Jerry C Lee1, Tomasz Zdrojewski2, Michael J Pencina3, Adam Wyszomirski4, Mateusz Lachacz4, Grzegorz Opolski5, Piotr Bandosz2, Marcin Rutkowski2, Zbigniew Gaciong6, Bogdan Wyrzykowski2, Ann M Navar7. 1. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 2. Department of Neurology, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland. 3. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina4Deputy Editor for Statistics, JAMA Cardiology. 4. Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, Poland. 5. Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, Hypertension and Vascular Disease, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland. 7. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina3Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for the management of blood cholesterol and the current European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines differ in how they identify adults in need of statin therapy; furthermore, it is unclear how this difference translates into numbers and characteristics of patients recommended for treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of the ACC/AHA and ESC/EAS cholesterol guidelines when applied to a population-based sample. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used nationally representative data for 3055 adults aged 40 to 65 years from the 2007-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) for the United States and for 1060 adults aged 40 to 65 years from the 2011 Nadciśnięnie Tętnicze w Polsce survey for Poland. Data analysis was conducted from May 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number and characteristics of adults recommended for statin therapy according to the ACC/AHA and ESC/EAS guidelines were evaluated, and characteristics were compared between adults with discordant recommendations. RESULTS: The 3136 US adults in NHANES (2007-2012) aged 40 to 65 years represented 100.1 million adults; after excluding the 81 patients with missing data, these population estimates translate to 97.9 million adults. Similarly, the 1060 Polish adults in NATPOL (2011) aged 40 to 65 years represent 13.5 million adults. Using weighted data, in the United States, 43.8% (95% CI, 40.9%-46.7%) of adults would be recommended for statin therapy according to ACC/AHA guidelines and 39.1% (95% CI, 36.4%-41.8%) according to ESC/EAS guidelines. In Poland, 49.9% (95% CI, 46.9%-52.9%) of adults would be recommended for statin therapy under ACC/AHA guidelines compared with 47.6% (95% CI, 44.6%-50.7%) under ESC/EAS guidelines. Among individuals without cardiovascular disease and not currently taking statins, 11.0% of US and 10.5% of Polish adults had discordant guideline recommendations. Compared with individuals recommended for statin therapy by the ESC/EAS guidelines but not the ACC/AHA guidelines, those recommended for statin therapy under the ACC/AHA guidelines only had less chronic kidney disease; however, these individuals were also more likely to smoke, have lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and have higher predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite differences in the ACC/AHA and EAS/ESC guidelines, the numbers of adults aged 40 to 65 years recommended for cholesterol-lowering therapy under each guideline were similar when applied to nationwide representative samples from both the United States and Poland. Discordant recommendations were driven by differences in the risk equations used in the 2 guidelines and different recommendations for adults with chronic kidney disease.
IMPORTANCE: The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for the management of blood cholesterol and the current European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines differ in how they identify adults in need of statin therapy; furthermore, it is unclear how this difference translates into numbers and characteristics of patients recommended for treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of the ACC/AHA and ESC/EAS cholesterol guidelines when applied to a population-based sample. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used nationally representative data for 3055 adults aged 40 to 65 years from the 2007-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) for the United States and for 1060 adults aged 40 to 65 years from the 2011 Nadciśnięnie Tętnicze w Polsce survey for Poland. Data analysis was conducted from May 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number and characteristics of adults recommended for statin therapy according to the ACC/AHA and ESC/EAS guidelines were evaluated, and characteristics were compared between adults with discordant recommendations. RESULTS: The 3136 US adults in NHANES (2007-2012) aged 40 to 65 years represented 100.1 million adults; after excluding the 81 patients with missing data, these population estimates translate to 97.9 million adults. Similarly, the 1060 Polish adults in NATPOL (2011) aged 40 to 65 years represent 13.5 million adults. Using weighted data, in the United States, 43.8% (95% CI, 40.9%-46.7%) of adults would be recommended for statin therapy according to ACC/AHA guidelines and 39.1% (95% CI, 36.4%-41.8%) according to ESC/EAS guidelines. In Poland, 49.9% (95% CI, 46.9%-52.9%) of adults would be recommended for statin therapy under ACC/AHA guidelines compared with 47.6% (95% CI, 44.6%-50.7%) under ESC/EAS guidelines. Among individuals without cardiovascular disease and not currently taking statins, 11.0% of US and 10.5% of Polish adults had discordant guideline recommendations. Compared with individuals recommended for statin therapy by the ESC/EAS guidelines but not the ACC/AHA guidelines, those recommended for statin therapy under the ACC/AHA guidelines only had less chronic kidney disease; however, these individuals were also more likely to smoke, have lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and have higher predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite differences in the ACC/AHA and EAS/ESC guidelines, the numbers of adults aged 40 to 65 years recommended for cholesterol-lowering therapy under each guideline were similar when applied to nationwide representative samples from both the United States and Poland. Discordant recommendations were driven by differences in the risk equations used in the 2 guidelines and different recommendations for adults with chronic kidney disease.
Authors: Maryam Kavousi; Maarten J G Leening; David Nanchen; Philip Greenland; Ian M Graham; Ewout W Steyerberg; M Arfan Ikram; Bruno H Stricker; Albert Hofman; Oscar H Franco Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Neil J Stone; Jennifer G Robinson; Alice H Lichtenstein; C Noel Bairey Merz; Conrad B Blum; Robert H Eckel; Anne C Goldberg; David Gordon; Daniel Levy; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Patrick McBride; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Karol Watson; Peter W F Wilson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: David C Goff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Glen Bennett; Sean Coady; Ralph B D'Agostino; Raymond Gibbons; Philip Greenland; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Jennifer G Robinson; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Paul Sorlie; Neil J Stone; Peter W F Wilson; Harmon S Jordan; Lev Nevo; Janusz Wnek; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen; Sidney C Smith; Gordon F Tomaselli Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Clifford L Johnson; Ryne Paulose-Ram; Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Deanna Kruszon-Moran; Sylvia M Dohrmann; Lester R Curtin Journal: Vital Health Stat 2 Date: 2013-09
Authors: Zeljko Reiner; Alberico L Catapano; Guy De Backer; Ian Graham; Marja-Riitta Taskinen; Olov Wiklund; Stefan Agewall; Eduardo Alegria; M John Chapman; Paul Durrington; Serap Erdine; Julian Halcox; Richard Hobbs; John Kjekshus; Pasquale Perrone Filardi; Gabriele Riccardi; Robert F Storey; David Wood Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-06-28 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: R M Conroy; K Pyörälä; A P Fitzgerald; S Sans; A Menotti; G De Backer; D De Bacquer; P Ducimetière; P Jousilahti; U Keil; I Njølstad; R G Oganov; T Thomsen; H Tunstall-Pedoe; A Tverdal; H Wedel; P Whincup; L Wilhelmsen; I M Graham Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Michael J Pencina; Ann Marie Navar-Boggan; Ralph B D'Agostino; Ken Williams; Benjamin Neely; Allan D Sniderman; Eric D Peterson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Tomasz Zdrojewski; Marcin Rutkowski; Piotr Bandosz; Zbigniew Gaciong; Tadeusz Jędrzejczyk; Bogdan Solnica; Michał Pencina; Wojciech Drygas; Bogdan Wojtyniak; Tomasz Grodzicki; Jerzy Piwoński; Bogdan Wyrzykowski Journal: Kardiol Pol Date: 2013 Impact factor: 3.108
Authors: Maja E Marcus; Cara Ebert; Pascal Geldsetzer; Michaela Theilmann; Brice Wilfried Bicaba; Glennis Andall-Brereton; Pascal Bovet; Farshad Farzadfar; Mongal Singh Gurung; Corine Houehanou; Mohammad-Reza Malekpour; Joao S Martins; Sahar Saeedi Moghaddam; Esmaeil Mohammadi; Bolormaa Norov; Sarah Quesnel-Crooks; Roy Wong-McClure; Justine I Davies; Mark A Hlatky; Rifat Atun; Till W Bärnighausen; Lindsay M Jaacks; Jennifer Manne-Goehler; Sebastian Vollmer Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2021-10-25 Impact factor: 11.069