BACKGROUND: Recommendations for blood cholesterol management differ across different guidelines. HYPOTHESIS: Lipid-lowering strategies based on low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-c) percent reduction or target concentration may have different effects on the expected cardiovascular benefit in intermediate-risk individuals. METHODS: We selected individuals between 40 and 75 years of age with 10-year risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) between 5.0% and <7.5% who underwent a routine health screening. For every subject, we simulated a strategy based on a 40% LDL-c reduction (S40% ) and another strategy based on achieving LDL-c target ≤100 mg/dL (Starget-100 ). The cardiovascular benefit was estimated assuming a 22% relative risk reduction in major cardiovascular events for each 39 mg/dL of LDL-c lowered. RESULTS: The study comprised 1756 individuals (94% men, 52 ± 5 years old). LDL-c and predicted 10-year ASCVD risk would be slightly lower in S40% compared to Starget-100 . The number needed to treat to prevent 1 major cardiovascular event in 10 years (NNT10 ) would be 56 with S40% and 66 with Starget-100 . S40% would prevent more events in individuals with lower baseline LDL-c, whereas Starget-100 would be more protective in those with higher LDL-c. A dual-target strategy (40% minimum LDL-c reduction and achievement of LDL-c ≤100 mg/dL) would be associated with outcomes similar to those expected with the S40% (NNT10 = 55). CONCLUSIONS: In an intermediate-risk population, cardiovascular benefit from LDL-c lowering may be optimized by tailoring the treatment according to the baseline LDL-c or by setting a dual-target strategy (fixed dose statin plus achievement of target LDL-c concentration).
BACKGROUND: Recommendations for blood cholesterol management differ across different guidelines. HYPOTHESIS: Lipid-lowering strategies based on low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-c) percent reduction or target concentration may have different effects on the expected cardiovascular benefit in intermediate-risk individuals. METHODS: We selected individuals between 40 and 75 years of age with 10-year risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) between 5.0% and <7.5% who underwent a routine health screening. For every subject, we simulated a strategy based on a 40% LDL-c reduction (S40% ) and another strategy based on achieving LDL-c target ≤100 mg/dL (Starget-100 ). The cardiovascular benefit was estimated assuming a 22% relative risk reduction in major cardiovascular events for each 39 mg/dL of LDL-c lowered. RESULTS: The study comprised 1756 individuals (94% men, 52 ± 5 years old). LDL-c and predicted 10-year ASCVD risk would be slightly lower in S40% compared to Starget-100 . The number needed to treat to prevent 1 major cardiovascular event in 10 years (NNT10 ) would be 56 with S40% and 66 with Starget-100 . S40% would prevent more events in individuals with lower baseline LDL-c, whereas Starget-100 would be more protective in those with higher LDL-c. A dual-target strategy (40% minimum LDL-c reduction and achievement of LDL-c ≤100 mg/dL) would be associated with outcomes similar to those expected with the S40% (NNT10 = 55). CONCLUSIONS: In an intermediate-risk population, cardiovascular benefit from LDL-c lowering may be optimized by tailoring the treatment according to the baseline LDL-c or by setting a dual-target strategy (fixed dose statin plus achievement of target LDL-c concentration).
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: Alberico L Catapano; Ian Graham; Guy De Backer; Olov Wiklund; M John Chapman; Heinz Drexel; Arno W Hoes; Catriona S Jennings; Ulf Landmesser; Terje R Pedersen; Željko Reiner; Gabriele Riccardi; Marja-Riita Taskinen; Lale Tokgozoglu; W M Monique Verschuren; Charalambos Vlachopoulos; David A Wood; Jose Luis Zamorano; Marie-Therese Cooney Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-08-27 Impact factor: 29.983
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: Todd J Anderson; Jean Grégoire; Glen J Pearson; Arden R Barry; Patrick Couture; Martin Dawes; Gordon A Francis; Jacques Genest; Steven Grover; Milan Gupta; Robert A Hegele; David C Lau; Lawrence A Leiter; Eva Lonn; G B John Mancini; Ruth McPherson; Daniel Ngui; Paul Poirier; John L Sievenpiper; James A Stone; George Thanassoulis; Richard Ward Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Terry A Jacobson; Matthew K Ito; Kevin C Maki; Carl E Orringer; Harold E Bays; Peter H Jones; James M McKenney; Scott M Grundy; Edward A Gill; Robert A Wild; Don P Wilson; W Virgil Brown Journal: J Clin Lipidol Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 4.766
Authors: Rory Collins; Christina Reith; Jonathan Emberson; Jane Armitage; Colin Baigent; Lisa Blackwell; Roger Blumenthal; John Danesh; George Davey Smith; David DeMets; Stephen Evans; Malcolm Law; Stephen MacMahon; Seth Martin; Bruce Neal; Neil Poulter; David Preiss; Paul Ridker; Ian Roberts; Anthony Rodgers; Peter Sandercock; Kenneth Schulz; Peter Sever; John Simes; Liam Smeeth; Nicholas Wald; Salim Yusuf; Richard Peto Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Salim Yusuf; Jackie Bosch; Gilles Dagenais; Jun Zhu; Denis Xavier; Lisheng Liu; Prem Pais; Patricio López-Jaramillo; Lawrence A Leiter; Antonio Dans; Alvaro Avezum; Leopoldo S Piegas; Alexander Parkhomenko; Katalin Keltai; Matyas Keltai; Karen Sliwa; Ron J G Peters; Claes Held; Irina Chazova; Khalid Yusoff; Basil S Lewis; Petr Jansky; Kamlesh Khunti; William D Toff; Christopher M Reid; John Varigos; Gregorio Sanchez-Vallejo; Robert McKelvie; Janice Pogue; Hyejung Jung; Peggy Gao; Rafael Diaz; Eva Lonn Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-04-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: B Mihaylova; J Emberson; L Blackwell; A Keech; J Simes; E H Barnes; M Voysey; A Gray; R Collins; C Baigent Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-05-17 Impact factor: 79.321
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