Variation in minimum desired cardiovascular disease-free longevity benefit from statin and antihypertensive medications: a cross-sectional study of patient and primary care physician perspectives

Risk Profile and Prognostic Implications of Premature Advanced Coronary Atherosclerotic Disease Among Young to Early Middle-aged Adults: The Coronary Artery Calcium Consortium

INTRODUCTION

Premature advanced subclinical coronary atherosclerosis among young adults is an under-recognized and unique disease phenotype that has not been well characterized.

METHODS

We used data from 44,047 participants with no prior CVD history (59.8% male) from the Coronary Artery Calcium (CAC) Consortium. We defined advanced disease as CAC ≥90th percentile for age, sex, and race, and compared risk factor profile of persons with advanced disease to those without CAC and those with CAC <90th percentile. Using multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazard and competing risks regression, we assessed the association of premature advanced disease with all-cause, cardiovascular, and CHD mortality.

RESULTS

Of 44,047 participants, 18,561 (42.2%) had CAC. Among those with CAC, 6,680 (36.0%) had CAC ≥90th percentile. Notably, 76.4% of those with CAC ≥90th percentile had multivessel CAC compared to 40.6% of those with CAC <90th percentile. After a mean follow-up of 12.5±3.6 years, the incidence per 1,000 person-years of all-cause (2.93 vs 1.85 vs 1.11), cardiovascular (1.11 vs 0.39 vs 0.21), and CHD mortality (0.65 vs 0.19 vs 0.08) was highest in the advanced disease group compared to CAC <90th percentile and the no CAC group. Persons with CAC ≥90th percentile had a higher multivariable-adjusted risk of all-cause (HR:2.17[1.83-2.57]), cardiovascular (SHR:3.89[2.78-5.44]), and CHD mortality (SHR:5.45[3.38-8.78]), compared to those without CAC. In the subgroup analysis, there was no difference in mortality between men and women with advanced CAC.

CONCLUSIONS

Premature advanced atherosclerosis is a distinct clinical phenotype that strongly predicts all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Among persons with CAC at young age, those with scores ≥ 90th percentile have the highest risk of early death and should be identified in future guidelines as a focus for aggressive clinical prevention.

Time Gained to Cardiovascular Disease by Intensive Lipid-Lowering Therapy: Results of Individual Placebo-Controlled Trials and Pooled Effects

INTRODUCTION

Despite the effect on blood lipid levels, the clinical benefits of intensive versus standard pharmacological lipid-lowering therapy remain unclear. Previous reviews have presented relative effects on the risk of clinical outcomes, but not the absolute risk reductions (ARRs) and the time gained to a clinical outcome, also called outcome postponement (OP). The aim of this study was to estimate the effect of intensive versus standard lipid-lowering therapy in terms of ARR and OP of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and all-cause mortality.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and prior reviews to identify trials comparing intensive versus standard lipid-lowering therapy for the risk of cardiovascular disease. We extracted the number of patients with MACE, MI, stroke, and all-cause mortality. Risk of bias was assessed according to the five domains of the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. We calculated ARRs and OPs to assess the clinical benefits of intensive versus standard therapy for each outcome. We conducted meta-analyses standardizing the results to 2 and 5 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

We identified 11 double-blind, randomized, controlled trials (n = 101,357). The follow-up period ranged from 1.5 to 7.0 years, with an average follow-up duration of 3.7 years. Risk of bias was generally high. During an estimated 2 years of intensive versus standard lipid-lowering therapy, 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7-1.5) fewer patients had MACE and the OP of MACE was 4.1 days (95% CI 2.6-5.6). The effects were 0.7% (95% CI 0.4-0.8) and 2.5 days (95% CI 1.6-3.3) for MI, 0.2% (95% CI 0.1-0.3) and 0.9 days (95% CI 0.5-1.2) for stroke, and 0.2% (95% CI - 0.1 to 0.4) and 0.6 days (95% CI - 0.4 to 1.5) for all-cause death. During on average 5 years of intensive versus standard lipid-lowering therapy, 2.4% (95% CI 1.5-3.3) fewer patients had MACE and the time gained to MACE was 23.5 days (95% CI 14.9-32.0). The effects were 1.5% (95% CI 1.0-2.1) and 14.6 days (95% CI 9.3-20.0) for MI, 0.6% (95% CI 0.4-0.8) and 5.3 days (95% CI 3.3-7.4) for stroke, and 0.4% (95% CI -0.2 to 0.1) and 3.6 days (95% CI - 2.1 to 9.2) for all-cause death.

CONCLUSION

Intensive lipid-lowering therapy during 2 or 5 years did not lead to fewer deaths or lifetime gained, and the effects on MI and stroke were negligible. The largest effect was that MACE did not occur in two of 100 patients and was postponed 3-4 weeks after 5 years of intensive treatment. Given the small effect, patients should receive this information as part of shared decision making.

Impact of implementing Dutch versus European guideline risk factor targets in older patients with ischaemic heart disease

BACKGROUND

In patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD) aged > 70 years, Dutch and European guidelines recommend different treatment targets: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) < 2.6 versus < 1.4 mmol/l and systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 140 versus < 130 mm Hg, respectively. How this impacts cardiovascular event-free life expectancy has not been investigated. The study objective was to compare estimated lifelong treatment benefits of implementing Dutch and European LDL‑c and SBP targets.

METHODS

Data from patients aged 71-80 years hospitalised for IHD in 2017-2019 were extracted from the PHARMO Database Network, which links primary and secondary healthcare settings, with follow-up until 31 December 2020. Potential benefit according to treatment strategy (in gain in event-free years) was estimated using the SMART-REACH model.

RESULTS

Of the 3003 eligible patients, 1186 (39%) had missing LDL‑c and/or SBP measurements. Of the 1817 included patients (36% women, median age at event: 74 years (interquartile range (IQR): 72-77), 84% achieved the Dutch targets for both LDL‑c and SBP; for European targets, this was 23% and 61%, respectively. If Dutch targets were met for LDL‑c and SBP (n = 1281), the additional effect of reaching European targets was a median gain of 0.6 event-free life years (IQR: 0.3-1.0). The greatest effect could be reached in patients not reaching Dutch targets (n = 501), with a median gain of 0.6 (IQR: 0.2-1.2) and 1.7 (IQR: 1.2-2.5) event-free years with Dutch versus European targets.

CONCLUSION

In patients aged > 70 years with IHD, implementation of European targets resulted in a greater gain of event-free years compared with Dutch targets, especially in patients with poorer risk factor control. The considerable number of patients with missing risk factor documentation suggested additional opportunities for risk reduction.

Estimated Life-Years Gained Free of New or Recurrent Major Cardiovascular Events With the Addition of Semaglutide to Standard of Care in People With Type 2 Diabetes and High Cardiovascular Risk

OBJECTIVE

Semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in a post hoc analysis of pooled data from Trial to Evaluate Cardiovascular and Other Long-term Outcomes with Semaglutide in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN) 6 and Peptide Innovation for Early Diabetes Treatment (PIONEER) 6. We estimated the benefit of adding semaglutide to standard of care (SoC) on life-years free of new/recurrent CVD events in people with T2D at high risk of CVD.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The Diabetes Lifetime-perspective prediction (DIAL) competing risk-adjusted lifetime CVD risk model for people with T2D was developed previously. Baseline characteristics of the pooled cohort from SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 (POOLED cohort) (N = 6,480) were used to estimate individual life expectancy free of CVD for patients in the POOLED cohort. The hazard ratio of MACE from adding semaglutide to SoC was derived from the POOLED cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76 [95% CI 0.62-0.92]) and combined with an individual's risk to estimate their CVD benefit.

RESULTS

Adding semaglutide to SoC was associated with a wide distribution in life-years free of CVD gained, with a mean increase of 1.7 (95% CI 0.5-2.9) life-years. Estimated life-years free of CVD gained with semaglutide was dependent on baseline risk (life-years free of CVD gained in individuals with established CVD vs. those with cardiovascular risk factors only: 2.0 vs. 0.2) and age at treatment initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding semaglutide to SoC was associated with a gain in life-years free of CVD events that was dependent on baseline CVD risk and age at treatment initiation. This study helps contextualize the results of semaglutide clinical trials.

Use of lipid-lowering therapy after ischaemic stroke and expected benefit from intensification of treatment

Objectives

Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) increases the risk of recurrent cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. We examined use of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) following ischaemic stroke, and estimated benefits from guideline-based up-titration of LLT.

Methods

The Norwegian COgnitive Impairment After STroke (Nor-COAST) study, a multicentre prospective cohort study, collected data on LLT use, dose intensity and LDL-C levels for 462 home-dwelling patients with ischaemic stroke. We used the Secondary Manifestations of Arterial Disease-Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (SMART-REACH) model to estimate the expected benefit of up-titrating LLT.

Results

At discharge, 92% received LLT (97% statin monotherapy). Patients with prestroke dementia and cardioembolic stroke aetiology were less likely to receive LLT. Older patients (coefficient −3 mg atorvastatin per 10 years, 95% CI −6 to −0.5) and women (coefficient −5.1 mg atorvastatin, 95% CI −9.2 to −0.9) received lower doses, while individuals with higher baseline LDL-C, ischaemic heart disease and large artery stroke aetiology received higher dose intensity. At 3 months, 45% reached LDL-C ≤1.8 mmol/L, and we estimated that 81% could potentially reach the target with statin and ezetimibe, resulting in median 5 (IQR 0–12) months of CVD-free life gain and median 2% 10-year absolute risk reduction (IQR 0–4) with large interindividual variation.

Conclusion

Potential for optimisation of conventional LLT use exists in patients with ischaemic stroke. Awareness of groups at risk of undertreatment and objective estimates of the individual patient’s benefit of intensification can help personalise treatment decisions and reduce residual cholesterol risk.

Trial registration number

NCT02650531.

Prolongation of disease-free life: When is the benefit sufficient to warrant the effort of taking a preventive medicine?

The prolongation of disease-free life (PODL) required by people to be willing to accept an offer of a preventive treatment is unknown. Quantifying the required benefits could guide information and discussions about preventive treatment. In this study, we investigated how large the benefit in prolongation of a disease-free life (PODL) should be for individuals aged 50-80 years to accept a preventive treatment offer. We used a cross-sectional survey design based on a representative sample of 6847 Danish citizens aged 50-80 years. Data were collected in 2019 through a web-based standardized questionnaire administered by Statistics Denmark, and socio-demographic data were added from a national registry. We analyzed the data with chi-square tests and stepwise multinomial logistic regression. The results indicate that the required minimum benefit from the preventive treatment varied widely between individuals (1-week PODL = 14.8%, ≥4 years PODL = 39.2%), and that the majority of individuals (51.1%) required a PODL of ≥2 years. The multivariable analysis indicate that education and income were independently and negatively associated with requested minimum benefit, while age and smoking were independently and positively associated with requested minimum benefit to accept the preventive treatment. Most individuals aged 50-80 years required larger health benefits than most preventive medications on average can offer. The data support the need for educating patients and health care professionals on how to use average benefits when discussing treatment benefits, especially for primary prevention.

Communicating personalised statin therapy-effects as 10-year CVD-risk or CVD-free life-expectancy: does it improve decisional conflict? Three-armed, blinded, randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether communicating personalised statin therapy-effects obtained by prognostic algorithm leads to lower decisional conflict associated with statin use in patients with stable cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared with standard (non-personalised) therapy-effects.

DESIGN

Hypothesis-blinded, three-armed randomised controlled trial SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 303 statin users with stable CVD enrolled in a cohort INTERVENTION: Participants were randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard practice (control-group) or one of two intervention arms. Intervention arms received standard practice plus (1) a personalised health profile, (2) educational videos and (3) a structured telephone consultation. Intervention arms received personalised estimates of prognostic changes associated with both discontinuation of current statin and intensification to the most potent statin type and dose (ie, atorvastatin 80 mg). Intervention arms differed in how these changes were expressed: either change in individual 10-year absolute CVD risk (iAR-group) or CVD-free life-expectancy (iLE-group) calculated with the SMART-REACH model (http://U-Prevent.com).

OUTCOME

Primary outcome was patient decisional conflict score (DCS) after 1 month. The score varies from 0 (no conflict) to 100 (high conflict). Secondary outcomes were collected at 1 or 6 months: DCS, quality of life, illness perception, patient activation, patient perception of statin efficacy and shared decision-making, self-reported statin adherence, understanding of statin-therapy, post-randomisation low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level and physician opinion of the intervention. Outcomes are reported as median (25th- 75th percentile).

RESULTS

Decisional conflict differed between the intervention arms: median control 27 (20-43), iAR-group 22 (11-30; p-value vs control 0.001) and iLE-group 25 (10-31; p-value vs control 0.021). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed.

CONCLUSION

In patients with clinically manifest CVD, providing personalised estimations of treatment-effects resulted in a small but significant decrease in decisional conflict after 1 month. The results support the use of personalised predictions for supporting decision-making.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NTR6227/NL6080.

Residual cardiovascular risk reduction guided by lifetime benefit estimation in patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic disease: effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

AIMS

To determine the (cost)-effectiveness of blood pressure lowering, lipid-lowering, and antithrombotic therapy guided by predicted lifetime benefit compared to risk factor levels in patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS 

For all patients with symptomatic atherosclerotic disease in the UCC-SMART cohort (1996-2018; n = 7697) two treatment strategies were compared. The lifetime benefit-guided strategy was based on individual estimation of gain in cardiovascular disease (CVD)-free life with the SMART-REACH model. In the risk factor-based strategy, all patients were treated the following: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) < 1.8 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure <140 mmHg, and antithrombotic medication. Outcomes were evaluated for the total cohort using a microsimulation model. Effectiveness was evaluated as total gain in CVD-free life and events avoided, cost-effectiveness as incremental cost-effectivity ratio (ICER). In comparison to baseline treatment, treatment according to lifetime benefit would lead to an increase of 24 243 CVD-free life years [95% confidence interval (CI) 19 980-29 909] and would avoid 940 (95% CI 742-1140) events in the next 10 years. For risk-factor based treatment, this would be an increase of 18 564 CVD-free life years (95% CI 14 225-20 456) and decrease of 857 (95% CI 661-1057) events. The ICER of lifetime benefit-based treatment with a treatment threshold of ≥1 year additional CVD-free life per therapy was €15 092/QALY gained and of risk factor-based treatment €9933/QALY gained. In a direct comparison, lifetime benefit-based treatment compared to risk factor-based treatment results in 1871 additional QALYs for the price of €36 538/QALY gained.

CONCLUSION 

Residual risk reduction guided by lifetime benefit estimation results in more CVD-free life years and more CVD events avoided compared to the conventional risk factor-based strategy. Lifetime benefit-based treatment is an effective and potentially cost-effective strategy for reducing residual CVD risk in patients with clinical manifest vascular disease.

Estimating individual lifetime benefit and bleeding risk of adding rivaroxaban to aspirin for patients with stable cardiovascular disease: results from the COMPASS trial

Aims 

Adding rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable atherosclerotic disease reduces the recurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) but increases the risk of major bleeding. The aim of this study was to estimate the individual lifetime treatment benefit and harm of adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable cardiovascular disease.

Methods and results 

Patients with established CVD from the COMPASS trial (n = 27 390) and SMART prospective cohort study (n = 8139) were used. Using the pre-existing lifetime SMART-REACH model for recurrent CVD, and a newly developed Fine and Gray competing risk-adjusted lifetime model for major bleeding, individual treatment effects from adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable CVD were estimated, expressed in terms of (i) life-years free of stroke or myocardial infarction (MI) gained; and (ii) life-years free from major bleeding lost. Calibration of the SMART-REACH model for prediction of recurrent CVD events in the COMPASS study was good. The major bleeding risk model as derived in the COMPASS trial showed good external calibration in the SMART cohort. Predicted individual gain in life expectancy free of stroke or MI from added low-dose rivaroxaban had a median of 16 months (range 1–48 months), while predicted individualized lifetime lost in terms of major bleeding had a median of 2 months (range 0–20 months).

Conclusion 

There is a wide distribution in lifetime gain and harm from adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in individual patients with stable CVD. Using these lifetime models, benefits and bleeding risk can be weighed for each individual patient, which could facilitate treatment decisions in clinical practice.

Development and Usability of ADappt: Web-Based Tool to Support Clinicians, Patients, and Caregivers in the Diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer Disease

Background

As a result of advances in diagnostic testing in the field of Alzheimer disease (AD), patients are diagnosed in earlier stages of the disease, for example, in the stage of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This poses novel challenges for a clinician during the diagnostic workup with regard to diagnostic testing itself, namely, which tests are to be performed, but also on how to engage patients in this decision and how to communicate test results. As a result, tools to support decision making and improve risk communication could be valuable for clinicians and patients.

Objective

The aim of this study was to present the design, development, and testing of a Web-based tool for clinicians in a memory clinic setting and to ascertain whether this tool can (1) facilitate the interpretation of biomarker results in individual patients with MCI regarding their risk of progression to dementia, (2) support clinicians in communicating biomarker test results and risks to MCI patients and their caregivers, and (3) support clinicians in a process of shared decision making regarding the diagnostic workup of AD.

Methods

A multiphase mixed-methods approach was used. Phase 1 consisted of a qualitative needs assessment among professionals, patients, and caregivers; phase 2, consisted of an iterative process of development and the design of the tool (ADappt); and phase 3 consisted of a quantitative and qualitative assessment of usability and acceptability of ADappt. Across these phases, co-creation was realized via a user-centered qualitative approach with clinicians, patients, and caregivers.

Results

In phase 1, clinicians indicated the need for risk calculation tools and visual aids to communicate test results to patients. Patients and caregivers expressed their needs for more specific information on their risk for developing AD and related consequences. In phase 2, we developed the content and graphical design of ADappt encompassing 3 modules: a risk calculation tool, a risk communication tool including a summary sheet for patients and caregivers, and a conversation starter to support shared decision making regarding the diagnostic workup. In phase 3, ADappt was considered to be clear and user-friendly.

Conclusions

Clinicians in a memory clinic setting can use ADappt, a Web-based tool, developed using multiphase design and co-creation, for support that includes an individually tailored interpretation of biomarker test results, communication of test results and risks to patients and their caregivers, and shared decision making on diagnostic testing.

The prediction of therapy-benefit for individual cardiovascular disease prevention: rationale, implications, and implementation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aim to outline the importance and the clinical implications of using predicted individual therapy-benefit in making patient-centered treatment decisions in cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Therapy-benefit concepts will be illustrated with examples of patients undergoing lipid management.

RECENT FINDINGS

In both primary and secondary CVD prevention, the degree of variation in individual therapy-benefit is large. An individual's therapy-benefit can be estimated by combining prediction algorithms and clinical trial data. Measures of therapy-benefit can be easily integrated into clinical practice via a variety of online calculators. Lifetime estimates (e.g., gain in healthy life expectancy) look at therapy-benefit over the course of an individual's life, and are less influenced by age than short-term estimates (e.g., 10-year absolute risk reduction). Lifetime estimates can thus identify people who could substantially benefit from early initiation of CVD prevention. Compared with current guidelines, treatment based on predicted therapy-benefit would increase eligibility for therapy among young people with a moderate risk-factor burden and individuals with a high residual risk.

SUMMARY

The estimation of individual therapy-benefit is an important part of individualized medicine. Implementation tools allow for clinicians to readily estimate both short-term and lifetime therapy-benefit.

Effects of Vegetable Proteins on Hypercholesterolemia and Gut Microbiota Modulation

Risk assessment tools, i.e., validated risk prediction algorithms, to estimate the patient's 10-year risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) should be used to identify high-risk people for primary prevention. Current evidence confirms that appropriate monitoring and control of risk factors either reduces the likelihood of CVD or slows down its progression. It is thus crucial that all health professionals make appropriate use of all the available intervention strategies to control risk factors: from dietary improvement and adequate physical activity to the use of functional foods, food supplements, and drugs. The gut microbiota, which encompasses 1 × 1014 resident microorganisms, has been recently recognized as a contributing factor in the development of human disease. This review examines the effect of both some vegetable food components belong to the "protein food group" and the underexploited protein-rich hempseed on cholesterolemia and gut microbiota composition.