to LDL cholesterol testing. (c) Clinical and cost-effectiveness: There is no consistent evidence yet that non-HDL cholesterol-, apoB-, or LDL particle-targeted treatment reduces the number of cardiovascular events and healthcare-related costs than treatment targeted to LDL cholesterol. SUMMARY: Follow-up of pre- and on-treatment (measured or calculated) LDL cholesterol concentration in a patient should ideally be performed with the same documented test method. Non-HDL cholesterol (or apoB) should be the secondary treatment target in patients with mild to moderate hypertriglyceridemia, in whom LDL cholesterol measurement or calculation is less accurate and often less predictive of cardiovascular risk. Laboratories should report non-HDL cholesterol in all standard lipid panels.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/clinchem.2018.287037

Cites

146 of 146 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Non-HDLC represents the cholesterol in all particles causing cardiovascular disease, that is, LDL, VLDL, IDL, and Lp(a); in the nonfasting state this additionally includes the cholesterol in chylomicrons and their remnant particles.

    “Calculated by subtracting HDLC from TC, non-HDLC represents the cholesterol in all particles causing cardiovascular disease, that is, LDL, VLDL, IDL, and Lp(a); in the nonfasting state this additionally includes the cholesterol in chylomicrons and their remnant particles [1].”

    From Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies: Consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM (2020) · cites this paper as [1]

    The CALCULATED NON-HDLC section (p. 12) defines non-HDLC as total cholesterol minus HDL cholesterol and lists LDL, VLDL, IDL, chylomicron remnants, and Lp(a) among the particles it covers. The LDL PARTICLES section (p. 5) specifies that chylomicron remnants contribute in the nonfasting state. The REMNANT PARTICLES section (p. 5) distinguishes these atherogenic remnants from nascent chylomicrons, which it says are initially too large to enter the arterial wall; the claim does not preserve that distinction when describing chylomicrons as particles causing cardiovascular disease. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Most clinical trials demonstrating the evidence base for clinical benefit of LDLC lowering have used Friedewald cLDLC.

    “It should be noted that most clinical trials demonstrating the evidence base for clinical benefit of LDLC lowering have used Friedewald cLDLC; thus it cannot be excluded that dLDLC rather than cLDLC is the method that misclassifies risk [1].”

    From Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies: Consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM (2020) · cites this paper as [1]

    In “DISCORDANT cLDLC VS dLDLC” (p. 11), the paper says that most trials establishing the benefit of LDL-C lowering *with statin therapy* used the Friedewald equation. The citing claim omits the statin-therapy qualifier, extending the statement to LDL-C-lowering trials generally. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Although apoB demonstrates competitive clinical performance compared with non-HDLC, there is no evidence yet of significant population health-economic benefit of intensifying pharmacological intervention aiming to further reduce apoB at very low concentrations of LDLC.

    “Although apoB demonstrates competitive clinical performance compared with non-HDLC, there is no evidence yet of significant population healtheconomic benefit of intensifying pharmacological intervention aiming to further reduce apoB at very low concentrations of LDLC [1].”

    From Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies: Consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM (2020) · cites this paper as [1]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • This may compensate for the under- or overestimation of LDLC in terms of clinical decision making, given the uncertainty of dLDLC measurements or the Friedewald calculation in dyslipidemic samples when LDLC lowering approaches 1.4 mmol/L, and non-HDLC can be used at high TG ≥ 4.5 mmol/l.

    “This may compensate for the under-or overestimation of LDLC in terms of clinical decision making, given the uncertainty of dLDLC measurements or the Friedewald calculation in dyslipidemic samples when LDLC lowering approaches 1.4 mmol/L, and non-HDLC can be used at high TG ≥ 4.5 mmol/l.”

    From Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies: Consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM (2020) · cites this paper as [1]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The combination of non-HDLC with Martin-Hopkins cLDLC may be considered as an appropriate strategy to guide therapy and they can be calculated from the standard lipid profile.

    “For the present purposes, the combination of non-HDLC with Martin-Hopkins cLDLC may be considered as an appropriate strategy to guide therapy and they can be calculated from the standard lipid profile [1].”

    From Quantifying atherogenic lipoproteins for lipid-lowering strategies: Consensus-based recommendations from EAS and EFLM (2020) · cites this paper as [1]

    The LDLC VS NON-HDLC section (p. 18) says combining non-HDLC with calculated LDL-C is an appropriate strategy to guide therapy, and ON-TREATMENT DISCORDANCES (p. 21) says these measures can be calculated from a standard lipid profile. The paper does not specifically recommend Martin-Hopkins calculated LDL-C for that combination; the VLDLC section (p. 9) says the clinical value of alternative LDL-C calculations remains to be determined. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. [15]15. RamasamyI.Updateonthelaboratoryinvestigationof dyslipidemias. Clin Chim Acta 2018;479:103-25.
  2. [17]17. risk in 2013: what have we learned? Cardiovasc Diabetol 2014;13:26.
  3. [42]42. Nauck M, Warnick GR, Rifai N. Methods for measurement of LDL-cholesterol: a critical assessment of direct measurementbyhomogeneousassaysversuscalculation. Clin Chem 2002;48:236-54.
  4. [44]44. Miller WG, Myers GL, Sakurabayashi I, Bachmann LM, Caudill SP, Dziekonski A, et al. Seven direct methods for measuring HDLandLDLcholesterolcomparedwith ultracentrifugation reference measurement procedures. Clin Chem 2010;56:977-86.
  5. [46]46. Miida T, Nishimura K, Okamura T, Hirayama S, Ohmura H, Yoshida H, et al. A multicenter study on the precision andaccuracyofhomogeneousassaysforLDL-cholesterol: comparison with a beta-quantification method using fresh serum obtained from non-diseased and diseased subjects. Atherosclerosis 2012;225:208-15.
  6. [50]50. Lund SS, Petersen M, Frandsen M, Smidt UM, Parving HH, Vaag AA, Jensen T. Agreement between fasting and postprandial LDL cholesterol measured with 3 methodsinpatientswithtype2diabetesmellitus.Clin Chem 2011;57:298-308.
  7. [54]54. Sathiyakumar V, Park J, Golozar A, Lazo M, Quispe R, Guallar E, et al. Fasting versus nonfasting and lowdensity lipoprotein cholesterol accuracy. Circulation 2018;137:10-9.
  8. [86]86. Marcovina SM, Albers JJ, Kennedy H, Mei JV, Henderson LO, Hannon WH. International Federation of Clinical Chemistry standardization project for measurementsofapolipoproteinA-IandB.IV.Comparabilityof apolipoprotein B values by use of International Reference Material. Clin Chem 1994;40:586-92.
  9. [96]96. Steffen BT, Guan W, RemaleyAT,ParamsothyP,Heckbert SR, McClelland RL, et al. Use of lipoprotein particle measures for assessing coronary heart disease risk postAmericanHeartAssociation/AmericanCollegeofCardiologyguidelines:theMulti-EthnicStudyofAtherosclerosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2015;35:448-54.
  10. [105]105. Masana L, Ibarretxe D, Heras M, Cabre ´ A, Ferre ´ R, Merino J, et al. Substituting non-HDL cholesterol with LDLasaguideforlipid-lowering therapy increases the number of patients with indication for therapy. Atherosclerosis 2013;226:471-5.
  11. [108]108. Barter PJ, Ballantyne CM, Carmena R, Castro Cabezas M,ChapmanMJ,CoutureP,etal.ApoBversuscholesterol in estimating cardiovascular risk and in guiding therapy: report of the thirty-person/ten-country panel. J Intern Med 2006;259:247-58.
  12. [13]13. tions in very-low-density lipoproteins. J Am Heart Assoc 2017;6:e007402.
  13. [24]24. and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2015;372: 1489-99.
  14. [140]140. Folse HJ, Goswami D, Rengarajan B, Budoff M, Kahn R. Clinicaland cost-effectiveness of LDL particleguided statin therapy: a simulation study. Atherosclerosis 2014;236:154-61.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Langlois, M. R., Chapman, M. J., Cobbaert, C., Mora, S., Remaley, A. T., Ros, E., Watts, G. F., Borén, J., Baum, H., Bruckert, E., Catapano, A., Descamps, O. S., von Eckardstein, A., Kamstrup, P. R., Kolovou, G., Kronenberg, F., Langsted, A., Pulkki, K., Rifai, N., Sypniewska, G., Wiklund, O., Nordestgaard, B. G., & for the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Joint Consensus Initiative
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
  • Klinikum Ludwigsburg (DE)
  • Pitié-Salpetriere University Hospital, Paris, France
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Hôpital de Jolimont (BE)
  • Institute for Clinical Chemistry, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center (GR)
  • Innsbruck Medical University (AT)
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Department of Laboratory Medicine, Collegium Medicum, NC University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
Corresponding author
Langlois, Michel R
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
2018-07-01
Volume
64
Issue
7
Pages
1006-1033
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2800713945
Cited by
260
References
146
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 9
FWCI
34.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Lipid metabolism and disorders
Keywords
atherogenic lipoproteins, LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, LDL particle number, remnant cholesterol, lipoprotein(a), hypertriglyceridemia, cardiovascular risk prediction, treatment goals, cost-effectiveness, personalized medicine
MeSH terms
Humans, Cholesterol, LDL, Consensus, Atherosclerosis, Precision Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review