Lipoprotein Combine Index as a Better Marker for NAFLD Identification Than Traditional Lipid Parameters

Abstract

Jiajun Qiu,1– 3,* Xin Huang,1– 3,* Maobin Kuang,1– 3,* Ruijuan Yang,1,4 Jiachong Li,1 Guotai Sheng,5,6 Yang Zou2,3 1Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of China; 2Jiangxi Cardiovascular Research Institute, Jiangxi Provincial People’s Hospital, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of China; 3Jiangxi Cardiovascular Research Institute, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of China; 4Department of Endocrinology, Jiangxi Provincial People’s Hospital, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of China; 5Jiangxi Provincial Geriatric Hospital, Jiangxi Provincial People’s Hospital, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of China; 6Jiangxi Provincial Geriatric Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People’s Republic of China*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Guotai Sheng, Jiangxi Provincial Geriatric Hospital, Jiangxi Provincial People’s Hospital, No. 92 Aiguo Road, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, People’s Republic of China, Email [email protected] Yang Zou, Jiangxi Cardiovascular Research Institute, Jiangxi Provincial People’s Hospital, No. 92 Aiguo Road, Nanchang, Jiangxi, 330006, People’s Republic of China, Email [email protected]: The association between traditional lipid parameters and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has been extensively discussed. This study aims to evaluate and compare the lipoprotein combine index (LCI) and traditional lipid parameters [total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)] to identify NAFLD.Patients and Methods: The analysis included 14,251 participants from the NAfld in the Gifu Area, Longitudinal Analysis (NAGALA). Logistic regression models were employed to calculate standardized odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for assessing and comparing the association of LCI and traditional lipid parameters with NAFLD. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) for LCI and traditional lipid parameters in identifying NAFLD.Results: After adjusting for various confounders, we found that LCI was positively associated with NAFLD (OR=2.25, 95% CI 1.92– 2.63), and this association was stronger than that of traditional lipid parameters [OR: TC1.23, TG1.73 LDL-C1.10]. Further subgroup analyses revealed that the association of LCI with NAFLD was stronger than other traditional lipid parameters in all subgroups, including men and women, overweight/obese [body mass index (BMI)≥ 25 kg/m2] and non-obese (BMI< 25 kg/m2), and older (age≥ 45 years) and younger (age< 45 years) participants. Additionally, ROC analysis indicated that LCI (AUC=0.8118) had significantly higher accuracy (All DeLong P< 0.05) in identifying NAFLD compared to traditional lipid parameters (AUC: TC0.6309; TG0.7969; LDL-C0.6941); HDL-C0.7587). Sensitivity analysis further confirmed the robustness of the study findings.Conclusion: This study revealed for the first time a positive correlation between LCI and NAFLD. Compared to traditional lipid parameters, LCI has a higher correlation with NAFLD. Additionally, further ROC analysis demonstrated that LCI had higher accuracy in identifying NAFLD compared to traditional lipid parameters, suggesting that LCI may be a better marker for NAFLD identification than traditional lipid parameters.Keywords: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, lipoprotein combine index, NAFLD, traditional lipid parameters, LCI

Keywords

• non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
• lipoprotein combine index
• nafld
• traditional lipid parameters
• lci.