A Translational Tool to Facilitate Use of Apolipoprotein B for Clinical Decision-Making

Abstract

Abstract Background Despite recent large-scale discordance studies showing definitively that atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk correlates better with apolipoprotein B (apoB) than with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), the latter remains the recommended metric for guiding lipid-lowering treatment decisions in the United States. A major barrier to change, in this regard, is the lack of guideline-recommended apoB treatment targets. We developed a simple method to “translate” apoB values into population-equivalent LDL-C units, allowing apoB-based treatment decisions to be made using LDL-C targets. Methods Sequentially collected, population-based samples underwent standard lipid panel analysis and apoB testing by immunoassay. Those with triglycerides greater than 1000 mg/dl were excluded, leaving a study cohort of 15 153 individuals. Results Linear regression of calculated LDL-C values against percentile-equivalent apoB values yielded an equation to convert apoB into percentile-equivalent LDL-C units: [LDL-C equivalents = 1.38(apoB) – 29] (R2 = 0.999). The extent of discordance between LDL-C and apoB was examined in subgroups with similar LDL-C, ranging from very low (55–70 mg/dL) to very high (175–190 mg/dL). Among individuals with very low LDL-C, 40% had discordantly higher apoB, indicating higher ASCVD risk. Of those with very high LDL-C, 49% had discordantly lower apoB. Across the range, a minority of patients (25%–40%) had concordant levels of apoB, confirming that discordance between these biomarkers is highly prevalent. Similar results were found in discordance analysis between apoB and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). Conclusions Providing visibility to discrepancies among LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and apoB should help to facilitate more rapid and widespread adoption of apoB for managing ASCVD risk.