Kamlesh Khunti1, Mark D Danese2, Lucie Kutikova3, David Catterick4, Francisco Sorio-Vilela3, Michelle Gleeson2, Sreenivasa Rao Kondapally Seshasai5, Jack Brownrigg6,7, Kausik K Ray7,8. 1. Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom. 2. Outcomes Research, Outcomes Insights, Inc, Westlake Village, California. 3. Health Economics, Amgen Europe GmbH, Zug, Switzerland. 4. Amgen Limited, Uxbridge, United Kingdom. 5. St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom. 6. St George's Vascular Institute, London, United Kingdom. 7. currently with Rare Diseases, Pfizer, London, United Kingdom. 8. Imperial Centre for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Importance: Both adherence and treatment intensity can alter the effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy in routine clinical practice. Objective: To evaluate the association of adherence and treatment intensity with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with documented cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes without CVD or chronic kidney disease (CKD), and CKD without CVD. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink from January 2010 through February 2016. United Kingdom primary care was the setting. Participants were newly treated patients who received their first statin and/or ezetimibe prescription between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013, plus an additional prescription for statins and/or ezetimibe during the following year. Exposures: Adherence was assessed annually using the proportion of days covered, with adherent defined as a proportion of days covered of 80% or higher. Treatment intensity was classified according to guidelines based on the expected percentage of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction as low (<30% reduction), moderate (30% to <50% reduction), or high (≥50% reduction). Adherence and treatment intensity were multiplied to create a combined measure, reflecting treatment intensity after accounting for adherence. Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite end point of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischemic stroke, heart failure, or revascularization. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated against patients not treated for 1 year or longer. Results: Among a total of 29 797 newly treated patients, there were 16 701, 12 422, and 674 patients with documented CVD, type 2 diabetes without CVD or CKD, and CKD without CVD, respectively; mean (SD) ages were 68.3 (13.2), 59.3 (12.4), and 67.3 (15.1) years, and male proportions were 60.6%, 55.0%, and 47.0%. In the documented CVD cohort, patients receiving high-intensity therapy were more likely to be adherent over time (84.1% in year 1 and 72.3% in year 6) than patients receiving low-intensity therapy (57.4% in year 1 and 48.4% in year 6). Using a combined measure of adherence and treatment intensity, a graded association was observed with both LDL-C reduction and CVD outcomes: each 10% increase in the combined measure was associated with a 10% lower risk (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94). Adherent patients receiving a high-intensity regimen had the lowest risk (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.54-0.68) vs patients untreated for 1 year or longer. Findings in the other 2 cohorts were similar. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study demonstrate that the lowest cardiovascular risk was observed among adherent patients receiving high-intensity therapy, and the highest cardiovascular risk was observed among nonadherent patients receiving low-intensity therapy. Strategies that improve adherence and greater use of intensive therapies could substantially improve cardiovascular risk.
Importance: Both adherence and treatment intensity can alter the effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy in routine clinical practice. Objective: To evaluate the association of adherence and treatment intensity with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with documented cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes without CVD or chronic kidney disease (CKD), and CKD without CVD. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink from January 2010 through February 2016. United Kingdom primary care was the setting. Participants were newly treated patients who received their first statin and/or ezetimibe prescription between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013, plus an additional prescription for statins and/or ezetimibe during the following year. Exposures: Adherence was assessed annually using the proportion of days covered, with adherent defined as a proportion of days covered of 80% or higher. Treatment intensity was classified according to guidelines based on the expected percentage of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction as low (<30% reduction), moderate (30% to <50% reduction), or high (≥50% reduction). Adherence and treatment intensity were multiplied to create a combined measure, reflecting treatment intensity after accounting for adherence. Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite end point of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischemic stroke, heart failure, or revascularization. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated against patients not treated for 1 year or longer. Results: Among a total of 29 797 newly treated patients, there were 16 701, 12 422, and 674 patients with documented CVD, type 2 diabetes without CVD or CKD, and CKD without CVD, respectively; mean (SD) ages were 68.3 (13.2), 59.3 (12.4), and 67.3 (15.1) years, and male proportions were 60.6%, 55.0%, and 47.0%. In the documented CVD cohort, patients receiving high-intensity therapy were more likely to be adherent over time (84.1% in year 1 and 72.3% in year 6) than patients receiving low-intensity therapy (57.4% in year 1 and 48.4% in year 6). Using a combined measure of adherence and treatment intensity, a graded association was observed with both LDL-C reduction and CVD outcomes: each 10% increase in the combined measure was associated with a 10% lower risk (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94). Adherent patients receiving a high-intensity regimen had the lowest risk (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.54-0.68) vs patients untreated for 1 year or longer. Findings in the other 2 cohorts were similar. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study demonstrate that the lowest cardiovascular risk was observed among adherent patients receiving high-intensity therapy, and the highest cardiovascular risk was observed among nonadherent patients receiving low-intensity therapy. Strategies that improve adherence and greater use of intensive therapies could substantially improve cardiovascular risk.
Authors: Ingar Holme; Michael Szarek; Nilo B Cater; Ole Faergeman; John J P Kastelein; Anders G Olsson; Matti J Tikkanen; Mogens Lytken Larsen; Christina Lindahl; Terje R Pedersen Journal: Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil Date: 2009-06
Authors: Sripal Bangalore; Andrei Breazna; David A DeMicco; Chuan-Chuan Wun; Franz H Messerli Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-04-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Christopher P Cannon; Michael A Blazing; Robert P Giugliano; Amy McCagg; Jennifer A White; Pierre Theroux; Harald Darius; Basil S Lewis; Ton Oude Ophuis; J Wouter Jukema; Gaetano M De Ferrari; Witold Ruzyllo; Paul De Lucca; KyungAh Im; Erin A Bohula; Craig Reist; Stephen D Wiviott; Andrew M Tershakovec; Thomas A Musliner; Eugene Braunwald; Robert M Califf Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
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: Massimo F Piepoli; Arno W Hoes; Stefan Agewall; Christian Albus; Carlos Brotons; Alberico L Catapano; Marie-Therese Cooney; Ugo Corrà; Bernard Cosyns; Christi Deaton; Ian Graham; Michael Stephen Hall; F D Richard Hobbs; Maja-Lisa Løchen; Herbert Löllgen; Pedro Marques-Vidal; Joep Perk; Eva Prescott; Josep Redon; Dimitrios J Richter; Naveed Sattar; Yvo Smulders; Monica Tiberi; H Bart van der Worp; Ineke van Dis; W M Monique Verschuren; Simone Binno Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Kausik K Ray; Robert M Stoekenbroek; David Kallend; Toshiyuki Nishikido; Lawrence A Leiter; Ulf Landmesser; R Scott Wright; Peter L J Wijngaard; John J P Kastelein Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Maria K Svensson; Francesc Sorio Vilela; Margrét Leósdóttir; Jonas Banefelt; Maria Lindh; Alexander Rieem Dun; Anna Norhammar; Guillermo Villa Journal: Ups J Med Sci Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 2.646
Authors: Jo L Byrne; Helen M Dallosso; Stephen Rogers; Laura J Gray; Ghazala Waheed; Prashanth Patel; Pankaj Gupta; Yvonne Doherty; Melanie J Davies; Kamlesh Khunti Journal: BMC Med Date: 2020-07-27 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Emil Hagström; Francesc Sorio Vilela; Maria K Svensson; Sara Hallberg; Emma Söreskog; Guillermo Villa Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2021-07-26 Impact factor: 4.070