Sripal Bangalore1, Rana Fayyad2, John J Kastelein3, Rachel Laskey2, Pierre Amarenco4, David A DeMicco2, David D Waters5. 1. New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY. Electronic address: sripalbangalore@gmail.com. 2. Pfizer, New York, NY. 3. Academic Medical Center/University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Paris-Diderot Sorbonne University, Paris, France. 5. San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 2013 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol recommends moderate- to high-intensity statins for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease but departs from the traditional treat-to-target approach. Whether percent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction or attained LDL-C levels add incremental prognostic value to statin dose is not known. METHODS: Patients in the Treating to New Targets (TNT), Incremental Decrease in Endpoints through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL), and Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL) trials (patient-level data) randomized to a statin arm (atorvastatin 80 mg/10 mg or simvastatin 20 mg) were chosen. Patients were divided into groups based on attained LDL-C levels (≤70 vs >70 mg/dL) and percent LDL-C reduction (≥50% vs <50%). Primary outcome was major cardiovascular event defined as death due to coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or stroke. Incremental prognostic value was assessed by using a forward conditional Cox proportional hazards model. Two models were tested: Model 1: Step 1 statin dose; Step 2 add attained LDL-C levels (continuous variable); Step 3 add percent LDL-C reduction (continuous variable). Model 2: Steps 2 and 3 were reversed. RESULTS: Among 13,937 patients included in this study, percent LDL-C reduction added incremental prognostic value over both statin dose and attained LDL-C levels (global chi-square increased from 3.64 to 26.1 to 47.5; P <.0001). However, attained LDL-C level did not provide incremental prognostic value over statin dose and percent LDL-C reduction (global chi-square increased from 3.64 to 47.5 to 47.5; P <.0001 and .94, respectively). Among patients with attained LDL-C ≤70 mg/dL, those with percent LDL-C reduction of <50% had a significantly higher risk of primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.97; P = .002) and stroke (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.46-2.93; P <.0001) and a numerically higher risk of death (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.98-1.90; P = .06) when compared with the group with percent LDL-C reduction of ≥50%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, percent LDL-C reduction provides incremental prognostic value over statin dose and attained LDL-C levels. However, the attained LDL-C level does not provide additional prognostic value over statin dose and percent LDL-C reduction.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The 2013 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol recommends moderate- to high-intensity statins for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease but departs from the traditional treat-to-target approach. Whether percent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction or attained LDL-C levels add incremental prognostic value to statin dose is not known. METHODS:Patients in the Treating to New Targets (TNT), Incremental Decrease in Endpoints through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL), and Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL) trials (patient-level data) randomized to a statin arm (atorvastatin 80 mg/10 mg or simvastatin 20 mg) were chosen. Patients were divided into groups based on attained LDL-C levels (≤70 vs >70 mg/dL) and percent LDL-C reduction (≥50% vs <50%). Primary outcome was major cardiovascular event defined as death due to coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or stroke. Incremental prognostic value was assessed by using a forward conditional Cox proportional hazards model. Two models were tested: Model 1: Step 1 statin dose; Step 2 add attained LDL-C levels (continuous variable); Step 3 add percent LDL-C reduction (continuous variable). Model 2: Steps 2 and 3 were reversed. RESULTS: Among 13,937 patients included in this study, percent LDL-C reduction added incremental prognostic value over both statin dose and attained LDL-C levels (global chi-square increased from 3.64 to 26.1 to 47.5; P <.0001). However, attained LDL-C level did not provide incremental prognostic value over statin dose and percent LDL-C reduction (global chi-square increased from 3.64 to 47.5 to 47.5; P <.0001 and .94, respectively). Among patients with attained LDL-C ≤70 mg/dL, those with percent LDL-C reduction of <50% had a significantly higher risk of primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.97; P = .002) and stroke (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.46-2.93; P <.0001) and a numerically higher risk of death (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.98-1.90; P = .06) when compared with the group with percent LDL-C reduction of ≥50%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, percent LDL-C reduction provides incremental prognostic value over statin dose and attained LDL-C levels. However, the attained LDL-C level does not provide additional prognostic value over statin dose and percent LDL-C reduction.
Authors: Sheldon W Tobe; James A Stone; Todd Anderson; Simon Bacon; Alice Y Y Cheng; Stella S Daskalopoulou; Justin A Ezekowitz; Jean C Gregoire; Gord Gubitz; Rahul Jain; Karim Keshavjee; Patty Lindsay; Mary L'Abbe; David C W Lau; Lawrence A Leiter; Eileen O'Meara; Glen J Pearson; Doreen M Rabi; Diana Sherifali; Peter Selby; Jack V Tu; Sean Wharton; Kimberly M Walker; Diane Hua-Stewart; Peter P Liu Journal: CMAJ Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Fernando H Y Cesena; Antonio Gabriele Laurinavicius; Viviane A Valente; Raquel D Conceição; Raul D Santos; Marcio S Bittencourt Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2018-03-25 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Brent M Egan; Susan E Sutherland; William F Childers; Ruthanne M Dahlheimer; George A Helmrich; Daryl A Lapeyrolerie; Nancy Markle; Dennis W Murphy; Locke Simmons; Robert A Davis; Peter Tilkemeier; Angelo Sinopoli Journal: Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis Date: 2016-01-04
Authors: Salim S Virani; Kevin F Kennedy; Julia M Akeroyd; Pamela B Morris; Vera A Bittner; Frederick A Masoudi; Neil J Stone; Laura A Petersen; Christie M Ballantyne Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2018-05
Authors: Fernando Henpin Yue Cesena; Antonio Gabriele Laurinavicius; Viviane A Valente; Raquel D Conceição; Raul D Santos; Marcio S Bittencourt Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 2.000