Abstract:
Despite the availability of several homogenous LDL-C assays, calculated Friedewald’s LDL-C equation remains the widely used
formula in clinical practice. Several novel formulas developed in different populations have been reported to outperform the
Friedewald formula. This study validated the existing LDL-C formulas and derived a modified LDL-C formula specific to a Ghanaian
population. In this comparative study, we recruited 1518 participants, derived a new modified Friedewald’s LDL-C (M-LDL-C)
equation, evaluated LDL-C by Friedewald’s formula (F-LDL-C), Martin’s formula (N-LDL-C), Anandaraja’s formula (A-LDL-C),
and compared them to direct measurement of LDL-C (D-LDL-C). The mean D-LDL-C (2.47±0.71 mmol/L) was significantly
lower compared to F-LDL-C (2.76±1.05 mmol/L), N-LDL-C (2.74±1.04 mmol/L), A-LDL-C (2.99±1.02 mmol/L), and M-LDL-C
(2.97±1.08 mmol/L) p < 0.001. There was a significantly positive correlation between D-LDL-C and A-LDL-C (r=0.658, p<0.0001),
N-LDL-C (r=0.693, p<0.0001), and M-LDL-C (r=0.693, p<0.0001). M-LDL-c yielded a better diagnostic performance [(area under
the curve (AUC)=0.81; sensitivity (SE) (60%) and specificity (SP) (88%)] followed by N-LDL-C [(AUC=0.81; SE (63%) and SP
(85%)], F-LDL-C [(AUC=0.80; SE (63%) and SP (84%)], and A-LDL-C (AUC=0.77; SE (68%) and SP (78%)] using D-LDL-C as
gold standard. Bland–Altman plots showed a definite agreement between means and differences of D-LDL-C and the calculated
formulas with 95% of values lying within ±0.50 SD limits. The modified LDL-C (M-LDL-C) formula derived by this study yielded
a better diagnostic accuracy compared to A-LDL-C and F-LDL-C equations and thus could serve as a substitute for D-LDL-C and
F-LDL-C equations in the Ghanaian population.
