Very Large Database of Lipids: Rationale and Design

Johns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Clinical Cardiology (Impact Factor: 2.59). 11/2013; 36(11). DOI: 10.1002/clc.22214
Source: PubMed


Blood lipids have major cardiovascular and public health implications. Lipid-lowering drugs are prescribed based in part on categorization of patients into normal or abnormal lipid metabolism, yet relatively little emphasis has been placed on: (1) the accuracy of current lipid measures used in clinical practice, (2) the reliability of current categorizations of dyslipidemia states, and (3) the relationship of advanced lipid characterization to other cardiovascular disease biomarkers. To these ends, we developed the Very Large Database of Lipids (NCT01698489), an ongoing database protocol that harnesses deidentified data from the daily operations of a commercial lipid laboratory. The database includes individuals who were referred for clinical purposes for a Vertical Auto Profile (Atherotech Inc., Birmingham, AL), which directly measures cholesterol concentrations of low-density lipoprotein, very low-density lipoprotein, intermediate-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, their subclasses, and lipoprotein(a). Individual Very Large Database of Lipids studies, ranging from studies of measurement accuracy, to dyslipidemia categorization, to biomarker associations, to characterization of rare lipid disorders, are investigator-initiated and utilize peer-reviewed statistical analysis plans to address a priori hypotheses/aims. In the first database harvest (Very Large Database of Lipids 1.0) from 2009 to 2011, there were 1 340 614 adult and 10 294 pediatric patients; the adult sample had a median age of 59 years (interquartile range, 49-70 years) with even representation by sex. Lipid distributions closely matched those from the population-representative National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The second harvest of the database (Very Large Database of Lipids 2.0) is underway. Overall, the Very Large Database of Lipids database provides an opportunity for collaboration and new knowledge generation through careful examination of granular lipid data on a large scale.

Download full-text


Available from: Peter Toth, Sep 15, 2014
1 Follower
32 Reads
  • Source
    • "Whereas LDL-C can be inferred from Friedewald’s equation in fasting conditions, this calculation underestimates LDL-C in moderate to severe hypertriglyceridemia (200-400 mg/dL), and is inapplicable for fasting TG >400 mg/dL [14]. To overcome this inaccuracy, a novel method for estimating LDL-C from standard lipid profile using an adjustable factor for the TG:VLDL-C ratio was recently proposed by Martin et al. [15,16]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Non-fasting triglyceride-rich lipoproteins cholesterol (TRL-C) contributes to cardiovascular risk, in that it includes remnant cholesterol (RC). TRL-C is computed as total C - [LDL-C + HDL-C]). Such calculation applies only if LDL-C is directly measured, or obtained from a non-Friedewald's formula, a method as yet never benchmarked against independent markers of TRL burden. The Discriminant Ratio (DR) methodology was used in 120 type 2 diabetic patients in order: (i) to compute TRL-C from non-fasting lipids; (ii) to establish the performance of TRL-C and TRL-C/apoA-I (vs. TG-based markers) to grade TRLs and atherogenic dyslipidemia (AD); and (iii) to relate TRL-C with non-fasting TG. Depending on apoB100 availability, TRL-C (mg/dL) can be derived from non-fasting lipids in two ways: (a) total cholesterol (TC) - [(0.0106 * TC - 0.0036 * TG + 0.017 * apoB100 - 0.27) * 38.6] - HDL-C; and (b) TC - [(0.0106 * TC - 0.0036 * TG + 0.017 * [0.65 * (TC - HDL-C) + 6.3] - 0.27) * 38.6] - HDL-C. Discrimination between log[TG] and TRL-C was similar (DR 0.94 and 0.84, respectively), whereas that of log[TG]/HDL-C was better than TRL-C/apoA-I (DR 1.01 vs. 0.65; p 0.0482). All Pearson's correlations between pairs reached unity, allowing formulation of two unbiased equivalence equations: (a) TRL-C = 97.8 * log[TG] - 181.9; and (b) TRL-C/apoA-I = 8.15 * (log[TG]/HDL-C) - 0.18. TRL-C and log[TG] are as effective and interchangeable for assessing remnant atherogenic particles. For grading TRL-AD, it is best to use log[TG]/HDL-C, inherently superior to TRL-C/apoA-I, while measuring the same underlying variable.
    Cardiovascular Diabetology 03/2014; 13(1):56. DOI:10.1186/1475-2840-13-56 · 4.02 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE In clinical and research settings worldwide, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is typically estimated using the Friedewald equation. This equation assumes a fixed factor of 5 for the ratio of triglycerides to very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (TG:VLDL-C); however, the actual TG:VLDL-C ratio varies significantly across the range of triglyceride and cholesterol levels. OBJECTIVE To derive and validate a more accurate method for LDL-C estimation from the standard lipid profile using an adjustable factor for the TG:VLDL-C ratio. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We used a convenience sample of consecutive clinical lipid profiles obtained from 2009 through 2011 from 1 350 908 children, adolescents, and adults in the United States. Cholesterol concentrations were directly measured after vertical spin density-gradient ultracentrifugation, and triglycerides were directly measured. Lipid distributions closely matched the population-based National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Samples were randomly assigned to derivation (n = 900 605) and validation (n = 450 303) data sets. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Individual patient-level concordance in clinical practice guideline LDL-C risk classification using estimated vs directly measured LDL-C (LDL-CD). RESULTS In the derivation data set, the median TG:VLDL-C was 5.2 (IQR, 4.5-6.0). The triglyceride and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels explained 65% of the variance in the TG:VLDL-C ratio. Based on strata of triglyceride and non-HDL-C values, a 180-cell table of median TG:VLDL-C values was derived and applied in the validation data set to estimate the novel LDL-C (LDL-CN). For patients with triglycerides lower than 400 mg/dL, overall concordance in guideline risk classification with LDL-CD was 91.7% (95% CI, 91.6%-91.8%) for LDL-CN vs 85.4% (95% CI, 85.3%-85.5%) for Friedewald LDL-C (LDL-CF) (P < .001). The greatest improvement in concordance occurred in classifying LDL-C lower than 70 mg/dL, especially in patients with high triglyceride levels. In patients with an estimated LDL-C lower than 70 mg/dL, LDL-CD was also lower than 70 mg/dL in 94.3% (95% CI, 93.9%-94.7%) for LDL-CN vs 79.9% (95% CI, 79.3%-80.4%) for LDL-CF in samples with triglyceride levels of 100 to 149 mg/dL; 92.4% (95% CI, 91.7%-93.1%) for LDL-CN vs 61.3% (95% CI, 60.3%-62.3%) for LDL-CF in samples with triglyceride levels of 150 to 199 mg/dL; and 84.0% (95% CI, 82.9%-85.1%) for LDL-CN vs 40.3% (95% CI, 39.4%-41.3%) for LDL-CF in samples with triglyceride levels of 200 to 399 mg/dL (P < .001 for each comparison). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A novel method to estimate LDL-C using an adjustable factor for the TG:VLDL-C ratio provided more accurate guideline risk classification than the Friedewald equation. These findings require external validation, as well as assessment of their clinical importance. The implementation of these findings into clinical practice would be straightforward and at virtually no cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION Identifier: NCT01698489.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 11/2013; 310(19):2061-8. DOI:10.1001/jama.2013.280532 · 35.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Women have less risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease compared with men up until midlife (ages 50 to 60), after which the gap begins to narrow post menopause. We hypothesized that the average lipid profile of women undergoes unfavorable changes compared with men after midlife. We examined lipids by sex and age in the Very Large Database of Lipids 10B (VLDL 10B) study. The analysis included 1 350 908 unique consecutive patients clinically referred for lipoprotein testing by density gradient ultracentrifugation from 2009 to 2011. Ratio variables were created for density subclasses of LDL-C, HDL-C, and VLDL-C (LLDR, LHDR, LVDR, respectively). Men showed higher median LDL-C values than women for ages 20 to 59, with the greatest difference in their 30s: 146 mg/dL in men versus 130 mg/dL in women. In contrast, women consistently had higher values after midlife (age 60), for example ages 70 to 79: 129 mg/dL in women versus 112 mg/dL in men. After age 50, women had higher LDL-C each decade, for example 14% higher from their 30s to 50s, while HDL-C concentrations did not differ. Women had more buoyant LDL-C and HDL-C (lower LLDR and LHDR) than men at all ages but the gap closed in higher age groups. In contrast, women had a generally denser VLDL-C (higher LVDR) leading into midlife, with the gap progressively closing in higher age groups, approximating that of men in their 60s and 70s. The narrowing sex differential in cardiovascular disease risk after midlife is mirrored by a higher total atherogenic lipoprotein cholesterol burden in women and a closer approximation of the less favorable density phenotype characteristic of men.
    Journal of the American Heart Association 03/2014; 3(2):e000851. DOI:10.1161/JAHA.114.000851 · 4.31 Impact Factor
Show more