Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goal Achievement Research Articles

An “Inclisiran First” Strategy vs Usual Care in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

BackgroundMost patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease fail to achieve guideline-directed low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals. Twice-yearly inclisiran lowers LDL-C by ∼50% when added to statins. ObjectivesThis study evaluated the effectiveness of an “inclisiran first” implementation strategy (adding inclisiran immediately upon failure to reach LDL-C <70 mg/dL despite receiving maximally tolerated statins) vs representative usual care in U.S. patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. MethodsVICTORION-INITIATE, a prospective, pragmatically designed trial, randomized patients 1:1 to inclisiran (284 mg at days 0, 90, and 270) plus usual care (lipid management at treating physician’s discretion) vs usual care alone. Primary endpoints were percentage change in LDL-C from baseline and statin discontinuation rates. ResultsWe randomized 450 patients (30.9% women, 12.4% Black, 15.3% Hispanic); mean baseline LDL-C was 97.4 mg/dL. The “inclisiran first” strategy led to significantly greater reductions in LDL-C from baseline to day 330 vs usual care (60.0% vs 7.0%; P < 0.001). Statin discontinuation rates with “inclisiran first” (6.0%) were noninferior vs usual care (16.7%). More “inclisiran first” patients achieved LDL-C goals vs usual care (<70 mg/dL: 81.8% vs 22.2%; <55 mg/dL: 71.6% vs 8.9%; P < 0.001). Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and serious TEAE rates compared similarly between treatment strategies (62.8% vs 53.7% and 11.5% vs 13.4%, respectively). Injection-site TEAEs and TEAEs causing treatment withdrawal occurred more commonly with “inclisiran first” than usual care (10.3% vs 0.0% and 2.6% vs 0.0%, respectively). ConclusionsAn “inclisiran first” implementation strategy led to greater LDL-C lowering compared with usual care without discouraging statin use or raising new safety concerns. (A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-label Trial Comparing the Effectiveness of an “Inclisiran First” Implementation Strategy to Usual Care on LDL Cholesterol [LDL-C] in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease and Elevated LDL-C [≥70 mg/dL] Despite Receiving Maximally Tolerated Statin Therapy [VICTORION-INITIATE]; NCT04929249)

Novel and Emerging LDL-C Lowering Strategies: A New Era of Dyslipidemia Management.

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) represents a major global health challenge, significantly contributing to mortality rates. This chronic inflammatory condition affecting blood vessels is intricately linked to hypercholesterolemia, with elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recognized as a central and modifiable risk factor. The effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) in mitigating ASCVD risk is well established, with studies revealing a substantial reduction in major ischemic events correlating with LDL-C reduction. While statins, often combined with ezetimibe, remain fundamental in dyslipidemia management, a significant proportion of patients on statin therapy continue to experience cardiovascular events. Recent pharmacological advancements, driven by a deeper understanding of atherogenesis, have unveiled novel therapeutic targets and potent drugs. Notably, agents like bempedoic acid and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors (evolocumab, alirocumab, inclisiran) have emerged as effective options to intensify LLT and achieve LDL-C goals, addressing limitations associated with statins, such as myopathy. Molecular insights into alternative pathways have spurred the investigation of emerging agents, offering promising perspectives for novel medications with efficacy comparable to established treatments, associated with advantages in cost and administration. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the evolving landscape of lipid-lowering strategies, highlighting the progress made in addressing ASCVD risk and the potential of upcoming therapies to further optimize cardiovascular prevention.

Is there a role for earlier use of combination therapy?

As the global population ages and cardiovascular risk factors rise, we can expect a continued increase in atherosclerotic disease. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction is a cornerstone of cardiovascular risk reduction with strong, causal evidence indicating that the greatest benefit is derived from early and large decreases in LDL-C. Despite the adoption of statins as the backbone of lipid-therapy regimens, numerous studies and registry analyses reveal our collective inability to achieve LDL-C goals in high-risk patients. Combination therapy with ezetimibe has been shown to result in statistically significant decreases in LDL-C level, atheroma volume, and cardiovascular adverse event rates. A major barrier to implementing an upfront combination therapy approach is the perceived side effects from therapeutic agents although multiple studies show that a therapeutic patient-physician relationship could overcome this issue. Novel agents such as PCSK-9 inhibitors, bempedoic acid, and inclisiran have the potential to achieve similar outcomes although additional research is needed regarding the cost effectiveness of these approaches. Despite these hurdles, there is a role for the newer agents early in the disease course of high-risk patients such as those with markedly elevated LDL-C >190 mg/dL and FH.The implementation of upfront combination therapy, especially in high-risk patients, will decrease clinical inertia while allowing for earlier consideration of newer, effective agents to decrease cardiovascular burden.

A retrospective nationwide analysis of evolocumab use in Sweden and its effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.

Treatment with proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and decreases the incidence of major ischaemic events in clinical trials. However, less is known about the efficacy of PCSK9 inhibition in clinical practice. This study aimed to describe the change in LDL-C levels over time and LDL-C goal achievement in patients with/without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), who were prescribed evolocumab in clinical practice, and to describe adherence to and persistence with treatment. Patients in Sweden with at least one evolocumab prescription filled between July 2015 and May 2020 were included. Medical history and lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) were sourced from national registries. LDL-C levels before and after treatment initiation were assessed using medical records. Persistence with and adherence to evolocumab and oral LLT were assessed up to 12 months after treatment initiation using the refill-gap method and proportion of days covered, respectively. Of the 2,360 patients with at least one prescription for evolocumab, 2,341 were included; 1,858 had ASCVD. Persistence with (76%) and adherence to (86%) evolocumab were high throughout the 12 months following initiation. Mean LDL-C levels decreased by 53% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51-55%) in patients adherent to evolocumab (n = 567) and 59% (95% CI: 55-63%) in patients adherent to evolocumab and oral LLT (n = 186). Similar reductions in LDL-C were observed in patients with/without ASCVD. Reduced LDL-C levels remained stable during follow-up. Amongst patients adherent to evolocumab and those adherent to evolocumab and oral LLT, 23 and 55% achieved the LDL-C goal of <1.4 mmol/L, respectively. The evolocumab LDL-C-lowering effect observed in clinical trials was confirmed in clinical practice in Sweden, particularly in patients also treated with oral LLT. During follow-up, adherence to and persistence with evolocumab were high, with stable reduced levels of LDL-C during observation.

Clinical characteristics and treatment patterns in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with hypercholesterolemia: a retrospective analysis of a large US real-world database cohort

Objective Guidelines developed by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recommend lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. This study described LLT utilization patterns and LDL-C goal achievement (to <70 mg/dL) among patients with ASCVD in the United States. Methods This retrospective study was conducted using Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (CDM). Patients with their first ASCVD diagnosis (index date) in the CDM database between July 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, were followed for ≥12 months to assess LLT utilization patterns and change in LDL-C. LLTs included were statins and non-statin LLTs (ezetimibe, fibrates, and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors). Adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC), defined as the number of days with drug on-hand (or number of days exposed to drug) divided by the 12-month follow-up period. Patients with PDC ≥0.8 were considered adherent. Results Among the patients with ASCVD (N = 1,424,893) included in this study, only 621,978 (43.7%) had at least one LDL-C measurement at baseline (6 months prior to and 3 months after the index date). The mean age was 71.5 years, and almost half of the patients were female. Patients were followed for a mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of 30.6 (11.4) months (median of 29.9 months). During the follow-up, about one-quarter of the patients did not receive any LLT. Among treated patients, 89.5% received statins and 10.5% received non-statin LLT. Less than half (47.6%) of the patients were adherent to the index treatment during the 12-month follow-up. Even in patients receiving combination therapy (statin + non-statin LLT), a sizable proportion (35.8%) showed an increase in LDL-C over the follow-up period. Conclusions This retrospective study highlighted limited LDL-C monitoring in patients with ASCVD, and unmet need in terms of suboptimal utilization of non-stain LLTs, limited adherence to LLTs, and inadequate lipid control after treatment (among those with LDL-C measurements during the follow-up period) need to be addressed to improve outcomes in this patient cohort.

Real vs perceived LDL cholesterol control in clinical practice in Spain: Which factors are related to real control?

Abstract Background/Introduction According to ESC Guidelines, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc) reduction is essential for the control of dyslipidaemia. Frequently, the physicians’ perception of LDLc control in patients (pts) is higher than the actual control, potentially leading to a suboptimal management of these pts. Purpose To understand the impact of physicians’ perception on LDLc control using a multivariate analysis and identify other potential predictive factors in the management of pts with dyslipidaemia in Spain. Methods Cross-sectional and multicentre study that included 435 healthcare professionals (34% cardiologists, 28% General Practitioners [GPs], 24% internists, and 14% endocrinologists) from 145 healthcare areas in Spain. Qualitative and quantitative information related to the management of pts with dyslipidaemia in clinical practice was collected. Additionally, aggregated anonymized data of the last 10 pts with dyslipidaemia attended by each physician were collected. With these data, a multivariate analysis was performed to estimate the impact of different variables on real LDLc control, including: age, gender and speciality of the physician, category of prevention, presence of comorbidities, lipid-lowing therapy (LLT) used, and whether the physician accurately perceived the real LDLc control. Results 4,010 pts (8%, 13%, 16% and 61% with low, moderate, high, and very high CV risk) were included. Physicians’ perception was that 62% of the pts achieved LDLc goals, but in actual clinical practice only 31% of pts did (p&amp;lt;0.01) (Figure 1). In the multivariate analysis it was found that physicians’ age and gender had little to no effect on LDLc control of pts, while their speciality did: cardiologists were twice as likely to control patients with dyslipidaemia than GPs. Likewise, pts with comorbidities or on secondary prevention were statistically associated with lower chance of appropriate LDLc control. Regarding the treatment used, data showed that the proportion of pts achieving LDLc goals increased as higher potency LLT was used. Precisely, LLT was found to have an significant impact on LDLc control: when compared to low intensity statins, pts treated with the combination of statin + ezetimibe had twice as many chances of achieving LDLc goals, reaching up to almost 15 times more possibilities for pts using PCSK9i. Lastly, control perception also mattered, with physicians who accurately perceived the real control having a probability two times higher to control their pts than physicians with poor LDLc control perception. Conclusions In Spain, most pts with dyslipidemia do not achieve the recommended LDLc goals mainly because of an insufficient intensification of LLT. The multivariate analysis showed that both LLT intensity and physicians’ perception had a major effect on LDLc control. These data highlight the need to further intensify LLT and raise awareness among physicians of the importance of achieving LDLc targets.Perceived vs real LDLc control by riskMultivariate analysis results

Low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol target attainment in high-risk patients with history of diabetes or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event: an (un)expected gender bias

Abstract Background Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is the cornerstone of cardiovascular disease prevention, especially after the occurrence of a major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE). Collection of epidemiological data is crucial for monitoring healthcare appropriateness and the fulfillment of guidelines recommendations. Purpose This analysis aimed to evaluate the proportion of high-risk patients who achieved LDL-C goal as suggested by the international guidelines by analyzing regional administrative data and to explore the predictors of therapeutic failure, with a focus on the role of gender. Methods By linking health administrative and laboratory data, we collected data from seven Local Health Districts on residents aged ≥45 years. Inclusion criteria were: 1) at least one LDL-C measurement in the year; 2) a history of MACCE (defined as myocardial infarction and/or stroke and/or revascularization of the coronary, carotid, or peripheral arteries) and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Cohorts were defined at 1st January 2019 and 1st January 2020. Lipid lowering therapy use (defined as ≥2 prescription fillings or ≥75% coverage of treatment days) over the past 6 months if LDL-C data were available or over the past year if no LDL-C data were available was monitored. The outcome was the number of patients with on-treatment LDL-C optimal levels, as defined by levels &amp;lt;55 mg/dl for patients with MACCE and &amp;lt;70 mg/dl for patients with T2DM without MACCE. Results A cohort of 174,200 individuals was analyzed (55% males). As regards subjects on lipid-lowering therapies, we found that female gender was associated with a significantly lower probability to have LDL-C levels at target (OR: 0.58±0.01; p&amp;lt;0.0001) in patients with MACCE with or without T2DM, in a model adjusted for age, district area, and the presence of cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities (renal failure, heart failure, atrial fibrillation). This result was confirmed also in the analysis conducted in subjects without lipid-lowering therapies (OR: 0.56±0.01; p&amp;lt;0.0001). No significant differences were documented by stratifying for the presence of clinical pathways aimed to the active call of the patients by clinicians ("Initiative Health"). Conclusions These results demonstrated that females have a significantly lower probability to reach LDL-C levels recommended targets. This datum is confirmed even in the absence of lipid-lowering therapies. These results call for action aimed to: 1) education for general population and for patients with MACCE with a specific target on females; 2) information for clinicians for the need of assessing adequate lipid-lowering therapy prescription and adherence irrespectively of gender; 3) organization of clinical pathways - from admission to recovery and follow-up - with a specific focus on secondary prevention target attainment.

Abstract 11893: Efficacy and Safety of Ongericimab in Chinese Patients With Primary Hypercholesterolemia and Mixed Dyslipidemia

Background: Ongericimab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9), significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in the phase 2 trial. A phase 3 trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ongericimab in Chinese patients with primary hypercholesterolemia and mixed dyslipidemia on background lipid-lowering therapy (LLT). Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 52-week trial conducted in China (NCT02662569). Eligible patients receiving stable statin (±ezetimibe) therapy but not achieving LDL-C goals were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1:2:1 ratio to receive either ongericimab 150 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 2 weeks (Q2W), or ongericimab 300 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks (Q4W) for 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was percent change in LDL-C from baseline to week 24. Results: A total of 806 patients were randomized, 802 patients received at least one dose of ongericimab or placebo. The least-squares (LS) mean difference between ongericimab and placebo in LDL-C from baseline to week 24 was -67.7% (95% CI: -72.49%, -62.99%; p &lt; 0.0001) in Q2W group and -61.2% (95% CI: -67.09%, -55.21%; p &lt; 0.0001) in Q4W group. LDL-C reductions were maintained to Week 52. Ongericimab also favorably altered other lipid parameters (Table 1). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar between ongericimab and placebo. Conclusion: Ongericimab on stable background LLT significantly reduced LDL-C and was well tolerated in Chinese patients with primary hypercholesterolemia and mixed dyslipidemia.

Achievement Rates for Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goals in Patients at High Risk of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in a Real-World Setting in Japan.

The study aimed to investigate low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement rates in patients receiving LDL-C-lowering therapy using recent real-world data, following the 2017 revision of the Japan Atherosclerosis Society Guidelines for Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases (JAS GL2017). Patients with documented LDL-C test results were extracted from the Medical Data Vision claims database between July 2018 and June 2021 and divided into three groups according to JAS GL2017: primary prevention high risk (Group I, LDL-C goal ＜120 mg/dL), secondary prevention (Group II, LDL-C goal ＜100 mg/dL), and secondary prevention high risk (Group III, LDL-C goal ＜70 mg/dL). The mean LDL-C value was 108.7 mg/dL (n=125,235), 94.4 mg/dL (n=57,910), and 90.6 mg/dL (n=33,850) in Groups I, II, and III, respectively. Intensive statin monotherapy (pitavastatin, rosuvastatin, or atorvastatin) was the most frequently prescribed lipid-lowering treatment (21.6%, 30.8%, and 42.7% in Groups I, II, and III, respectively), followed by ezetimibe (2.5%, 7.1%, and 8.5% in Groups I, II, and III, respectively). LDL-C goals were achieved by 65.5%, 60.6%, and 25.4% of patients overall in Groups I, II, and III, respectively. Achievement rates were 83.9%, 75.3%, and 29.5% in patients prescribed intensive statin monotherapy and 82.3%, 86.4%, and 46.4% in those prescribed statin and ezetimibe combinations in Groups I, II, and III, respectively. In Group III, the proportion of patients with familial hypercholesterolemia prescribed statin and ezetimibe combinations achieving LDL-C goals was low (32.5%). The proportion of patients achieving LDL-C goals for secondary prevention in the high-risk group remains low even with statin and ezetimibe combination therapy.

Associations of advanced liver fibrosis with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in type 2 diabetic patients according to obesity and metabolic goal achievement status.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), is frequently coexisted with obesity, poor glycemic, blood pressure (BP), and/or lipid control. We aimed to investigate the associations of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and its advanced fibrosis with HFpEF according to obesity, glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), BP, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement status in T2DM patients. A total of 2,418 T2DM patients who were hospitalized were cross-sectionally assessed. Liver fibrosis was evaluated by non-invasive biomarkers. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the independent and combined associations of fibrosis status and diabetic care goal attainments with HFpEF risk. Simple steatosis was not associated with HFpEF risk compared with patients without steatosis, while advanced liver fibrosis was found to have significantly higher odds for HFpEF risk (odds ratio,1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-2.08). Advanced fibrosis in NAFLD was significantly associated with an increased risk of HFpEF, regardless of obesity status, HbA1c, BP, and LDL-C goal achievement status. P values for the interactions between fibrosis status and HbA1c control status, fibrosis status and BP control status, fibrosis status and LDL-C control status, and fibrosis status and body mass index (BMI) status on HFpEF risk were 0.021, 0.13, 0.001, and 0.23, respectively. In patients with T2DM, advanced hepatic fibrosis was significantly associated with HFpEF risk, irrespective of obesity status, HbA1c, BP, and LDL-C goal attainment status. Further, HbA1c and LDL-C goal attainment status modified this association.

Tafolecimab: First Approval.

Tafolecimab (SINTBILO®), a subcutaneously administered anti-proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 enzyme(PCSK9) monoclonal antibody, is being developed by Innovent for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and mixed hyperlipidemia. Tafolecimab was approved in August 2023 in China as an adjunct to diet, in combination with a statin or statin with other low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)-lowering therapies, for the treatment of adults with primary hyperlipidemia [including heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) and non-familial hypercholesterolemia (non-FH)] and mixed dyslipidemia who have failed to achieve LDL-C goals despite moderate or higher doses of statins, to reduce LDL-C, total cholesterol (TC), and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) levels. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of tafolecimab leading to this first approval for the treatment of adults with primary hyperlipidemia and mixed dyslipidemia.

Real-World Insights into Evolocumab Use in Patients with Hyperlipidemia Across Five Countries: Analysis from the ZERBINI Study.

This study characterizes patients receiving evolocumab in clinical practice and assesses treatment effectiveness, safety and persistence outcomes across five countries. This retrospective and prospective observational study enrolled patients initiated on evolocumab during August 2017 to July 2019 at 49 sites across Canada, Mexico, Colombia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Medical records data were extracted within 6months prior to (baseline) and every 3months for 12months post evolocumab initiation and reported as available. A total of 578 patients were enrolled (40.1% female, median age 60 [interquartile range (IQR) 51-68] years); 83.7% had atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or familial hypercholesterolemia. Median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) at baseline was 3.4 (IQR 2.7-4.2) mmol/L (131.5 [IQR 104.4-162.4] mg/dL), with 75.6% of patients receiving a statin (59.2% high intensity). Compared to baseline, the median lowest LDL-C was reduced by 70.2% and remained stable over 12months of treatment. Guideline-recommended LDL-C thresholds < 1.8, < 1.4 and < 1.0mmol/L (< 70, < 55 and < 40mg/dL) were achieved by 75.3%, 63.6% and 47.4% of patients. LDL-C outcomes were consistent across high- and very high-risk patients. Background lipid-lowering therapy remained relatively stable. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported, and persistence to evolocumab was 90.2% at 12months. These findings provide real-world evidence that evolocumab use is in accordance with its international guideline-recommended place in dyslipidemia therapy, as well as confirmation of its effectiveness and safety in a heterogeneous population. Evolocumab can address a healthcare gap in the management of dyslipidemia by increasing the proportion of patients achieving LDL-C goals recommended to lower cardiovascular risk.

Efficacy and Safety of Single-Pill Combination of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe in Chinese Patients with Primary Hypercholesterolemia Inadequately Controlled by Statin Treatment (ROZEL): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double Dummy, Active-Controlled Phase 3 Clinical Trial.

Many patients with primary hypercholesterolemia do not achieve their plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals with statin alone under a recommended dose of statin (e.g., 10 mg rosuvastatin) in China. The objective of this phase III study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new single-pill combination (SPC) of rosuvastatin 10 mg/ezetimibe 10 mg (R10/E10) in this population. This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled study in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia inadequately controlled with statin alone. The participants were randomized 1:1 to receive SPC R10/E10 or R10. The primary objective was to demonstrate the superiority of SPC R10/E10 vs. R10 in reducing the LDL-C levels after 8 weeks. This trial randomized 305 participants to SPC R10/E10 (n = 153) and R10 (n = 152). The superiority of SPC R10/E10 over R10 was demonstrated with the least square (LS) mean difference of percent change in LDL-C from baseline to week 8: - 13.85% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 20.15% to - 7.56%, P < 0.0001). The proportion of participants who achieved the LDL-C target (< 2.6 mmol/l) at week 8 was larger with SPC R10/E10 (n = 80, 54.1%) than with R10 (n = 42, 29.2%) (Odds ratio = 2.80, 95% CI 1.70 to 4.61, P < 0.0001). No unexpected safety findings were reported. The results suggest that SPC R10/E10 improve LDL-C reduction and goal achievement in Chinese patients with primary hypercholesterolemia not adequately controlled on statin therapy, without new safety findings. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04669041).

Optimal implementation of the 2019 ESC/EAS dyslipidaemia guidelines in patients with and without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease across Europe: a simulation based on the DA VINCI study.

The impact of the stepwise implementation of the 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) treatment algorithm on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment was simulated in patients from the DA VINCI study. Monte Carlo simulation was used to evaluate treatment optimisation scenarios, based on a patient's risk category: statin intensification (step 1), addition of ezetimibe (step 2), and addition of a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor (step 3). Residual cardiovascular risk and predicted relative and absolute risk reduction (RRR and ARR) in cardiovascular events were assessed. In DA VINCI, 2482 patients did not achieve their 2019 ESC/EAS LDL-C goals and were included in the simulation. In patients without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) (n=962), 27.0% (n=259) and 57.0% (n=548) are likely to achieve their LDL-C goals at step 1 and step 2, respectively. Of those at very high risk without ASCVD (n=74), 88.1% (n=65) are likely to achieve their LDL-C goals at step 3. In patients with ASCVD (n=1520), 12.0% (n=183), 42.1% (n=641) and 93.2% (n=1416) are likely to achieve their LDL-C goals at steps 1, 2 and 3, respectively. In patients with and without ASCVD, treatment optimisation may result in mean simulated RRR of 24.0% and 17.7%, respectively, and ARR of 8.1% and 2.6%, respectively. Most patients at high cardiovascular risk are unlikely to achieve LDL-C goals through statin optimisation and ezetimibe, and will require a PCSK9 inhibitor, leading to greater reduction in cardiovascular risk. Amgen.

Regional differences in physicians' behavior and factors influencing the intensity of PCSK9 inhibitor therapy with alirocumab: a subanalysis of the ODYSSEY APPRISE study.

Despite better accessibility of the effective lipid-lowering therapies, only about 20% of patients at very high cardiovascular risk achieve the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals. There is a large disparity between European countries with worse results observed for the Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) patients. One of the main reasons for this ineffectiveness is therapeutic inertia related to the limited access to appropriate therapy and suitable dosage intensity. Thus, we aimed to compare the differences in physicians' therapeutic decisions on alirocumab dose selection, and factors affecting these in CEE countries vs. other countries included in the ODYSSEY APPRISE study. ODYSSEY APPRISE was a prospective, single-arm, phase 3b open-label (≥12 weeks to ≤30 months) study with alirocumab. Patients received 75 or 150 mg of alirocumab every 2 weeks, with dose adjustment during the study based on physician's judgment. The CEE group in the study included Czechia, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia, which we compared with the other nine European countries (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland) plus Canada. A total of 921 patients on alirocumab were involved [modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis], including 114 (12.4%) subjects from CEE countries. Therapy in CEE vs. other countries was numerically more frequently started with lower alirocumab dose (75 mg) at the first visit (74.6 vs. 68%, p = 0.16). Since week 36, the higher dose was predominantly used in CEE patients (150 mg dose in 51.6% patients), which was maintained by the end of the study. Altogether, alirocumab dose was significantly more often increased by CEE physicians (54.1 vs. 39.9%, p = 0.013). Therefore, more patients achieved LDL-C goal at the end of the study (<55 mg/dl/1.4 mmol/L and 50% reduction of LDL-C: 32.5% vs. 28.8%). The only factor significantly influencing the decision on dose of alirocumab was LDL-C level for both countries' groups (CEE: 199.2 vs. 175.3 mg/dl; p = 0.019; other: 205.9 vs. 171.6 mg/dl; p < 0.001, for 150 and 75 mg of alirocumab, respectively) which was also confirmed in multivariable analysis (OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.07-1.13). Despite larger unmet needs and regional disparities in LDL-C targets achievement in CEE countries, more physicians in this region tend to use the higher dose of alirocumab, they are more prone to increase the dose, which is associated with a higher proportion of patients reaching LDL-C goals. The only factor that significantly influences decision whether to increase or decrease the dose of alirocumab is LDL-C level.

Trends in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal achievement and changes in lipid-lowering therapy after incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: Danish cohort study.

We aimed to investigate trends in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement (LDL-C<1.8 mmol/L, equivalent to 70 mg/dL), initiation of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and changes in LLT intensity in individuals with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) at very high risk of recurrent cardiovascular disease. A cohort study design was used including individuals with incident ASCVD and LDL-C≥1.8 mmol/L in 2010-2015. Data were obtained from national, population-based registers (patient, prescription, income, and laboratory). We included 11,997 individuals. Acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and stable angina pectoris accounted for 79.6% of the qualifying ASCVD events. At inclusion, 37.2% were in LLT. Mean LDL-C before or during ASCVD hospitalization was 3.1 mmol/L (120 mg/dL). LDL-C goal achievement increased within the first two years after inclusion from 40.5% to 50.6%. LLT initiation within the first 90 days increased from 48.6% to 56.0%. Initiation of intensive LLT increased from 9.6% to 32.8%. The largest change in LLT intensity was seen in the period 180 days before to 90 days after discharge with 2.2% in 2010 to 12.1% in 2015. LDL-C goal achievement within the first 2 years after inclusion increased from 40.5% in 2010 to 50.6% in 2015. LLT initiation within the first year after inclusion increased, especially for intensive LLT, although only one third initiated intensive LLT in 2015. Despite trends show improvements in LDL-C goal achievement, 49.4% of individuals at very high risk of a CV event did not achieve the LDL-C goal within 2 years after ASCVD hospitalization.

Differences in treatment strategies for LDL-cholesterol reduction in a university lipid clinic vs. standard care apart from the use of PCSK9 inhibitors

Lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) is insufficient despite clear guideline recommendations. Lipid clinics have specialized in patients with dyslipidemia, but the magnitude and reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in lipid clinics has not yet been studied in depth. To assess LDL-C reduction in very high-risk CVD patients achieved in a lipid clinic through different forms of LLT in comparison to standard care without the initiation of PSCK9 inhibitors. Data from 96 lipid clinic patients were analyzed retrospectively and compared to 84 standard care patients. Very high-risk patients were defined according to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Different combinations of LLT focusing on statins and ezetimibe were investigated. Achievement of LDL-C treatment goals according to ESC guidelines as well as LDL-C reduction were assessed. Baseline and follow-up data of 180 very high-risk CVD patients (mean age 67.7 (±9.8) y; 60.6% male) were used. Achievement of the LDL-C goal in lipid clinic patients increased significantly from 14.6% at baseline to 41.7% at the latest visit (p<0.001) while standard care patients improved from 21.4% to 33.3% (p=0.08). The largest relative LDL-C reduction via an adjustment in LLT was achieved by initiation of high-intensity statins (50.8 ± 4.9%, n=5, p < 0.05). Treatment in a lipid clinic leads to a superior LDL-C goal achievement in very high-risk CVD patients as compared to standard care with the highest reduction under LLT with high-intensity statins and ezetimibe. Referral algorithms have to be established for high-risk patients.

Sex differences in LDL-C control in a primary care population: The PORTRAIT-DYS study

Background and aimsCardiovascular (CV) diseases show clear differences in clinical manifestation and treatment outcomes between men and women. To reduce sex disparities in achieving lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) goals, a sex-focused assessment is essential and more studies are needed to bring new evidence to clinicians. This study aims to assess the role of sex in attaining low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals, after correction for age, CV risk category, LLT intensity, and presence of mental health disorder and social deprivation. MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis of patients aged 40–85, followed in 1 hospital and 14 primary care centers in Portugal, using electronic health records from 1/1/2012 to 31/12/2020, was performed. The analysis considered an episode-based design, where exposure consists of any time when LLT was started or intensity changed. The likelihood of reaching the LDL-C goal according to contemporary ESC/EAS guidelines was modeled using multivariate Cox regression. LDL-C goal achievement at 180 days was defined as the outcome. The analysis was repeated at 30-day follow-up intervals up to 360 days, and also stratified by CV risk category. ResultsWe identified 40,032 exposure episodes (LLT initiation or intensity change) in 30,323 distinct patients. Male sex, older age, lower CV risk and increasing LLT intensity were associated with improved LDL-C control. Women were 22% less likely to reach the LDL-C goal than men (HR = 0.78, 95% CI:0.73, 0.82) independently of covariates. ConclusionsWomen have a lower likelihood of attaining LDL-C goals than men after adjustment for LLT intensity, age, CV risk category, presence of mental health disorder and social deprivation. This finding underscores the need for further investigation and tailoring of LLT management strategies in women.

Lipid management in ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack in China: result from China National Stroke Registry III

ObjectivesThe aims of the study were to assess the management of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and the goal achievement, as well as to investigate the association between baseline LDL-C level,...

A Practical Statin Recommendation System Based on Real-World Data to Improve LDL-C Management in Secondary Prevention.

Statins are considered the cornerstone of secondary prevention in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, many patients fail to achieve the guide-recommended goal of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) after statin monotherapy, leading to a high residual risk of cardiovascular events. Owing to individual differences in statin therapy, it is possible first to consider changing the type of statin before adding nonstatin medications in certain patients to improve LDL-C management. We developed and evaluated a statin recommendation system using real-world data. Ensemble learning was performed to develop the recommendation system that integrated the output results of support vector machines (SVM) and the similarity of patients. Model performance was assessed to investigate whether treatment according to the recommended model would increase the proportion of patients with the primary end point. Finally, a total of 3510 patients were enrolled in the development and validation of the recommender system. Of them, 1240 patients received atorvastatin (35.3%), 1714 patients received rosuvastatin (48.8%), and 556 patients received pitavastatin (15.8%). The statin recommendation system could significantly improve LDL-C target rate achievement in the recommended treatment group compared with the nonrecommended treatment group in the validation set (50.8% vs. 31.5%, P < 0.001). This study demonstrated that the statin recommendation system could significantly improve the achievement of LDL-C goals in ASCVD patients, providing a new approach to improve LDL-C management.