BACKGROUND: The United States' National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III and the Canadian Working Group on Hypercholesterolemia and Other Dyslipidemias (CWG) have each issued guidelines for the treatment of dyslipidemia. OBJECTIVE: The present analysis compared the percentage of patients reaching target lipid levels according to NCEP and CWG guidelines among participants of the NCEP Evaluation ProjecT Utilizing Novel E-technology (NEPTUNE) II, a survey performed in the United States. METHODS: American physicians who were high prescribers of lipid-modifying medications (n=376) each enrolled 10 to 20 consecutive patients from February to September 2003. Medical information, laboratory measurements and treatment plans associated with a single office visit were entered into a personal digital assistant and uploaded to a central database via the Internet. RESULTS: Under both sets of guidelines, treatment success was strongly related to risk category (P<0.001). Treatment goal achievement in the low-risk (zero or one risk factor) and moderate-risk (two or more risk factors) categories was not substantially different between NCEP and CWG guidelines; however, in the high-risk category (coronary artery disease [CAD] and risk equivalents [RE]), CWG treatment goals were met less frequently than NCEP goals. NCEP combined low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol treatment goals were met by 39% of hypertriglyceridemic patients (27% in the CAD + CAD RE category). CWG combined low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio treatment goals were met by 38% of hypertriglyceridemic patients (19% in the CAD + CAD RE category). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate substantial underachievement of treatment goals by patients at high risk under both the CWG and NCEP guidelines. The lower frequency of treatment success in high-risk patients according to the CWG definition indicates that more aggressive treatment is needed to reach CWG goals.
BACKGROUND: The United States' National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III and the Canadian Working Group on Hypercholesterolemia and Other Dyslipidemias (CWG) have each issued guidelines for the treatment of dyslipidemia. OBJECTIVE: The present analysis compared the percentage of patients reaching target lipid levels according to NCEP and CWG guidelines among participants of the NCEP Evaluation ProjecT Utilizing Novel E-technology (NEPTUNE) II, a survey performed in the United States. METHODS: American physicians who were high prescribers of lipid-modifying medications (n=376) each enrolled 10 to 20 consecutive patients from February to September 2003. Medical information, laboratory measurements and treatment plans associated with a single office visit were entered into a personal digital assistant and uploaded to a central database via the Internet. RESULTS: Under both sets of guidelines, treatment success was strongly related to risk category (P<0.001). Treatment goal achievement in the low-risk (zero or one risk factor) and moderate-risk (two or more risk factors) categories was not substantially different between NCEP and CWG guidelines; however, in the high-risk category (coronary artery disease [CAD] and risk equivalents [RE]), CWG treatment goals were met less frequently than NCEP goals. NCEP combined low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol treatment goals were met by 39% of hypertriglyceridemicpatients (27% in the CAD + CAD RE category). CWG combined low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio treatment goals were met by 38% of hypertriglyceridemicpatients (19% in the CAD + CAD RE category). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate substantial underachievement of treatment goals by patients at high risk under both the CWG and NCEP guidelines. The lower frequency of treatment success in high-risk patients according to the CWG definition indicates that more aggressive treatment is needed to reach CWG goals.
Authors: Peter S Sever; Björn Dahlöf; Neil R Poulter; Hans Wedel; Gareth Beevers; Mark Caulfield; Rory Collins; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Arni Kristinsson; Gordon T McInnes; Jesper Mehlsen; Markku Nieminen; Eoin O'Brien; Jan Ostergren Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-04-05 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Scott M Grundy; James I Cleeman; C Noel Bairey Merz; H Bryan Brewer; Luther T Clark; Donald B Hunninghake; Richard C Pasternak; Sidney C Smith; Neil J Stone Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-07-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Christopher P Cannon; Eugene Braunwald; Carolyn H McCabe; Daniel J Rader; Jean L Rouleau; Rene Belder; Steven V Joyal; Karen A Hill; Marc A Pfeffer; Allan M Skene Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-03-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J Shepherd; S M Cobbe; I Ford; C G Isles; A R Lorimer; P W MacFarlane; J H McKillop; C J Packard Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245