Association of Clinician Knowledge and Statin Beliefs With Statin Therapy Use and Lipid Levels (A Survey of US Practice in the PALM Registry)

Strategies of improving adherence to lipid-lowering therapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lowering LDL-C has been shown to reduce ASCVD events, yet many ASCVD patients do not achieve their guideline-directed LDL-C goals leaving patients at increased risk of another ASCVD event. This review discusses implementation strategies to improve guideline-directed lipid management in patients with ASCVD focusing on the provider, patient, and system level.

RECENT FINDINGS

At a provider level, under-prescribing of statin intensity due most often to statin intolerance, clinical inertia, insufficient monitoring of LDL-C levels, and the difficulty and cost of prescribing other lipid-lowering therapies such as the PCSK9 inhibitors leads to suboptimal cholesterol management in ASCVD patients. Patients concerns about medication side effects and lack of understanding of their ASCVD risk are causes of poor adherence to their lipid-lowering therapy as are barriers at a system level.

SUMMARY

To improve cholesterol management in ASCVD patients will require an integrated approach targeting the provider, the patient and the system. There is a need for further education of clinicians on the importance of intensive LDL-C lowering in ASCVD patients and greater use of nonstatin LDL-C-lowering therapies for those patients on a maximally tolerated statin who have not achieved their guideline-directed LDL-C goal. This will require shared decision-making with a focus on patient education and patient-clinician communication so that the clinician's goals and aims align with that of the patient.

Practical solutions for implementation of blood cholesterol guidelines in clinical practice

Underutilization of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and failure to attain guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals are important quality gaps in cardiovascular risk optimization, especially among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Large database analyses demonstrate an unmet need for improved LDL-C measurement, and that nearly 75% of patients with ASCVD have an LDL-C level above guideline-recommended levels, and greater than 50% are not treated with statins or ezetimibe. Proposed solutions for overcoming these obstacles to optimal lipid management include provider- and patient-facing educational interventions, health information technology strategies, implementation of incentive-based care, advocacy efforts, and systems-based process innovations. While individual interventions may not be enough to overcome the totality of barriers to optimal LLT, comprehensive multifaceted approaches that address barriers at the provider, patient, and healthcare delivery level are likely to offer the greatest likelihood of success and improved patient outcomes.

Clinical potential of inclisiran for patients with a high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level is associated with an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Although high-intensity lipid-lowering therapies with statins and ezetimibe are highly effective for reducing LDL-C levels, over half of high-risk patients do not achieve guideline-recommended LDL-C goals. Thus, there is a significant gap between treatment guidelines and their implementation in daily clinical practice. The major causes are individual variability in the response to lipid-lowering therapies and variation in treatment adherence. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibodies combined with statins provide marked and consistent reduction in LDL-C levels; however, poor adherence due to the need for subcutaneous injections every 2 or 4 weeks and high cost are major obstacles to their use in real-world clinical settings. Inclisiran, a recently approved novel small interfering ribonucleic acid (siRNA) molecule that inhibits PCSK9 synthesis, provides robust and long-term reduction in LDL-C levels with a low inter-individual variability in the LDL-C-lowering response. Moreover, its administration by biannual injection is expected to greatly improve treatment adherence. Clinical trials of this drug lasting for up to 4 years showed acceptable safety profiles, and ongoing studies accumulate evidence of its longer-term safety. This narrative review summarizes the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of inclisiran and analyzes its potential to overcome the gap between guideline recommendations and real-world clinical practice in current LDL-C-lowering therapies, with a focus on reduced LDL-C level variability and improved treatment adherence.

Guidelines for the management of hyperlipidemia: How can clinicians effectively implement them?

Guidelines support lowering cholesterol to decrease atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk across the entire lifespan with intensive lifestyle intervention, as well as statin and non-statin pharmacotherapy for those at highest risk. Modest improvements in the initiation, use, and adherence to statin therapy in patients with ASCVD have occurred over the past decades. However, studies continue to document a less than desired implementation of guidelines highlighting a substantial and persistent treatment gap. The success of implementation depends on the consideration of a variety of barriers that exist throughout the healthcare delivery system. Further research is needed to comprehensively evaluate these barriers in order to develop appropriate and sustainable interventions to improve guideline implementation.

Lipid Testing Trends Before and After Hospitalization for Myocardial Infarction Among Adults in the United States, 2008-2019

Background

Routine monitoring of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) identifies patients who may benefit from modifying lipid-lowering therapies (LLT). However, the extent to which LDL-C testing is occurring in clinical practice is unclear, specifically among patients hospitalized for a myocardial infarction (MI).

Methods

Using US commercial claims data, we identified patients with an incident MI hospitalization between 01/01/2008-03/31/2019. LDL-C testing was assessed in the year before admission (pre-MI) and the year after discharge (post-MI). Changes in LDL-C testing were evaluated using a Poisson model fit to pre-MI rates and extrapolated to the post-MI period. We predicted LDL-C testing rates if no MI had occurred (ie, based on pre-MI trends) and estimated rate differences and ratios (contrasting observed vs predicted rates).

Results

Overall, 389,367 patients were hospitalized for their first MI during the study period. In the month following discharge, 9% received LDL-C testing, increasing to 27% at 3 months and 52% at 12 months. Mean rates (tests per 1000 patients per month) in the pre- and post-MI periods were 51.9 (95% CI: 51.7, 52.1) and 84.4 (95% CI: 84.1, 84.6), respectively. Over 12 months post-MI, observed rates were higher than predicted rates; the maximum rate difference was 66 tests per 1000 patients in month 2 (rate ratio 2.2), stabilizing at a difference of 15-20 (ratio 1.2-1.3) for months 6-12.

Conclusion

Although LDL-C testing increased following MI hospitalization, rates remained lower than recommended by clinical guidelines. This highlights a potential gap in care, where increased LDL-C testing after MI may provide opportunities for LLT modification and decrease risk of subsequent cardiovascular events.

High-Intensity Statin Use Among Patients With Atherosclerosis in the U.S

BACKGROUND

Preventive therapy among patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is generally underused. Whether new guideline recommendations and a focus on implementation have improved the use of high-intensity statins is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the patterns and predictors of statin use among patients with ASCVD.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, pharmacy and medical claims data from a commercial health plan were queried for patients with established ASCVD between January 31, 2018, and January 31, 2019. Statin use on an index date of January 31, 2019, was evaluated, as was 12-month adherence and discontinuation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine independent associations with statin use of varying intensities.

RESULTS

Of the 601,934 patients with established ASCVD, 41.7% were female, and the mean age was 67.5 ± 13.3 years. Overall, 22.5% of the cohort were on a high-intensity statin, 27.6% were on a low- or moderate-intensity statin, and 49.9% were not on any statin. In multivariable analysis, younger patients, female patients, and those with higher Charlson comorbidity score were less likely to be prescribed any statin. Among statin users, female patients, older patients, and those with peripheral artery disease were less likely to be on a high-intensity formulation, whereas a cardiology encounter in the prior year increased the odds. The majority of high-intensity stain users achieved high levels of adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial underuse of statins persists in a large, insured, and contemporary cohort of patients with ASCVD from the United States. In particular, concerning gaps in appropriate statin use remain among younger patients, women, and those with noncoronary ASCVD.

The power of lipid registries for cardiovascular disease prevention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lipid registry-based research is a valuable tool for assessing current lipid management in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Results of several registries are useful for improving clinical practice highlight gaps between guidelines and their implementation and potential impact on population health. We summarize recent clinical studies based on lipid registries.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current guidelines for lipid management recommend high-intensity statins and concomitant therapies such as ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors for high-risk patients. However, recent observational studies show that the majority of patients received inadequate lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), and the low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment rates are still unsatisfactory.

SUMMARY

There is a clear gap between lipid guidelines and lipid management in clinical practice. Clinical studies based on registry databases represent real-world conditions, as opposed to clinical trials. Contemporary registry data reveal that only half of the patients received high-intensity statins, and less than half achieve the LDL-C <70 mg/dL in secondary prevention. In addition, the major reasons for insufficient therapy have been shown to be not only side effects of LLT, but poor adherence by patients to medication regimens and low use of combination therapies by physicians. The real-world evidence from lipid registries clarifies gaps, areas for focus for implementation, to improve CVD prevention.

Geographic variations in lipid-lowering therapy utilization, LDL-C levels, and proportion retrospectively meeting the ACC/AHA very high-risk criteria in a real-world population of patients with major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events in the United States

OBJECTIVE

We assessed national- and state-level geographic variations among patients with a history of ≥1 major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event in: (1) the proportion of patients with retrospectively identified 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline very high-risk (VHR) ASCVD criteria; (2) utilization of guideline-directed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT); and (3) the proportion of patients with persistent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) elevations despite statin and/or ezetimibe use.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using the Prognos LDL-C database linked to IQVIA longitudinal medical and prescription claims databases. The study period was from January 01, 2011, to November 30, 2019 and the index period was from January 01, 2016, to November 30, 2019; the index date was defined as the most recent LDL-C test during the index period. The study included patients aged ≥18 years at index who had a measured LDL-C level during the index period and had ≥1 inpatient/outpatient claim for ASCVD during the 5-year pre-index period.

RESULTS

Of patients with any ASCVD (N=4652,468), 1537,514 (33.1%) patients had ≥1 major ASCVD event. Among patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event, the VHR ASCVD criteria were retrospectively identified in 1139,018 (74.1%) patients; Hawaii had the highest (81.7%) and Colorado the lowest (65.0%) proportion of these patients. Nationally, 48.8% and 50.2% of patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event and retrospectively identified VHR ASCVD criteria, respectively, had current LLT use; Massachusetts and Colorado had the highest and lowest proportions, respectively. After standardizing for age and sex, 57.3% and 58.8% of patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event and retrospectively identified VHR ASCVD criteria, respectively, had LDL-C ≥70 mg/dL (≥1.8 mmol/L) despite statin and/or ezetimibe use, with substantial state-level variations observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights high rates of elevated LDL-C and pervasive underuse of LLT in health-insured patients with a history of major ASCVD events treated in the United States, with state-level geographic variations observed.

The insidious impact of under-diagnosed proximal weakness induced by statins

Introduction: This Perspective reassesses the consensus opinion that statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS) occur in <1% of users and associated myopathic proximal muscle weakness is even more rare.Areas covered: Of the over 180,000 participants in clinical trials and large registries of statin users, only a few studies have included a standard manual muscle test (MMT), dynamometry or a focused questionnaire to assess for proximal weakness and related disability in daily and recreational activities. Formal strength testing suggests, however, that weakness can be demonstrated in at least 10% of users.Expert opinion: Reporting inaccuracies about SAMS, confirmation bias among experts and physicians, absence of a standard questionnaire regarding the potential consequences of weakness on physical capacity, and the failure to routinely perform an objective assessment of strength may have led to under-diagnosis of statin-induced myopathy. A brief MMT before cholesterol-lowering agents are started and at follow-up visits, a 12-week withdrawal of the statin in the presence of new paresis without an alternative cause, and the exam finding that strength recovers off the statin are necessary to assess the incidence of drug-induced proximal weakness and inform alternative therapeutic strategies.

Beliefs, risk perceptions, and lipid management among patients with and without diabetes: Results from the PALM registry

Intensive lipid management is critical to reduce cardiovascular (CV) risk for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM).

METHODS

We performed an observational study of 7628 patients with (n = 2943) and without DM (n = 4685), enrolled in the Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry and treated at 140 outpatient clinics across the United States in 2015. Patient self-estimated CV risk, patient-perceived statin benefit and risk, observed statin therapy use and dosing were assessed.

RESULTS

Patients with DM were more likely to believe that their CV risk was elevated compared with patients without DM (39.1% vs 29.3%, P < .001). Patients with DM were more likely to receive a statin (74.2% vs 63.5%, P < .001) but less likely to be treated with guideline-recommended statin intensity (36.5% vs 46.9%, P < .001), driven by the low proportion (16.5%) of high risk (ASCVD risk ≥7.5%) primary prevention DM patients treated with a high intensity statin. Patients with DM treated with guideline-recommended statin intensity were more likely to believe they were at high CV risk (44.9% vs 38.4%, P = .005) and that statins can reduce this risk (41.1% vs 35.6%, P = .02), compared with patients treated with lower than guideline-recommended statin intensity. Compared with patients with an elevated HgbA1c, patients with well-controlled DM were no more likely to be on a statin (77.9% vs 79.3%, P = .43).

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide study, the majority of patients with DM were treated with lower than guideline-recommended statin intensity. Patient education and engagement may help providers improve lipid therapy for these high-risk patients.

Cardiovascular Risk After Sepsis: Understanding the Role of Statin Indications and the Impact of Clinical Inertia on Prescribing Patterns

INTRODUCTION

Patients with sepsis have high rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in the literature, but the stratification of those at risk has been limited. Statin indicated groups provides clear criteria for therapy, but the risk of MACE after sepsis based on these groups has never been assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort analysis conducted on adult patients admitted from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2013, with suspected or confirmed sepsis and data available on statin use. Patients' past medical history; statin use prior, during, or at time of discharge; and occurrence of MACE were recorded from electronic health records.

RESULT

A total of 321 patients were screened and 265 were found to have data available on statin use. The mean age of the patients was 59 ± 15 years and 47% were female. Overall, 9% were observed to have a MACE at 1 year, with significantly higher rates in those in a statin indicated group (12.2%). On admission, 174 patients were not taking a statin out of whom 52% were in a statin indicated group. Among those in a statin indicated group who survived to hospital discharge, only 10% not on a statin on admission received a statin on discharge, whereas 89% on a statin on admission received a statin on discharge.

CONCLUSION

There is a high risk of MACE after sepsis especially among those in statin indicated groups with significant clinical inertia in prescribing practices.

Lipid management in people with peripheral artery disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize recent data on the role of dyslipidaemia and the benefit from managing this in people with disease of the abdominal aorta and its peripheral branches (peripheral artery disease, PAD).

RECENT FINDINGS

Findings from the Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) Inhibition in Subjects with Elevated Risk (FOURIER) trial demonstrate the benefit of intensely lowering low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-c) in people with PAD to substantially reduce the incidence of major cardiovascular events (MACE; myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular death) and major adverse limb events (MALE). Despite the evidence of substantial benefits from lowering LDL-c, the uptake of drug therapies to lower LDL-c remains sub-optimal in people with PAD.

SUMMARY

Effective methods to educate physicians and patients on best medical management are needed. Further research is needed to examine the benefit of LDL-c lowering and other lipid therapies for PAD-specific problems like abdominal aortic aneurysm progression and walking impairment. Other novel lipid therapies, such as those that lower lipoprotein (a), maybe particularly beneficial to people with PAD given the evidence indicating high concentrations in this population and the high incidence of MACE in these individuals.