Statins For Prevention Of Cardiovascular Disease Research Articles

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV in Adults: 2024 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

New data and new antiretroviral drugs and formulations continue to become available for the prevention and management of HIV infection. To provide updated recommendations for HIV treatment and clinical management and HIV prevention. A panel of volunteer expert physician scientists were appointed to provide updated consensus recommendations for 2024. Relevant evidence in the literature since the last report was identified from PubMed and Embase searches (which initially yielded 3998 unique citations, of which 249 were considered relevant); from ongoing monitoring of the literature by the panel members; from data submitted by product manufacturers; and from studies presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences between June 2022 and October 2024. Antiretroviral therapy continues to be recommended for all individuals with HIV. For most people with HIV, initial regimens composed of an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (InSTI), specifically bictegravir or dolutegravir, with 2 (and in some cases 1) nucleoside or nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors are recommended. Recommendations are made for those with particular clinical circumstances, such as pregnancy and active opportunistic diseases, as well as for those unable to take InSTIs. Regimens may need to be changed for virologic failure, adverse effects, convenience, or cost, among other reasons. Long-acting injectable therapy is available for those who prefer not to take daily oral medications and for people struggling with adherence to daily therapy. Recommendations are provided for laboratory monitoring, management of substance use disorders and weight changes, as well as use of statins for cardiovascular disease prevention. For HIV prevention, oral (daily or intermittent) and injectable long-acting medications are effective options for people at increased likelihood of HIV exposure. Further, new tools for maintaining health and well-being among people with HIV, such as doxycycline postexposure prophylaxis to avert sexually transmitted infection, and strategies to treat substance use disorders, are recommended. Disparities in HIV acquisition and care access are discussed and solutions proposed. New approaches for treating and preventing HIV offer additional tools to help end the HIV epidemic, but achieving this goal depends on addressing disparities and inequities in access to care.

Abstract 04: Gender and Racial Inequalities in the Use of Statins for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Remains Despite Persistent Recommendations in Recent Guidelines - A Call to Action

Introduction: Statins use for secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention is associated with better health outcomes and lower cost among adults with ASCVD. We aimed to examine the prevalence of statin use among adults with ASCVD in the US and to assess for gender and racial differences in statin use. Methods: We identified adults aged 40-75 years with ASCVD (defined using ICD codes and self-reported history) from the 2008-17 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) data. We estimated the trends in statin use among them, and used joint point regression (JPR) to estimate the annual percentage change in statin use. Logistic regression was used to assess the racial variation in statin use. We applied the weights in the MEPS complex survey design to estimate population sizes, so all results are nationally representative. Results: Between 2008 and 2017, 24896 adults aged 40-75 years with ASCVD were identified. In 2017, there were 2445 patients with ASCVD (equivalent to 24.5 million adults). In 2017, the mean age [SE] was 62.2 [0.3] years, and 42.9% were females. The overall proportion of adults with ASCVD using statin increased from 50.0% in 2008 to 58.7% in 2017, with an average annual percentage change of 0.95% between 2010 and 2017 ( p= 0.01). As shown in Figure 1a , among those with ASCVD, statin use was persistently lower in women than in men. In 2017, compared to White adults with ASCVD, Blacks (OR=0.69; 95% CI: 0.51-0.92) and Hispanics (OR=0.62; 95% CI: 0.45-0.85) were less likely to be on statin. Each year, over 3 million women with ASCVD were not on statin, and majority of them were Blacks and Hispanics. (Figure 1b) Conclusion: Millions of adults with ASCVD are not on statins in the US while gender and racial inequalities in statin use remains, despite persistent guideline recommendations. Herein lies an opportunity to improve CVD-related outcomes and cost by intensifying efforts to use statins for the secondary prevention of CVD and closing gender and racial gaps, especially with the 2030 sustainable development goals in view.

Estimated Impact of US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations on Use and Cost of Statins for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention.

US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released new recommendations on statin use for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) prevention. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandates USPSTF recommendations with an "A" or "B" grade receive insurance coverage without copayment. We assessed the potential impact of these recommendations. To assess the US population meeting criteria for statin use and factors associated with use, and calculate associated costs. We estimated 10-year ASCVD event risk scores from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data using Pooled Cohort Equations from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and applied them to Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data. We estimated the population meeting USPSTF criteria and calculated the number of statin prescription fills and out-of-pocket and total costs. We assessed associations between statin use and sociodemographic and health characteristics and national trends in use from 1996 to 2014. A nationally representative sample of people aged ≥ 40years, representing 150 million people living in the USA. Of 26.8 million adults recommended for statins, only 41.8% were taking them. Female sex, Hispanic ethnicity, uninsured status, or living in the South was associated with lower odds of using statins. Under ACA, people with private insurance would avoid out-of-pocket cost of $9 for each generic prescription, resulting in savings of approximately $44 in annual costs. ACA's mandate for insurance coverage would result in a $193 million shift in out-of-pocket cost for statins from patients to private insurers. New USPSTF recommendations may result in decreased out-of-pocket costs and expanded access to statins. Previous research has shown that eliminating copayments increased adherence and decreased rates of ASCVD events without increasing overall healthcare costs. Future research will determine whether the USPSTF's recommendations will result in similar findings.

Statins for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

Importance Cardiovascular disease (CVD), the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the United States, may be potentially preventable with statin therapy. Objective To systematically review benefits and harms of statins for prevention of CVD to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from 1991), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (from 2005) to June 2016. Study Selection Randomized clinical trials of statins vs placebo, fixed-dose vs titrated statins, and higher- vs lower-intensity statins in adults without prior cardiovascular events. Data Extraction and Synthesis One investigator abstracted data, a second checked data for accuracy, and 2 investigators independently assessed study quality using predefined criteria. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures All-cause mortality, CVD-related morbidity or mortality, and harms. Results Nineteen trials (n = 71 344 participants [range, 95-17 802]; mean age, 51-66 years) compared statins vs placebo or no statin. Statin therapy was associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.80 to 0.93]; I 2 = 0%; absolute risk difference [ARD], −0.40% [95% CI, −0.64% to −0.17%]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.88]; I 2 = 54%; ARD, −0.43% [95% CI, −0.75% to −0.11%]), stroke (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.82]; I 2 = 0; ARD, −0.38% [95% CI, −0.53% to −0.23%]), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.71]; I 2 = 0%; ARD, −0.81% [95% CI, −1.19 to −0.43%]), and composite cardiovascular outcomes (RR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.78]; I 2 = 36%; ARD, −1.39% [95% CI, −1.79 to −0.99%]). Relative benefits appeared consistent in demographic and clinical subgroups, including populations without marked hyperlipidemia (total cholesterol level I 2 = 52%), and 1 trial found high-intensity statins associated with increased risk (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.49]). No trial directly compared titrated vs fixed-dose statins, and there were no clear differences based on statin intensity. Conclusions and Relevance In adults at increased CVD risk but without prior CVD events, statin therapy was associated with reduced risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and CVD events, with greater absolute benefits in patients at greater baseline risk.

Mind the Gap! A Multilevel Analysis of Factors Related to Variation in Published Cost-Effectiveness Estimates within and between Countries.

Background. Published cost-effectiveness estimates can vary considerably, both within and between countries. Despite extensive discussion, little is known empirically about factors relating to these variations. Objectives. To use multilevel statistical modeling to integrate cost-effectiveness estimates from published economic evaluations to investigate potential causes of variation. Methods. Cost-effectiveness studies of statins for cardiovascular disease prevention were identified by systematic review. Estimates of incremental costs and effects were extracted from reported base case, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses, with estimates grouped in studies and in countries. Three bivariate models were developed: a cross-classified model to accommodate data from multinational studies, a hierarchical model with multinational data allocated to a single category at country level, and a hierarchical model excluding multinational data. Covariates at different levels were drawn from a long list of factors suggested in the literature. Results. We found 67 studies reporting 2094 cost-effectiveness estimates relating to 23 countries (6 studies reporting for more than 1 country). Data and study-level covariates included patient characteristics, intervention and comparator cost, and some study methods (e.g., discount rates and time horizon). After adjusting for these factors, the proportion of variation attributable to countries was negligible in the cross-classified model but moderate in the hierarchical models (14%−19% of total variance). Country-level variables that improved the fit of the hierarchical models included measures of income and health care finance, health care resources, and population risks. Conclusions. Our analysis suggested that variability in published cost-effectiveness estimates is related more to differences in study methods than to differences in national context. Multinational studies were associated with much lower country-level variation than single-country studies. These findings are for a single clinical question and may be atypical.

Statins and Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Women

Objectives. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of statins in preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD) in women without cardiovascular disease. Background. Several meta-analyses have been performed evaluating statins in CVD primary prevention trials involving women. This review is an update incorporating the results of recent CVD primary prevention trials in women and the recent concerns of statins and new-onset diabetes. Method. PubMed database was searched for primary prevention trials and meta-analyses. The key terms “statins, cardiovascular disease, primary prevention in women” were used. Search was limited to all English publications published up to October 2012. Results. Statin use led to a trend towards reduction in cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in women. No significant increased risk in adverse events was observed. The slight increased incidence of diabetes is outweighed by the greater cardiovascular benefit derived from statin use. Conclusions. The data support the use of statins for primary prevention of CVD in women at higher risk of CVD. The lack of statistical significance in prior randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses is attributable to the lower numbers of women enrolled in these trials and the lower CVD risk of women in the trials resulting in the inadequate powering of these studies. Higher risk women who may benefit from CVD primary prevention with statins may be identified using validated tools such as the Reynolds scoring system, the 2011 American Heart Association risk algorithm for women, and the forthcoming National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute risk equations.

Statins for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, better known as statins, are used in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with elevated cholesterol. Statins also reduce the incidence of coronary events and stroke and improve survival rates in CVD.

The Association Between Statins and Cancer Incidence in a Veterans Population

Meta-analyses of trials of 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitors or statins for cardiovascular disease prevention have failed to show any statistically significant benefit of statins for cancer prevention. However, these trials included relatively young participants, who develop few cancers, and their follow-up periods may have been too short to detect an association between statin use and cancer incidence. We investigated this association in a population of veterans. We identified patients using antihypertensive medications but no cholesterol-lowering medications (n = 25,594) and patients using statins (n = 37,248) who were enrolled in the Veterans Affairs New England Healthcare System between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2005. Age- and multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for cancer incidence, excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer, among patients taking statins compared with patients taking antihypertensive medications and among patients grouped by statin dose (as equivalent simvastatin dose). All statistical tests were two-sided. The absolute incidence of total cancers was 9.4% among statin users and 13.2% among nonusers (difference = 3.8%, 95% CI = 3.3% to 4.3%, P(difference) < .001). Statin users had a statistically significant lower risk for total cancer than nonusers after adjustment for age (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.73 to 0.80) and multiple potential confounders (HR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.70 to 0.78). After multivariable adjustment, a statistically significantly decreased risk of all cancers was also associated with increasing statin use (P(trend) < .001). Patients using statins may be at lower risk for developing cancer. Additional observational studies and randomized trials of statins for cancer prevention are warranted.

Drug Costs Associated with Non-Adherence to Cholesterol Management Guidelines for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in an Elderly Population

In The Netherlands, costs of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) use have recently increased sharply compared with costs of other drugs. However, several studies have established both undertreatment and non-guidelines-indicated treatment with statins, suggesting a suboptimal use of resources. To estimate the drug costs associated with non-guidelines-indicated treatment and undertreatment with statins in an elderly population. Data were obtained from the Rotterdam Study, a population-based prospective cohort study which began in 1990 with 7983 participants aged > or =55 years. Subjects with a history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) were excluded. Pharmacy records were used to assess patterns of medication use in daily medical practice. Non-guidelines-indicated treatment and undertreatment with statins were established in relation to Dutch cholesterol management guidelines for all participants. We calculated the costs of statin therapy associated with non-guidelines-indicated treatment, and the costs of statins if all those undertreated were to receive statins. The results were projected on to the Dutch population to determine the economic implications of non-adherence to cholesterol management guidelines in the elderly. Of the participants who started treatment with statins for the primary prevention of CVD during follow-up, 69% received non-guidelines-indicated treatment. More men (7.5%) were undertreated than women (1.6%) and more women (6.2%) received non-guidelines-indicated treatment than men (1.5%). Among the participants without CVD who were still alive at 1 January 2002, 14% were eligible for statin therapy but were untreated. After projection of the prevalence of non-guidelines-indicated treatment and undertreatment to the Dutch population, the absolute costs for non-guidelines-indicated treatment with statins in 2005 were estimated to be approximately 23 million euro(uncertainty limits [UL]: 19-28 million euro), while the cost to eliminate undertreatment was also 23 million euro (UL: 19-28 million euro). Reallocation of resources used for statin therapy from those receiving non-guidelines-indicated treatment to those being undertreated could lead to a more efficient use of resources.