JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY VOL. 70, NO.

13, 2017

ª 2017 BY THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY FOUNDATION ISSN 0735-1097/$36.00

PUBLISHED BY ELSEVIER http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.08.006

REVIEW TOPIC OF THE WEEK

A Test in Context: Lipid Profile,

Fasting Versus Nonfasting
Børge G. Nordestgaard, MD, DMSC

ABSTRACT

Fasting for >8 h, as previously required for lipid profiles, normally only occurs a few hours before breakfast. By contrast,
the nonfasting state predominates most of a 24-h cycle and better captures atherogenic lipoprotein levels. Plasma
contains atherogenic lipoproteins of hepatic origin in the fasting state and additionally those of intestinal origin in the
nonfasting state. Maximal mean changes for random, nonfasting versus fasting levels are þ26 mg/dl for
triglycerides, 8 mg/dl for total cholesterol, 8 mg/dl for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, þ8 mg/dl for remnant
cholesterol, and 8 mg/dl for non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; lipoprotein(a), apolipoprotein B, and
high-density lipoprotein cholesterol are largely unaffected. For patients, laboratories, and clinicians alike, nonfasting lipid
profiles represent a simplification without negative implications for prognostic, diagnostic, and therapeutic options for
cardiovascular disease prevention. Several societies’ guidelines and statements in Denmark, the United Kingdom,
Europe, Canada, Brazil, and the United States endorse nonfasting lipid profiles. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:1637–46)
© 2017 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

F asting for more than 8 h normally only occurs a

few hours before breakfast (Figure 1). By
contrast, the nonfasting state predominates
for most of a 24-h cycle. Therefore, because plasma
statements in Denmark (3), the United Kingdom (4),
Europe (5,6), Canada (7,8), Brazil (9), and the United
States (10–12).
This review first delineates the lipid, lipoprotein,
contains atherogenic lipoproteins of hepatic origin and apolipoprotein components of minimal, stan-
in the fasting state and additionally those of intesti- dard, and expanded lipid profiles, followed by a
nal origin in the nonfasting state, the nonfasting state description of the difference in these measurements
may better capture the total amount of atherogenic li- between the fasting and the random, nonfasting
poproteins in plasma during the majority of a 24-h states. Thereafter, and with focus on the patient, the
period. main goal of this review is to provide a critical eval-
Despite that, lipid profiles have previously been uation of the pros and cons of fasting versus non-
measured in blood drawn in the fasting state, that is, fasting lipid profiles, and the implications for
after 8 to 12 h without food intake, whereas water and prognostic, diagnostic, and therapeutic options for
other nonfatty fluid intake have typically been preventing cardiovascular disease. Finally, the re-
allowed (1,2). However, the tradition of using fasting view mention implications for conducting clinical
lipid profiles is currently changing many places in the trials and provides a short historical overview for the
world, with random, nonfasting lipid profiles being increasing use of nonfasting, rather than fasting, lipid
endorsed by several societies, guidelines and profiles worldwide.
Listen to this manuscript’s
audio summary by
JACC Editor-in-Chief
Dr. Valentin Fuster.
From the Department of Clinical Biochemistry and The Copenhagen General Population Study, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital,
Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; and the Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copen-
hagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. Dr. Nordestgaard has reported that he has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to
disclose.

Manuscript received June 23, 2017; revised manuscript received August 3, 2017, accepted August 4, 2017.
1638 Nordestgaard JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017

Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46

ABBREVIATIONS LIPIDS, LIPOPROTEINS, AND are apolar toward the lipoprotein core, but are polar
AND ACRONYMS APOLIPOPROTEINS MEASURED IN toward the water phase. These molecules are phos-
LIPID PROFILES pholipids, free cholesterol, and apolipoproteins
apoB = apolipoprotein B
(Table 1). Apolipoproteins act as cofactors for en-
CI = confidence interval
Lipids such as cholesterol and triglycerides, zymes in lipid metabolism and as ligands when lipo-
HDL = high-density lipoprotein
measured as total plasma values in lipid proteins are recognized at cell surfaces. Most
IDL = intermediate-density profiles, are important for most cells. important are apolipopteins B (apoB) and E, which
lipoprotein
Cholesterol is an essential component of cell facilitate removal of low-density lipoprotein (LDL)
LDL = low-density lipoprotein
membranes, and also acts as precursor for and chylomicron remnant/intermediate-density
Lp(a) = lipoprotein(a)
bile acids and steroid hormones. Tri- lipoprotein (IDL) from plasma, respectively.
VLDL = very low-density glycerides are important as energy sources Lipoproteins increase in size and decrease in den-
lipoprotein
and, after storage, act as an energy reserve as sity from high-density lipoprotein (HDL) to LDL to
well as for insulation against cold weather. Unlike lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) to IDL to very low-density li-
triglycerides, carbohydrates, and proteins, choles- poprotein (VLDL) to chylomicrons (Table 1). Chylo-
terol cannot be degraded by human cells. Cholesterol micron remnants have size and density like IDL and
that is newly synthesized or taken up via the intestine VLDL.
will therefore remain in the body unless it is con- Cholesterol and triglycerides in the diet are
verted to steroid hormones, lost through skin cell absorbed in the small intestine and incorporated into
detachment, or secreted via bile. chylomicrons (Figure 2). Chylomicrons are transferred
Because lipids will not mix with water, plasma has to the bloodstream via lymph, where it comes in
a lipid transport system consisting of water-soluble contact with the triglyceride-degrading enzyme lipo-
lipoproteins. The cores of lipoproteins consist of protein lipase, mainly in fat and muscle tissue. The
apolar lipid triglycerides and cholesterol esters resulting chylomicron remnants are taken up rapidly
(Table 1) (13). Cholesterol esters are free cholesterol by liver cells.
molecules esterified with a fatty acid coming from Cholesterol in the liver is either secreted via bile as
phospholipids; when cholesterol is measured in bile acids or cholesterol, or will, together with tri-
plasma or lipoproteins, it is a measurement of free glycerides, be packed into VLDL particles that are
and esterified cholesterol combined. To keep tri- secreted into the bloodstream (Figure 2). Triglycerides
glycerides and cholesterol esters in a water solution, in VLDL will be degraded in fat and muscle tissue by
the surface of lipoproteins consists of molecules that the enzyme lipoprotein lipase, and the cholesterol-
rich IDL particle is formed. Some IDL particles are
cleared by liver cells, whereas others are converted to
F I G U R E 1 Nonfasting and Fasting Periods During a 24-h Cycle With Intake of LDL particles through the action of the triglyceride-
Typical Meals degrading enzyme hepatic lipase. LDL particles are
taken up via the LDL receptor in the liver and other
Less than 8 hrs tissues.
since last meal
Lipoprotein(a) particles are LDL particles with an
extra apolipoprotein, apo(a) (Table 1); apo(a) has ho-
mology with plasminogen, and therefore may inter-
Non-fasting fere with fibrinolysis and indirectly promote arterial
Noon
thrombosis (14). HDL particles were previously
thought to be important in atherosclerosis and car-
6 am 6 pm diovascular disease, but the evidence to support this
is becoming weaker and weaker (15,16).
Fasting In hyperlipidemia, there is a surplus of atherogenic
Midnight
lipoproteins circulating in the blood, and a fraction of
these will penetrate into the arterial intima via simple
size- and concentration-dependent filtration (Figure 3)
More than 8 hrs (17). Chylomicrons and large VLDL with diameters
since last meal
larger than 75 nm are not able to enter the intima (18),
unlike all other lipoproteins (16,17). LDL, lip-
Fasting for more than 8 h for most individuals only represents a few hours in the early oprotein(a) (Lp(a)), IDL, chylomicron remnants, and
morning. VLDL all enter the intima and are trapped, as they
cannot penetrate the elastic laminas in the media.
JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017 Nordestgaard 1639
SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46 Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting

T A B L E 1 Size, Density, and Core and Surface Components of Lipoproteins

Components (% of Dry Weight)

Core Surface
Diameter Molecular Density Main
(nm) Weight  106 (Da) (g/ml) Triglycerides Cholesterol Ester Cholesterol Phospholipid Apolipoproteins Apolipoproteins

Chylomicrons 75–1,200 50–1,000 0.93 86 3 2 7 2 A, B-48, C, E

VLDL 30–80 10–80 0.93–1.006 55 12 7 18 8 B-100, C, E
IDL 25–35 5–10 1.006–1.019 23 29 9 19 19 B-100, C, E
Lipoprotein(a) 25–30 4–5 1.040–1.090 8 30 8 25 29 B-100, a
LDL 18–25 2.3 1.019–1.063 6 42 8 22 22 B-100
HDL 5–12 0.2–0.4 1.063–1.210 4 15 5 34 42 A, C, E

HDL ¼ high-density lipoprotein; IDL ¼ intermediate-density lipoprotein; LDL ¼ low-density lipoprotein; VLDL ¼ very low-density lipoprotein.

All of these apoB-containing lipoproteins can, to some
degree, transfer back from the intima to the lumen of
the artery against the blood pressure gradient, but the
larger triglyceride-rich lipoproteins IDL, chylomicron
remnants and VLDL have particular difficulty leaving
the intima due to their larger sizes (16,19,20).
In isolated hypercholesterolemia,
glycerides are below 176 mg/dl (2 mmol/l), LDL
cholesterol is the main atherogenic component in
plasma (Figure 4, left). In combined hyperlipidemia,
when triglycerides are 176 to 880 mg/dl (2 to
10 mmol/l), cholesterol in LDL, IDL, chylomicron
remnants, and VLDL combined
atherogenic plasma component (Figure 4, middle).
However, when triglycerides are severely elevated
above 880 mg/dl (10 mmol/l), chylomicrons and large
VLDL are not atherogenic, whereas LDL, IDL, chylo-
micron remnants, and small VLDL are atherogenic
value and may confuse, rather than enlighten, the
clinician.
A minimal lipid profile consists of plasma total
cholesterol and triglycerides (Table 2). A standard lipid
profile also includes measurements of LDL cholesterol
and HDL cholesterol. Total cholesterol, HDL choles-
when tri- terol, and triglycerides are measured directly, whereas
LDL cholesterol can either be measured directly
or calculated by the Friedewald equation if
triglycerides are <400 mg/dl (<4.5 mmol/l): total
cholesterol  HDL cholesterol  triglycerides/2.2 (all
in mmol/l; or  triglycerides/5 with values in mg/dl)
constitute the (21), with direct measurement of LDL cholesterol at
triglyceride concentrations $400 mg/dl (4.5 mmol/l).
Traditionally, the Friedewald equation has been
F I G U R E 2 Atherogenic Lipoproteins Present in the Blood During Periods of

(Figure 4, right). Fasting and Nonfasting

MINIMAL, STANDARD, AND EXPANDED Nonfasting

LIPID PROFILES
Fasting

The decision of which lipid profile to order for a given

patient depends on the balance between optimal
LDL
diagnostic accuracy and cost, while avoiding unnec-
essary diagnostic noise from measurement of too
Chylomicron
many lipid, lipoprotein, and apolipoprotein compo- Chylomicron
remnant
nents (Table 2). The minimal lipid profile is valuable
VLDL IDL
in countries and situations where cost is a major
issue, whereas standard and expanded lipid
profiles are most commonly used in modern medi-
cine. Single measurements of either total or LDL Lipoprotein lipase Lipoprotein lipase
cholesterol should be avoided, as important elevation
Triglycerides Cholesterol
of triglycerides and remnant cholesterol can then
be overlooked. Finally, many laboratories offer
During fasting, only liver-derived lipoproteins are present in plasma, whereas in the
additional measurements, such as lipoprotein nonfasting state, intestinal-derived lipoproteins are likewise found in plasma.
subfractions, other apolipoproteins, and even IDL ¼ intermediate-density lipoprotein; LDL ¼ low-density lipoprotein; VLDL ¼ very
metabolomics phenotyping, all of which, for the low-density lipoprotein.
majority of patients, are without proven clinical
1640 Nordestgaard
Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting
F I G U R E 3 Transfer of Lipoproteins Between Plasma and the Arterial Intima
Plasma Arterial Wall
Intima Media Adventitia
HDL
LDL
Lp(a)
IDL +
chylomicron
remnants
Small
VLDL
Chylomicrons
+ large VLDL
This figure depicts the relative speed by which different lipoproteins enter and leave the
arterial intima, and thereby which lipoproteins that get trapped preferentially in the intima.
First, the larger the lipoprotein diameter, the fewer that will enter into the intima, where
chylomicrons and large VLDL are simply too large to enter. Second, although HDL is small
enough to penetrate into the media and leave via the adventitia, other lipoproteins are so
large that they can only leave the intima via the lumen of the artery. Because back transport
is against a blood pressure gradient, the largest lipoproteins, such as IDL, chylomicron
remnants, and small VLDL, get trapped preferentially in the intima. HDL ¼ high-density
lipoprotein; Lp(a) ¼ lipoprotein(a); other abbreviations as in Figure 2.
applied to a fasting lipid profile; however, calculated
LDL cholesterol determined with this equation at tri-
glyceride concentrations <400 mg/dl (4.5 mmol/l) is
similar to LDL cholesterol measured directly on both
fasting and nonfasting lipid profiles (22–24). These 4
measurements can, without additional cost, be sup-
plemented with calculated remnant cholesterol (i.e.,
triglyceride-rich lipoprotein cholesterol) and calcu-
lated non-HDL cholesterol (i.e., LDL þ remnant
cholesterol) levels. Calculated remnant cholesterol is
a strong causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease
(25–27). The use of non-HDL cholesterol for cardio-
vascular disease risk prediction has been emphasized
in several guidelines and consensus papers
(6,7,10,28); non-HDL cholesterol is currently not a
therapeutic target in U.S. guidelines (29).
An expanded lipid profile should be a standard
one, with inclusion of Lp(a) measurement. This ge-
netic, causal cardiovascular risk factor (14,30,31)
should be measured at least once in all patients
screened for cardiovascular risk (30); it is noteworthy
that Lp(a) concentrations vary little over time (<10%)
in any individual. Lp(a) determination should not,
however, be included in repeated lipid profile
JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017
SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46
measurements in the same patient, unless therapeu-
tic intervention is aimed at reducing Lp(a) concen-
trations. Importantly, the cholesterol content of
Lp(a), corresponding to approximately 30% of Lp(a)
total mass (32), is included in total, non-HDL, and LDL
cholesterol values and its apoB content is included in
the apoB value.
Finally, measurements of apoB can be used as an
alternative to non-HDL cholesterol (6,7,10,28), but
this measurement adds extra cost. ApoB is a well-
standardized measurement that captures all athero-
genic lipoproteins.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FASTING AND
NONFASTING LIPID PROFILES
Plasma contains remnant lipoproteins of hepatic
origin in the fasting state, whereas remnant lipo-
proteins of intestinal origin additionally are present
in the nonfasting state (Figure 2). This means that
from 1 to 7 h after a habitual meal, plasma tri-
glycerides and remnant cholesterol are slightly
elevated (Figure 5). A habitual meal here means
whatever the person chose to eat before blood sam-
pling, which naturally will differ from person to
person and from country to country. The degree of
plasma triglyceride elevation is related to levels at
baseline; the lower the baseline triglycerides, the
smaller the postprandial effect and vice versa per
equivalent fat load.
The maximal mean changes as measured in random,
nonfasting versus fasting blood samples are þ26 mg/dl
(0.3 mmol/l) for triglycerides, 8 mg/dl (0.2 mmol/l)
for total cholesterol, 8 mg/dl (0.2 mmol/l) for LDL
cholesterol, þ8 mg/dl (0.2 mmol/l) for remnant
cholesterol, and 8 mg/dl (0.2 mmol/l) for non-HDL
cholesterol, whereas lipoprotein(a), apoB, HDL
cholesterol, and apoA1 are largely unaffected by
random, nonfasting sampling (Figure 6) (5,33–37).
Importantly, in individual subjects, the change in tri-
glycerides will depend on baseline triglyceride levels,
fat intake, and time since the last meal.
Interestingly, the slight decrease in total, LDL, and
non-HDL cholesterol after a habitual meal intake
(Figure 6) occurs 0 to 4 h after meals, at the same time
as a reduction in plasma albumin is observed, but not
coinciding with the observed increase in triglycerides
and remnant cholesterol (35,36). This illustrates that
the slight reduction in levels of total, LDL, and non-
HDL cholesterol is due to fluid intake, and not food
intake, and that this phenomenon therefore will likely
also occur during standard fasting for lipid profiles, as
water and other nonfatty fluid intake is typically
allowed (1,2).
JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017 Nordestgaard 1641
SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46 Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting

F I G U R E 4 Cholesterol in Atherogenic Lipoproteins in Different Types of Hyperlipidemia

Plasma
Cholesterol
mg/dL mmol/L

463 12

309 8
VLDL (+IDL) Chylomicrons
VLDL + IDL
+ large VLDL
+ chylomicron
remnants
Atherogenic
LDL cholesterol Atherogenic
155 4 cholesterol VLDL + IDL
LDL + chylomicron
remnants
Atherogenic
LDL cholesterol
HDL
HDL HDL
0 0

Isolated Hypercholesterolemia Combined Hypercholesterolemia Severe Hypertriglyceridemia

(Triglycerides < 2 mmol/L) (Triglycerides 2-10 mmol/L) (Triglycerides > 10 mmol/L)
(< 176 mg/dL) (176-880 mg/dL) (> 880 mg/dL)

(Top) The visual appearance of the 3 types of hyperlipidemia: isolated hypercholesterolemia; combined hyperlipidemia; and severe hyper-
triglyceridemia. (Bottom) Distribution of atherogenic cholesterol in different lipoproteins, all shown in orange. For severe hypertriglyceridemia,
some cholesterol is found in chylomicrons and large VLDL that likely are not atherogenic (shown in gold), as these lipoproteins are too large to enter
into the intima (see Figure 3). Neutral cholesterol in HDL is shown in green. Abbreviations as in Figures 2 and 3.

T A B L E 2 Minimal, Standard, and Expanded Lipid Profiles, Nonfasting or Fasting

Measurements in Plasma or Serum as

Part of Lipid Profiles
Minimal Lipid Standard Lipid Expanded Lipid Not Advised as Additional
Measurement Lipid Lipoprotein Apolipoprotein Profile Profile Profile Single Measurement Measurements

Advantage Inexpensive Low cost Relatively low cost None None

Disadvantage No lipoprotein None None Overlooked elevated Expensive, largely
measurements triglycerides and remnant unnecessary
cholesterol measurements
Triglycerides O O O O
Total cholesterol O O O O O
LDL cholesterol* O O O O
HDL cholesterol O O O
Remnant cholesterol† O O O
Non-HDL cholesterol‡ O O O
Lipoprotein(a) O O
ApoB O (O) O
ApoA1 O O
Lipoprotein subfractions O O
Other apolipoproteins O O
Metabolomic phenotyping O O O O

*LDL cholesterol can either be measured directly or calculated by the Friedewald equation if triglycerides are <400 mg/dl (4.5 mmol/l): total cholesterol  HDL cholesterol  triglycerides/2.2 (all in mmol/l;
or  triglycerides/5 with values in mg/dl) (21), with direct measurement of LDL cholesterol at triglyceride concentrations $400 mg/dl (4.5 mmol/l). †Remnant cholesterol (¼ triglyceride-rich lipoprotein
cholesterol) is calculated as total cholesterol  LDL cholesterol  HDL cholesterol, using random, nonfasting or fasting lipid profiles; if LDL cholesterol is also calculated, then remnant cholesterol is
equivalent to triglycerides/2.2 in mmol/l and to triglycerides/5 in mg/dl. ‡Non-HDL cholesterol is calculated as total cholesterol  HDL cholesterol and is equivalent to LDL and remnant cholesterol
combined.
ApoA1 ¼ apolipoprotein A1; ApoB ¼ apolipoprotein B; other abbreviations as in Table 1.
1642 Nordestgaard JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017

Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46

In patients at Copenhagen University Hospital, re-

F I G U R E 5 Plasma Triglycerides and Remnant Cholesterol as a Function of Time Since
Last Habitual Meal in Individuals in the General Population
sults were similar with triglycerides measured both in
the nonfasting and fasting states (Figure 7) (5). This
Copenhagen General Population Study was even true for those with the highest triglyceride
N = 92,285 levels or with diabetes.
2

PROS AND CONS OF NONFASTING VERSUS

FASTING LIPID PROFILES

Triglycerides Because fasting has previously been the standard

before blood sampling for a lipid profile in most
mmol/L

countries, the shift toward using nonfasting rather

1
than fasting lipid profiles naturally has been debated
over the last few years (5,38–50): many arguments
and novel data for and against have been presented
Remnant cholesterol from the perspective of the patient, laboratory, and
clinician.
With the current evidence base, it could be argued

0
that the use of nonfasting lipid profiles is evidence-
Fasting 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 driven, whereas continued use of fasting lipid pro-
Time Since Last Meal, Hours files is largely belief-driven (Central Illustration).
Indeed, a main argument for keeping fasting lipid
The mean maximal increase in triglycerides of 26 mg/dl (0.3 mmol/l) and in remnant profiles is that “We have always done it that way!”
cholesterol of 8 mg/dl (0.2 mmol/l), compared with fasting levels, occurs 3 to 4 h after when today, prospective evidence from more than
the last meal. 300,000 individuals is available suggesting that
nonfasting lipid profiles are as good as, if not better
than, fasting lipid profiles in predicting future car-
diovascular events (5,51–54).
For example, in the Emerging Risk Factors Collab-
F I G U R E 6 Mean Maximal Change in Lipids, Lipoproteins, oration, the hazard ratio for predicting coronary heart
and Apolipoproteins in Random, Nonfasting Compared With
disease per 43 mg/dl (1.1 mmol/l) higher non-HDL
Fasting Lipid Profiles in Individuals in the General Population
cholesterol was 1.72 (95% confidence interval [CI]:
Copenhagen General Population Study 1.51 to 1.95) in 20 studies combined using nonfasting
N = 92,285 lipid profiles and including 103,354 subjects, of whom
mmol/L mg/dL
3,829 had an event, whereas the corresponding value
Triglycerides +0.3 +26
in 48 studies combined using fasting lipid profiles in
Total cholesterol –0.2 –8 199,076 subjects, of whom 8,956 had an event, was
1.41 (95% CI: 1.30 to 1.53) (51). Similarly, 3 large ran-
LDL cholesterol –0.2 –8
domized trials of statin therapy used nonfasting lipid
Remnant cholesterol +0.2 +8 profiles (5).
NonHDL cholesterol –0.2 –8 The pros and the new evidence for using random,
nonfasting lipid profiles reflect that many new
Lipoprotein(a) No change
guidelines and consensus statements endorse non-
Apolipoprotein B No change fasting lipid profiles for most patients (3–9,11,12),
whereas a few older guidelines still recommend
HDL cholesterol No change
fasting lipid profiles for most patients (Central
Apolipoprotein A1 No change Illustration) (29).
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PATIENT. From the
Decreased Increased
Maximal Change After Normal Food Intake perspective of the patient, a random, nonfasting lipid
profile is practical compared with a fasting lipid pro-
file because it does not interfere with the patient’s
These changes all are clinically insignificant. Adapted with
permission from Nordestgaard et al. (5). Abbreviations as in normal life and allows going to the laboratory for the
Figures 2 and 3. blood draw at any time of the day (Central
Illustration). Nonfasting sampling will also be safe,
JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017 Nordestgaard 1643
SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46 Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting

whereas fasting for some patients with diabetes on

F I G U R E 7 Comparison of Concentrations of Plasma Triglycerides Measured in the
antidiabetic medication may lead to risk of hypogly- Random, Nonfasting, and Fasting States in the Same Patients
cemia (55). Nonfasting lipid profiles will be time-
saving and thus cost-saving for patients, because Copenhagen University Hospital 2011-2015
the need to return another day for a fasting lipid N
profile is eliminated. All 5538
Triglycerides, mmol/L
IMPLICATIONS FOR PROGNOSTIC AND DIAGNOSTIC < 1.1 1793
OPTIONS. From the perspective of the laboratory, a
1.1-1.5 1582
fasting lipid profile is thought to be superior to a
nonfasting one because it can be standardized and 1.6-2.5 1454

leads to slightly less variation in the measured ana- 2.6-4.0 534

lytes (49), most importantly triglycerides. Interest-
> 4.0 175
ingly, however, the median triglyceride values and
Diabetes
95% CIs were similar in 5,538 patients who had tri- No 4711
glycerides measured both in the nonfasting and
fasting states (Figure 7). Also, under nonstandardized, Yes 418

random, nonfasting conditions, plasma triglycerides

on average only increase by 26 mg/dl (0.3 mmol/l) at
4 h after a habitual meal (Figures 5 and 6). Such minor
changes are clinically unimportant, because a clini-
cian is only interested in whether plasma tri-
glycerides are 176 mg/dl (2 mmol/l) versus say
440 mg/dl (5 mmol/l), whereas a difference between
176 mg/dl (2 mmol/l) and 202 mg/dl (2.3 mmol/l) is
clinically insignificant.
Another argument often presented against elimi-
nation of fasting lipid profiles is that, in many coun-
tries, other measurements in the blood also require
fasting before blood sampling. In Denmark, however,
there is no requirement for fasting for any blood
measurements, except for fasting before an oral
glucose tolerance test, and random, nonfasting gly-
cosylated hemoglobin A 1c is used to diagnose and
monitor diabetes, rather than fasting glucose.
Several publications endorsing use of nonfasting
lipid profiles for the majority of patients also mention
situations where a fasting lipid profile, or at least a
fasting triglyceride measurement, may theoretically
improve diagnostic accuracy (3–7,9,11,12). Although
each of these suggestions for using fasting lipid pro-
files in certain situations may sound reasonable, none
are supported by strong scientific evidence, but
rather are likely driven by beliefs of some of the au-
thors of the various guidelines and statements.
Therefore, my recommendation is to use nonfasting
lipid profiles widely, whereas any physician, natu-
rally, is free to agree with an individual patient to fast
for a given lipid profile.
Taken together, and given the higher and higher
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Triglycerides, mmol/L
Nonfasting Fasting
The fluctuation in plasma triglycerides is similar in the fasting and nonfasting states, even
in those with the highest triglycerides or with diabetes. Most patients were outpatients;
however, a minor fraction were likely inpatients, many of whom may experience reduced
appetite and, depending upon diagnosis (and state of recovery), were likely receiving
clear liquids/soft diet with low fat intake at the time of the nonfasting and/or fasting
blood draw. For such patients, the total fat intake likely is lower than in the free-living
state and, therefore, would not be generalizable to a general population. Adapted with
permission from Nordestgaard et al. (5).
F I G U R E 8 Historical Development of Endorsement of Random, Nonfasting Lipid
Profiles by Societies, Guidelines, and Statements
Endorsement of nonfasting lipid profiles by societies, guidelines, & statements
Year Region Society/guideline/statement
2017 US AACE/ACE: American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists
& American College of Endocrinology
2016 Brazil Consensus of five medical societies
2016 Europe ESC/EAS: European Society of Cardiology & European
Atherosclerosis Society
2016 Canada CCS: Canadian Cardiovascular Society
2016 Canada CHEP: Canadian Hypertension Education Program
2016 Europe EAS/EFLM: European Atherosclerosis Society & European
Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
2014 US VA/DoD: Veterans Affairs & US Department of Defense
2014 UK NICE: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
2011 US AHA: American Heart Association
2009 Denmark DSKB: Danish Society for Clinical Biochemistry
Before 2009 essentially all societies, guidelines, and statements either required
fasting before lipid profile measurement or did not mention requirements

demands for fast, efficient, and inexpensive health

care services all over the world, it is important that Particularly from 2016 and onwards, the use of nonfasting lipid profiles has been
we consider what is most convenient for patients, endorsed widely.
laboratories, and clinicians alike, while, at the same
1644 Nordestgaard JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017

Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46

C E NT R AL IL L U STR AT IO N Comparison of Fasting and Nonfasting Lipid Profiles

Nordestgaard, B.G. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(13):1637–46.

Direct comparison of arguments for and against use of random, nonfasting, and fasting blood sampling. Nonfasting blood sampling can occur anytime during the 24-h
cycle, irrespective of what and when the individual ate before blood sampling. By contrast, a fasting blood sample can only be drawn after a period without food
intake for 8 or more hours, which often means that a natural small fast of a few hours in the early morning will be extended, possibly until noon, before the blood is
drawn.

time, being perfectly fine clinically, and maybe
focus less on exactly how standardly and precisely
we can measure an analyte (50). In addition, use
of nonfasting lipid profiles will improve patient flow
in laboratories, as it eliminates large numbers of
people all coming for blood draws early in the
morning.
IMPLICATIONS FOR THERAPEUTIC OPTIONS. Because
statin therapy (and other lipid-lowering therapy)
is decided on the basis of an individual’s global
cardiovascular risk, including the presence of car-
diovascular disease, familial hypercholesterolemia,
and diabetes, and not just on plasma lipid values in
all major guidelines (4,6,7,11,12,29), minor changes in
JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017 Nordestgaard 1645
SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46 Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting

the lipid profile from fasting to nonfasting conditions HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF

(Figures 5 to 7) will only affect a few individuals
regarding the decision to start a statin or not. Also,
many guidelines use total and HDL cholesterol for
risk calculations, and these measurements are mini-
mally affected by nonfasting versus fasting states.
Nevertheless, many guidelines use LDL cholesterol
to monitor pharmacological treatment and as goals
for treatment. In individuals with borderline LDL
cholesterol, the lower LDL cholesterol observed
mainly 0 to 4 h after a habitual meal due to liberal
fluid intake and hemodilution (35), particularly in
patients with diabetes (36), needs to be considered
when using nonfasting lipid profiles to decide
whether to commence a statin or titrate its dose;
however, the same is true for fasting lipid profiles,
typically with no restrictions on water intake (1,2).
IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL TRIALS. Nonfasting,
compared with fasting lipid profiles will also help
recruit and retain patients in lipid-lowering trials,
and likely will reduce trial costs. This is because
ethical committees in many countries do not allow
patients to be asked to fast before the first study visit,
which means an extra study visit simply for the lipid
profile. Also, the use of nonfasting lipid profiles dur-
ing follow-up visits will be more practical for study
participants, and will allow study visits at any time of
the day, whatever suits the individual study partici-
pant. Finally, because nonfasting lipid profile mea-
surements are used more and more commonly in
clinical practice, it is equally important that future
lipid-lowering trials are conducted under nonfasting
conditions to match the clinical reality of the future.
NONFASTING LIPID PROFILES
The Danish Society for Clinical Chemistry recom-
mended nationwide use of nonfasting lipid profiles in
2009 (3), followed by similar endorsement in 2011 by
the American Heart Association (10) and, in 2014, by
the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care
Excellence guidelines (4) and guidelines from Veter-
ans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense (Figure 8)
(11). This was followed by similar recommendations
in 2016 by the European Atherosclerosis Society and
European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Lab-
oratory Medicine, in a joint consensus statement with
detailed discussion of the evidence, as well as the
clinical implications of using nonfasting, rather than
fasting lipid profiles (5). Later in 2016, this was fol-
lowed by a similar endorsement for nonfasting lipid
profiles by the Canadian Hypertension Education
Program guidelines (8), the Canadian Cardiovascular
Society guidelines (7), the European Society of Car-
diology and the European Atherosclerosis Society
guidelines for the management of dyslipidemias (6),
and by consensus of 5 medical societies in Brazil (9).
Finally, in 2017, endorsement of the use of nonfasting
lipid profiles came from the American Association of
Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of
Endocrinology (12).
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Dr. Børge G.
Nordestgaard, Clinical Biochemistry, Herlev Hospital,
Herlev Ringvej 75, 2730 Herlev, Denmark. E-mail:
boerge.nordestgaard@regionh.dk.

REFERENCES

1. Rifai N, Warnick GR. Lipids, lipoproteins, apoli-
poproteins, and other cardiovascular risk factors.
In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, Bruns DE, editors. Tietz
Textbook of Clinical Chemistry and Molecular Di-
agnostics. 4th Edition. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier
Saunders, 2005:903–82.
2. Simundic AM, Cornes M, Grankvist K, Lippi G,
Nybo M. Standardization of collection re-
quirements for fasting samples: for the Working
Group on Preanalytical Phase (WG-PA) of the Eu-
ropean Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Lab-
oratory Medicine (EFLM). Clin Chim Acta 2014;
432:33–7.
3. Nordestgaard BG, Hilsted L, Stender S. [Plasma
lipids in non-fasting patients and signal values of
laboratory results]. Ugeskr Laeger 2009;171:1093.
4. NICE Guidance. Cardiovascular Disease: Risk
Assessment and Reduction, Including Lipid
Modification. NICE. Updated 2016. Available at:
https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg181/resources.
Accessed August 7, 2017.
5. Nordestgaard BG, Langsted A, Mora S, et al.
Fasting is not routinely required for determination
of a lipid profile: clinical and laboratory implica-
tions including flagging at desirable concentration
cut-points–a joint consensus statement from the
European Atherosclerosis Society and European
Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory
Medicine. Eur Heart J 2016;37:1944–58.
6. Catapano AL, Graham I, De Backer G, et al. 2016
ESC/EAS guidelines for the management of dysli-
pidaemias. Eur Heart J 2016;37:2999–3058.
7. Anderson TJ, Gregoire J, Pearson GJ, et al. 2016
Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines for the
management of dyslipidemia for the prevention of
cardiovascular disease in the adult. Can J Cardiol
2016;32:1263–82.
8. Leung AA, Nerenberg K, Daskalopoulou SS,
et al., CHEP Guidelines Task Force. Hypertension
Canada’s 2016 Canadian Hypertension Education
Program guidelines for blood pressure measure-
ment, diagnosis, assessment of risk, prevention,
and treatment of hypertension. Can J Cardiol
2016;32:569–88.
9. Scartezini M, Ferreira CEDS, Izar MCO, et al.
Positioning about the flexibility of fasting for lipid
profiling. Arq Bras Cardiol 2017;108:195–7.
10. Miller M, Stone NJ, Ballantyne C, et al. Tri-
glycerides and cardiovascular disease: a scientific
statement from the American Heart Association.
Circulation 2011;123:2292–333.
11. Downs JR, O’Malley PG. Management of dys-
lipidemia for cardiovascular disease risk reduction:
synopsis of the 2014 U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense clinical
practice guideline. Ann Intern Med 2015;163:
291–7.
12. Jellinger PS, Handelsman Y, Rosenblit PD,
et al. American Association of Clinical Endocri-
nologists and American College of Endocrinology
guidelines for management of dyslipidemia and
prevention of cardiovascular disease. Endocr Pract
2017;23:1–87.
1646 Nordestgaard
Lipid Profile, Fasting Versus Nonfasting
13. Havel JH, Kane JP. Introduction: structure and
metabolism of plasma lipoproteins. In: Scriver CR,
Beaudet AL, Sly WS, Valle D, editors. The Meta-
bolic & Molecular Bases of Inherited Disease. 8th
Edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2001:
2705–16.
14. Nordestgaard BG, Langsted A. Lipoprotein (a)
as a cause of cardiovascular disease: insights from
epidemiology, genetics, and biology. J Lipid Res
2016;57:1953–75.
15. Jansen H, Samani NJ, Schunkert H. Mendelian
randomization studies in coronary artery disease.
Eur Heart J 2014;35:1917–24.
16. Nordestgaard BG. Triglyceride-rich lipopro-
teins and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease:
new insights from epidemiology, genetics, and
biology. Circ Res 2016;118:547–63.
17. Nordestgaard BG, Nielsen LB. Atherosclerosis
and arterial influx of lipoproteins. Curr Opin Lip-
idol 1994;5:252–7.
18. Nordestgaard BG, Zilversmit DB. Large lipo-
proteins are excluded from the arterial wall in
diabetic cholesterol-fed rabbits. J Lipid Res 1988;
29:1491–500.
19. Shaikh M, Wootton R, Nordestgaard BG, et al.
Quantitative studies of transfer in vivo of low
density, Sf 12-60, and Sf 60-400 lipoproteins
between plasma and arterial intima in humans.
Arterioscler Thromb 1991;11:569–77.
20. Nordestgaard BG, Wootton R, Lewis B. Selec-
tive retention of VLDL, IDL, and LDL in the arterial
intima of genetically hyperlipidemic rabbits
in vivo. Molecular size as a determinant of frac-
tional loss from the intima-inner media. Arte-
rioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1995;15:534–42.
21. Friedewald WT, Levy RI, Fredrickson DS. Esti-
mation of the concentration of low-density lipo-
protein cholesterol in plasma, without use of the
preparative ultracentrifuge. Clin Chem 1972;18:
499–502.
22. Nordestgaard BG, Langsted A, Mora S, et al.
Fasting is not routinely required for determina-
tion of a lipid profile: clinical and laboratory
implications including flagging at desirable con-
centration cutpoints–a joint consensus statement
from the European Atherosclerosis Society and
European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and
Laboratory Medicine. Clin Chem 2016;62:
930–46.
23. Tanno K, Okamura T, Ohsawa M, et al. Com-
parison of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
concentrations measured by a direct homoge-
neous assay and by the Friedewald formula in a
large community population. Clin Chim Acta 2010;
411:1774–80.
24. Mora S, Rifai N, Buring JE, Ridker PM. Com-
parison of LDL cholesterol concentrations by
Friedewald calculation and direct measurement in
relation to cardiovascular events in 27,331 women.
Clin Chem 2009;55:888–94.
25. Varbo A, Benn M, Tybjærg-Hansen A,
Jørgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, Nordestgaard BG.
Remnant cholesterol as a causal risk factor for ischemic
heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:427–36.
26. Varbo A, Benn M, Tybjærg-Hansen A,
Nordestgaard BG. Elevated remnant cholesterol
causes both low-grade inflammation and ischemic
heart disease, whereas elevated low-density lipo-
protein cholesterol causes ischemic heart disease
without inflammation. Circulation 2013;128:
1298–309.
27. Nordestgaard BG, Varbo A. Triglycerides and
cardiovascular disease. Lancet 2014;384:626–35.
28. Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, et al. 2016
European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease
prevention in clinical practice: the Sixth Joint Task
Force of the European Society of Cardiology and
Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Pre-
vention in Clinical Practice (constituted by repre-
sentatives of 10 societies and by invited experts).
Eur Heart J 2016;37:2315–81.
29. Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, et al.
2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the treatment of
blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic car-
diovascular risk in adults: a report of the American
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association
Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Car-
diol 2014;63:2889–934.
30. Nordestgaard BG, Chapman MJ, Ray K, et al.
Lipoprotein(a) as a cardiovascular risk factor: cur-
rent status. Eur Heart J 2010;31:2844–53.
31. Kamstrup PR, Tybjærg-Hansen A,
Steffensen R, Nordestgaard BG. Genetically
elevated lipoprotein(a) and increased risk of
myocardial infarction. JAMA 2009;301:2331–9.
32. Kinpara K, Okada H, Yoneyama A, Okubo M,
Murase T. Lipoprotein(a)-cholesterol: a significant
component of serum cholesterol. Clin Chim Acta
2011;412:1783–7.
33. Mora S, Rifai N, Buring JE, Ridker PM. Fasting
compared with nonfasting lipids and apolipopro-
teins for predicting incident cardiovascular events.
Circulation 2008;118:993–1001.
34. Steiner MJ, Skinner AC, Perrin EM. Fasting
might not be necessary before lipid screening: a
nationally representative cross-sectional study.
Pediatrics 2011;128:463–70.
35. Langsted A, Freiberg JJ, Nordestgaard BG.
Fasting and nonfasting lipid levels: influence of
normal food intake on lipids, lipoproteins, apoli-
poproteins, and cardiovascular risk prediction.
Circulation 2008;118:2047–56.
36. Langsted A, Nordestgaard BG. Nonfasting
lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins in in-
dividuals with and without diabetes: 58 434 in-
dividuals from the Copenhagen General
Population Study. Clin Chem 2011;57:482–9.
37. Sidhu D, Naugler C. Fasting time and lipid levels
in a community-based population: a cross-sectional
study. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:1707–10.
38. Watts GF, Cohn JS. Whither the lipid profile:
feast, famine, or no free lunch? Clin Chem 2011;57:
363–5.
39. Lund SS, Jensen T. Using nonfasting lipids—
hemodilution or convenience? Clin Chem 2011;57:
1336–8.
40. Gaziano JM. Should we fast before we mea-
sure our lipids? Arch Intern Med 2012;172:1705–6.
JACC VOL. 70, NO. 13, 2017
SEPTEMBER 26, 2017:1637–46
41. Khera AV, Mora S. Fasting for lipid testing: is it
worth the trouble? Arch Intern Med 2012;172:
1710–2.
42. Eckel RH. LDL cholesterol as a predictor of
mortality, and beyond: to fast or not to fast, that
is the question? Circulation 2014;130:528–9.
43. Langsted A, Nordestgaard BG. Nonfasting lipid
profiles: the way of the future. Clin Chem 2015;61:
1123–5.
44. Driver SL, Martin SS, Gluckman TJ, Clary JM,
Blumenthal RS, Stone NJ. Fasting or nonfasting
lipid measurements: it depends on the question.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;67:1227–34.
45. Rifai N, Young IS, Nordestgaard BG, et al.
Nonfasting sample for the determination of
routine lipid profile: is it an idea whose time has
come? Clin Chem 2016;62:428–35.
46. Mora S. Nonfasting for routine lipid testing:
from evidence to action. JAMA Intern Med 2016;
176:1005–6.
47. Stone NJ. Advances in lipid testing: a practical
step forward. Clin Chem 2016;62:905–6.
48. Farukhi Z, Mora S. Re-assessing the role of
non-fasting lipids; a change in perspective. Ann
Transl Med 2016;4:431.
49. Lorenzo Lozano MC, Cosmen Sanchez A,
Belinchón Torres PM, Prieto Menchero S, Pineda-
Tenor D. Is fasting necessary for lipid profile de-
terminations? Some considerations from the
perspective of the clinical laboratory. Clin Chem
Lab Med 2017;55:e187–8.
50. Nordestgaard BG, Langlois MR. Precision of
nonfasting lipid profiles should focus on clinical
relevance rather than necessarily obtaining the
least variation. Clin Chem Lab Med 2017;55:
e189–90.
51. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration. Major
lipids, apolipoproteins, and risk of vascular dis-
ease. JAMA 2009;302:1993–2000.
52. Bansal S, Buring JE, Rifai N, Mora S, Sacks FM,
Ridker PM. Fasting compared with nonfasting tri-
glycerides and risk of cardiovascular events in
women. JAMA 2007;298:309–16.
53. Nordestgaard BG, Benn M, Schnohr P,
Tybjaerg-Hansen A. Nonfasting triglycerides and
risk of myocardial infarction, ischemic heart
disease, and death in men and women. JAMA
2007;298:299–308.
54. Doran B, Guo Y, Xu J, et al. Prognostic value of
fasting versus nonfasting low-density lipoprotein
cholesterol levels on long-term mortality: insight
from the National Health and Nutrition Examina-
tion Survey III (NHANES-III). Circulation 2014;130:
546–53.
55. Aldasouqi S, Sheikh A, Klosterman P, et al.
Hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes on anti-
diabetic medications who fast for laboratory tests.
Diabetes Care 2011;34:e52.
KEY WORDS cardiovascular disease,
cholesterol, lipoproteins, low-density
lipoprotein, triglycerides