National Cholesterol Education Panel Research Articles

Analysis of Knowledge and Barriers to Non-High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goal Attainment Among Physicians in Training*

Synopsis: The National Cholesterol Education Panel Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III) guidelines recommend non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) as a secondary treatment target in patients with elevated triglycerides after low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment. However, unlike LDL-C, non-HDL-C goal attainment has remained low.

Defining the Safety of Anacetrapib, a CETP Inhibitor, in Patients at High Risk for Coronary Heart Disease: the DEFINE study

In 2004, the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Panel Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III Guidelines were updated based on recent trials available at that time to expand the scope and intensity of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapy [1]. That report also recommended consideration of combination therapy for high-risk patients with high triglycerides and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). One pharmacologic approach to such a regimen is the use of cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitors, which raise HDL-C and may decrease LDL-C. The Investigation of Lipid Level Management to Understand its Impact in Atherosclerotic Events (ILLUMINATE) trial attempted to test the hypothesis that CETP inhibition with torcetrapib would decrease clinical cardiovascular events, but despite substantial increases in HDL-C, the trial was terminated early due to excess adverse events, including increased mortality in the group that received torcetrapib plus atorvastatin compared to the group that received atorvastatin alone [2]. Hypotheses for the increased mortality, both due to cardiovascular and noncardiovascular causes, included an off-target effect of the drug unrelated to CETP inhibition, or an adverse effect of CETP inhibition itself, including possibly the generation of dysfunctional or even proatherogenic HDL-C. The ILLUMINATE trial did find a known off-target effect of torcetrapib (an increase in blood pressure) but could not definitively rule in or out either of the two potential explanations. Other effects of torcetrapib included increased sodium and bicarbonate levels, decreased potassium levels, and apparent increases in aldosterone levels. Other CETP inhibitors, including anacetrapib [3], have not shown increases in blood pressure and appear to be better candidates for further study.

Coronary Risk Stratification, Discrimination, and Reclassification Improvement Based on Quantification of Subclinical Coronary Atherosclerosis: The Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study

The purpose of this study was to determine net reclassification improvement (NRI) and improved risk prediction based on coronary artery calcification (CAC) scoring in comparison with traditional risk factors. CAC as a sign of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis can noninvasively be detected by CT and has been suggested to predict coronary events. In 4,129 subjects from the HNR (Heinz Nixdorf Recall) study (age 45 to 75 years, 53% female) without overt coronary artery disease at baseline, traditional risk factors and CAC scores were measured. Their risk was categorized into low, intermediate, and high according to the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and National Cholesterol Education Panel Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III guidelines, and the reclassification rate based on CAC results was calculated. After 5 years of follow-up, 93 coronary deaths and nonfatal myocardial infarctions occurred (cumulative risk 2.3%; 95% confidence interval: 1.8% to 2.8%). Reclassifying intermediate (defined as 10% to 20% and 6% to 20%) risk subjects with CAC <100 to the low-risk category and with CAC ≥400 to the high-risk category yielded an NRI of 21.7% (p = 0.0002) and 30.6% (p < 0.0001) for the FRS, respectively. Integrated discrimination improvement using FRS variables and CAC was 1.52% (p < 0.0001). Adding CAC scores to the FRS and National Cholesterol Education Panel ATP III categories improved the area under the curve from 0.681 to 0.749 (p < 0.003) and from 0.653 to 0.755 (p = 0.0001), respectively. CAC scoring results in a high reclassification rate in the intermediate-risk cohort, demonstrating the benefit of imaging of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis. Our study supports its application, especially in carefully selected individuals with intermediate risk.

Inclusion of Stroke as an Outcome and Risk Equivalent in Risk Scores for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Vascular Disease

Current guideline statements for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) rely on estimates of absolute risk of coronary events. For example, the American Heart Association guidelines on primary prevention state that persons with ≥10% risk over 10 years of myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary death should be considered for antiplatelet therapy with aspirin.1 Similarly, the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines2 state that target low-density lipoprotein level should be based on projected absolute risk of future coronary events rather than on presence or absence of specific risk factors. These guidelines state that patients at high risk of MI and coronary death, defined as an absolute 10-year risk of ≥20%, should have a target low-density lipoprotein level <100 mg/dL and should receive statin therapy if needed to achieve this goal. Stroke, however, is not included as one of the outcomes contributing to these absolute risk levels. Included in the group of patients with elevated risk, moreover, are those who already have ischemic heart disease, as well as patients deemed to be “coronary heart disease (CHD) risk equivalents,” indicating those at the same elevated risk as patients with ischemic heart disease. CHD risk equivalents include patients with diabetes mellitus, those with multiple risk factors that put them at elevated risk based on calculation of their Framingham Score, and patients with “other forms of symptomatic atherosclerotic disease.” The latter group is further defined to include those with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), and carotid artery disease. The category of “risk equivalents” in the ATP III guidelines, however, does not include the vast majority (≈80%3) of ischemic stroke patients without carotid artery disease as cause of their stroke. Ischemic stroke is therefore notably excluded from the list of outcomes contributing to …

Cardiovascular computed tomographic assessment of the effect of combination lipoprotein therapy on coronary arterial plaque: Rationale and design of the AFRICA (Atorvastatin plus Fenofibric acid in the Reduction of Intermediate Coronary Atherosclerosis) study

Whether combination lipoprotein therapy targeting apolipoprotein B (apoB)- and apoA-containing lipoprotein particles and triglycerides (TGs) in low-risk, asymptomatic subjects with coronary atherosclerosis alters the natural progression of plaques is unknown. This study was designed to compare the progression of coronary atherosclerosis in asymptomatic, low-risk subjects without previously known coronary artery disease but with the presence of plaque on a combination of atorvastatin 40 mg plus fenofibric acid 135 mg daily for 18 months, using cardiovascular computed tomography (CCT). This is an investigator-initiated, single-center, prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm study. Asymptomatic subjects at low risk of cardiovascular events defined as <10% 10-year risk based on the Framingham Risk Score will be recruited, if they do not qualify for lipoprotein-lowering therapy based on the National Cholesterol Education Panel Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Subjects will qualify based on lipid parameters if their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol is >/=100 mg/dL and <190 mg/dL, TGs are >150 mg/dL, and the TGs/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio is >3.5. Patients must have nonobstructive plaque based on CCT. Randomization will be 1:1 to either a combination of atorvastatin 40 mg plus fenofibric acid 135 mg daily or placebo for 18 months. Patients will undergo CCT at baseline and at the end of the treatment period. The primary end point will be the between-group difference in percent atheroma volume. Ultimately, this study can guide physicians about the use of a statin-fibric acid derivative combination in asymptomatic, low-risk persons with atherosclerosis.

Computerized history-taking as a tool to manage dyslipidemia

BackgroundValidated guidelines to manage low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol are utilized inconsistently or not at all even though their application lowers the incidence of coronary events. New approaches are needed, therefore, to implement these guidelines in everyday practice.Methods and resultsWe compared an automated method for applying The National Cholesterol Education Panel (NCEP) guidelines with results from routine care for managing LDL-cholesterol. The automated method comprised computerized history-taking and analysis of historical data without physician input. Results from routine care were determined for 213 unselected patients and compared with results from interviews of the same 213 patients by a computerized history-taking program. Data extracted from hospital charts showed that routine care typically did not collect sufficient information to stratify risk and assign treatment targets for LDL-cholesterol and that there were inconsistencies in identifying patients with normal or elevated levels of LDL-cholesterol in relation to risk. The computerized interview program outperformed routine care in collecting historical data relevant to stratifying risk, assigning treatment targets, and clarifying the presence of hypercholesterolemia relative to risk.ConclusionsComputerized history-taking coupled with automated analysis of the clinical data can outperform routine medical care in applying NCEP guidelines for stratifying risk and identifying patients with hypercholesterolemia in relation to risk.

The SHAPE Paradigm

Atherosclerosis is a chronic immunoinflammatory disease trigerred by lipoprotein retention in the subendothelium and produces its most serious manifestations by triggering arterial thrombosis when the plaque ruptures or erodes.1 Atherothrombotic cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in the West and is achieving similar dubious distinction in developing countries.2 Atherosclerosis begins at a young age, but it remains clinically silent for a long time and the majority of clinical manifestations occur later in life. Despite considerable progress, regrettably 50% of life-threatening acute cardiovascular events occur in previously asymptomatic individuals. Identifying individuals at risk for future cardiovascular events affords an opportunity for risk reduction and thus remains a major imperative for healthcare professionals. In 2006 the SHAPE (Society for Heart Attack Prevention and Education) Task Force introduced an algorithm incorporating noninvasive screening for subclinical atherosclerosis to augment risk factor–based risk stratification in asymptomatic subjects between the ages of 45 to 75 in men and 55 to 75 in women, excluding those at very low risk or at high risk.3 In June 2009, the Texas Governor Rick Perry signed off on the Texas Heart Attack Prevention Bill introduced by Rep Rene Oliveira, mandating health-benefit plans to cover noninvasive screening for subclinical atherosclerosis. This bill grew out of the 2006 SHAPE Task Force guidelines and became effective September 1, 2009; an earlier version of the bill had been rejected in 2007. This generated a mixed reaction from healthcare professionals and others, much of which played out in the media. The critics argued that such an action is inappropriate because: (1) the SHAPE guidelines were created by an ad hoc group and had not been explicitly endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC) or the American Heart Association (AHA), and (2) SHAPE guidelines are not based on randomized clinical …

Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Goal Achievement With Ezetimibe/Simvastatin Versus Atorvastatin or Rosuvastatin in Patients With Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome, or Neither Disease, Stratified by National Cholesterol Education Program Risk Category

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and metabolic syndrome are at increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). Studies have shown differential statin efficacy on low-density lipid cholesterol (LDL-C) by CHD risk strata. The aim of this study was to evaluate the consistency of effect with ezetimibe/simvastatin (E/S) combination therapy, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin in patients with DM, metabolic syndrome, or neither condition (No DM/metabolic syndrome), stratified by the National Cholesterol Education Panel Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) CHD risk group. Post hoc analyses of 2 multicenter, double-blind, randomized, 6-week studies comparing E/S 10/10, 10/20, 10/40, or 10/80 mg with either atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg, or rosuvastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg. Treatments were compared by pooling across all doses for LDL-C reduction and NCEP LDL-C goal attainment in patients with DM, metabolic syndrome without DM, or No DM/metabolic syndrome across NCEP CHD risk strata. NCEP LDL-C goal attainment was lowest in the high-risk group with atherosclerotic vascular disease (12-64%) and greatest in the moderate and low-risk groups (84-100%). In contrast, LDL-C reduction was generally similar irrespective of disease or risk subgroup. All treatments were generally well tolerated, with overall similar safety regardless of disease and risk level. In these studies, CHD risk strata were inversely related to the likelihood of attaining NCEP LDL-C goals, but did not appear to affect the percentage LDL-C change from baseline. This demonstrates the need for especially aggressive cholesterol lowering necessary to reach the lower LDL-C goal for high-risk patients.

Does Metabolic Syndrome Have an Impact on the Quality of Life and Mood of Hemodialysis Patients?

Little is known about the association between metabolic syndrome (MetSyn), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and depressive symptoms in hemodialysis (HD) patients. We hypothesized that MetSyn may be associated with lower HRQoL and depression in HD patients. This was a cross-sectional study. The trial involved HD patients at a tertiary-care hospital. We evaluated 115 patients (41 women and 74 men; mean age, 48.4 +/- SD 11.9 years SD). MetSyn was defined according to National Cholesterol Education Panel criteria. The Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) were used to assess HRQoL and signs of depression, respectively. We compared HRQoL and clinical and psychosocial characteristics among participants with and without MetSyn. Fifty patients (43.5%) had MetSyn, and 65 patients (56.5%) were free of MetSyn. Comparisons of SF-36 and BDI scores between HD patients with and without MetSyn revealed no statistically significant differences. The Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) of SF-36 was independently associated with HD duration (beta = -0.274, P = .002), age (beta = -0.206, P = .024), sleep disturbance (beta = -0.175, P = .045), albumin (beta = +0.252, P = .006), and hemoglobin (beta = +0.270, P = .002) in stepwise linear regression analysis. The MetSyn was not associated with PCS. The Mental Component Summary Score of SF-36 was independently associated with hemoglobin (beta = +0.235, P = .016) and BDI score (beta = -0.218, P = .025). The presence of MetSyn was not associated with HRQoL according to the Mental Component Summary Score. In HD patients, HRQoL and depressive behaviors were not influenced by MetSyn, but by various other factors.

Common lipid-altering gene variants are associated with therapeutic intervention thresholds of lipid levels in older people

AimsThere are a large number of common genetic variants that have been robustly associated with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, or triglyceride concentrations. The majority of these have been identified or confirmed in recent genome-wide association studies, but few studies have assessed the combined effect of known lipid variants. We hypothesized that these variants would influence both the need for interventions and myocardial infarction (MI) outcomes. We aimed to estimate combined effects of proven SNPs on LDL, HDL, and triglyceride concentrations and MI history in a representative older population.Methods and resultsIn the InCHIANTI Study of Aging (age ≥65 years), we calculated individual dyslipidaemia risk allele counts for increased LDL (range 4–14, n = 594), reduced HDL (5–16, n = 635), and increased triglycerides (7–16, n = 611). Lipid levels were compared with ATPIII National Cholesterol Education Panel (NCEP) intervention guidelines. Individual variants and the APOE haplotype explained <2.1% of the variance in their respective lipid concentrations, with the exception of the CETP SNP rs1800775 and HDL levels (4.76%). Combined risk allele counts outperformed the largest single-SNP effects for LDL (explaining 7.1% of variance) and triglycerides (4.8%), but not HDL (3.4%). Risk alleles were divided as near as possible into quartiles. The 31% of respondents with 10 or more LDL increasing alleles were more likely to have LDL levels above the intervention threshold (OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.67–5.39, P = 2.5 × 10−4), compared with the 21% with 7 or less risk alleles. Similarly, the 35% with 13 or more triglyceride risk alleles were more likely to exceed NCEP intervention thresholds (OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.43–6.22, P = 0.004) compared with the 24% with 10 or less alleles. The number of individuals reporting an MI event was small (n = 67), but an event was more common in the 36% of respondents who had the highest combined risk allele score for all three lipids (OR 3.68, 95% CI 1.21–11.2, P = 0.021) compared with the lowest risk 22%.ConclusionIn a representative older population, the cumulative effects of proven LDL- and triglyceride-altering genetic variants increased the odds of crossing the lipid-level threshold for therapeutic intervention by approximately three-fold.

National Cholesterol Education Panel ΙΙΙ Guidelines Performance Role in Preventing Myocardial Infarction in a Large Cohort Without a History of Coronary Artery Disease: Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry Study

The Third Report of the Adult Treatment Panel National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP-ATP III) guidelines are widely used for the primary prevention of a coronary event. These guidelines were developed using experimental data from studies that enrolled mostly Caucasian patients. The pathogenesis of atherosclerosis varies with ethnicity. Given these two circumstances, the authors sought to investigate the performance of the guidelines in a large Asian cohort. The Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR) includes data collected between November 2005 and December 2006 from 41 referral centers in South Korea. A retrospective review of the clinical data was performed. After patients with a history of coronary heart disease (CHD), CHD equivalent, and those taking lipid-lowering medications were excluded, 2969 individuals (76% men; 61+/-12 years) were enrolled. The recommendations for lipid-lowering treatments according to the NCEP-ATP III were examined in the context of the cohort. A total of 38%, 66%, and 8% of the study participants had hypertension, were smokers, and had a family history of premature CHD, respectively. When patients were stratified by the number of risk factors present and their 10-year CHD risk, 69% diagnosed with an acute myocardial infarction did not qualify for drug therapy. Irrespective of the age group examined (young, intermediate, and old), the percentage of patients who did not qualify for a lipid-lowering pharmacologic intervention was higher than 60%. NCEP-ATP III underestimates CHD risk in individuals of Asian descent. Further studies are needed to improve primary CHD prevention in this patient population.

Does diagnosis of metabolic syndrome predict the likelihood of peripheral arterial disease as defined by a low ankle-brachial index?

There is limited information about whether a diagnosis of metabolic syndrome (MS) predicts peripheral arterial disease independently of diabetes. This study assessed whether MS adds prognostic information beyond that relating to diabetes in the identification of a low ankle-brachial index (ABI). Cross-sectional population-based study of people aged 50-75 years. Eight hundred and fifty-eight participants were randomly selected. The likelihood of low ABI (<0.90) was calculated according to MS status before and after excluding diabetes. The National Cholesterol Education Panel and the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) definitions of MS were used. The prevalence of National Cholesterol Education Panel-defined and IDF-defined MS, and low ABI was 57.8, 61.1 and 7.5%, respectively. When there were participants with three or more criteria for MS, participants with only three criteria, and participants with four or five criteria were compared with participants without MS, the odds ratio for low ABI was 1.89 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-3.30), 1.34 (0.70-2.60) and 2.70 (1.45-5.03), respectively. The association of MS and low ABI lost statistical significance after excluding diabetes. No difference was observed using the IDF definition of MS. Screening of participants with MS does not improve the identification of abnormal ABI provided by diabetes.

Primary Prevention and Statins: Is It Just About Going to Class?

Primary Prevention and Statins: Is It Just About Going to Class?

Identifying the Vulnerable Patient with Rupture-Prone Plaque

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, and the obesity epidemic combined with aging of the population seems destined to increase the burden of this disease. Traditional cardiovascular risk assessment accounts for <50% of the variability in risk in the United States. Therefore, better and more effective identification of persons at high cardiovascular risk is needed. Our understanding of atherosclerosis has shifted from a focal disease whose hallmark is symptoms caused by a severe stenosis to a systemic disease characterized by endothelial dysfunction (ED) and plaque inflammation, with the potential for rupture and thrombosis mainly in those with subcritical stenosis. Under the new paradigm, clinicians require updated strategies to better assess the quality of arterial plaque. Effective tools for primary and secondary prevention of heart attack and stroke include intensive lifestyle modification, blood pressure reduction, and lipid-modifying therapies. These interventions are now understood to decrease plaque inflammation and thereby promote plaque stability. Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) (Lp-PLA(2)) appears to be a specific marker of plaque inflammation that may play a direct role in the formation of rupture-prone plaque. In contrast, traditional risk factors, lipid measurement, and most vascular imaging modalities do not directly assess the acute ischemic potential in the arterial wall. Measuring Lp-PLA(2) levels in human serum or plasma is noninvasive and relatively inexpensive. Lp-PLA(2) may provide additional clinically relevant information that shows which patients have a high level of atherosclerotic disease activity as manifested by vascular inflammation, ED, and increased risk for progression toward rupture-prone plaque.

HDL-C and LDL-C: Their role in stroke pathogenesis and implications for treatment

Elevated serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and low serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) are risk factors for atherosclerotic ischemic stroke. The National Cholesterol Education Panel and the American Heart Association have released guidelines for the treatment of dyslipidemia that stress LDL-C reduction using HMG CoA (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A) reductase inhibitors (statins) and are applicable to individuals who have had or are at a high risk of having a stroke. Treatment of low HDL-C is a secondary goal of these guidelines and can be best achieved by using extended-release niacin (alone or in combination with statins) and fibrates. Early and aggressive treatment of dyslipidemia is an important component of a multimodality approach to stroke prevention.

Identification of High-Risk Coronary Heart Disease Patients Receiving Atypical Antipsychotics

Although psychiatric patients have a shortened life expectancy due to increased coronary heart disease (CHD), early identification of high-risk patients and targeted prevention for reduction of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol are suboptimal in clinical care. We aimed to compare the accuracy of a single LDL-cholesterol intervention threshold of > 130 mg/dL (recently proposed for psychiatric patients) with that of the more complex LDL-cholesterol targets defined by the National Cholesterol Education Panel (NCEP). The study was performed in patients receiving second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), a medication class associated with CHD risk. Three hundred fifty-six psychiatric patients receiving SGAs underwent standard LDL-cholesterol target assessments upon admission to the hospital between August 1, 2004, and March 1, 2005. The expert consensus-recommended > 130-mg/dL LDL-cholesterol threshold was used to determine false-negative results among patients with above-target NCEP-defined LDL cholesterol and false-positive results in the group with below-target NCEP-defined LDL cholesterol. The > 130-mg/dL threshold misclassified 15 (14.9%) of 101 high-risk patients and 31 (12.2%) of 255 low-risk patients (mean +/- SD 10-year CHD risk: 23.1% +/- 12.2% and 2.1% +/- 2.2%, respectively). Results were similar in the 171 schizophrenia patients. Misclassified patients with above-target LDL cholesterol were more likely than correctly identified patients to have diabetes (p = .0002), greater 10-year CHD risk (p = .0006), higher age (p = .0008), metabolic syndrome (p = .0018), and past CHD events (p = .0025). No distinguishing factors for false-positive cases could be identified. The > 130-mg/dL LDL-cholesterol intervention threshold operated poorly in our psychiatric population. To avoid substandard care, NCEP-defined LDL-cholesterol targets should be used for the routine detection of psychiatric patients treated with antipsychotics who require interventions to decrease CHD risk.

Not all diabetics are created equal (in cardiovascular risk)

Current guidelines continue to recommend all persons with diabetes be considered at high risk and treated accordingly. For example, National Cholesterol Education Panel Guidelines state ‘Persons with type 2 diabetes should be managed as a coronary heart disease (CHD) risk equivalent. Treatment for low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol should follow Adult Treatment Panel III recommendations for persons with established CHD’.1 This remains an important tenet, as up to 80% of persons with diabetes will suffer a cardiovascular event. This has led some to conclude that further risk stratification in persons with diabetes is neither warranted nor useful. However, persons with diabetes are not all at equal risk. The data from PREDICT,2 as well as previous coronary artery calcium (CAC) studies, demonstrate that persons with diabetes will have widely varied cardiovascular risk. While many persons with diabetes do have increased cardiovascular risk compared with the general population, there is a defined subset who have a very low cardiovascular risk and an equally large subset who are at extremely high risk. These groups cannot be discerned on the basis of HbA1c levels, duration of diabetes, age, gender or cardiovascular risk factors. Clearly, coronary calcium scanning (CCS) is not only becoming widely accepted in intermediate risk patients, such as those with several cardiovascular risk … *Corresponding author. Tel: (310) 222 4107, Fax: (310) 787 0448, E-mail: mbudoff{at}labiomed.org

Lipid‐Lowering Efficacy and Safety After Switching to Atazanavir‐Ritonavir‐Based Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy in Patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and lipid-lowering effects after switching from a non-atazanavir-containing, protease inhibitor-based highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) to atazanavir-ritonavir-based HAART in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Multicenter, noncontrolled, retrospective study. Three tertiary teaching hospitals. Thirty-six patients with HIV infection, aged 18 years or older, who were receiving non-atazanavir-containing, protease inhibitor-based HAART that was switched to atazanavir 300 mg-ritonavir 100 mg-based HAART without changes in nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and confounders known to alter serum lipid levels. Lipid profiles measured 4 weeks-6 months before the switch, as well as follow-up lipid profiles measured 4 weeks-6 months after receiving the new HAART regimen, were evaluated. The switch resulted in the following changes in lipid levels: total cholesterol -9% (p=0.002), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol -13% (p<0.001), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL) -2% (p=0.431), triglycerides -23% (p=0.007), non-HDL -11% (p=0.002), total cholesterol:HDL ratio -10% (p=0.004), and triglyceride:HDL ratio -24% (p=0.019). A subgroup analysis was conducted on the lipid profiles of nine patients who still met the strict inclusion and exclusion criteria up to 9 months after the switch; it showed that the reductions in their lipid profiles were sustained. In addition, 33% more patients achieved their National Cholesterol Education Panel (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III cholesterol goals. No significant changes were noted in median (interquartile range) CD4+ counts (372 [236-551] and 361 [217-464] cells/mm(3), p=0.118) or in number of patients with undetectable HIV viral loads ([defined as < 50 copies/ml] 32/36 and 31/36 patients, p>0.05) between baseline and after the switch, respectively. Switching to an atazanavir-ritonavir-based HAART regimen was associated with significant improvement in lipid profiles, similar to those seen in clinical trials, without compromising safety or viral and immunologic control. In addition, more patients were able to achieve their NCEP ATP III goals.

National Cholesterol Education Panel III performance in preventing myocardial infarction in young adults

National Cholesterol Education Panel III performance in preventing myocardial infarction in young adults

National Cholesterol Education Panel III performance in preventing myocardial infarction in young adults

BACKGROUNDOnly one published trial has directly evaluated the utility of the new National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines in young adults and that study population consisted of young Americans. We examined the utility of the latest NCEP Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines in a group of young Lebanese adults.METHODSA group of 234 young adults admitted for myocardial infarction at a Lebanese teaching hospital over a 2-year period were evaluated retrospectively. The Framingham risk predictor model was used to calculate the 10-year risk for coronary events in all subjects.RESULTSTwo hundred young Lebanese adults with a mean age of 49.7±7.6 years were included in the analysis. The majority of the study population had a history of smoking (67%) and LDL cholesterol <130 mg/dL(70.5%) and were considered overweight and obese (80.5%). As a group, 80% did not meet the criteria to qualify for antilipemic pharmacotherapy prior to their presentation.CONCLUSIONThe predictive model did not detect the majority of these patients. Clinicians should treat modifiable risk factors with the same intensity given to cholesterol even if the patient has a normal lipid profile.