Literature DB >> 30649251

Cardiovascular event rates in a high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk population: estimates from Swedish population-based register data.

Maria Lindh1, Jonas Banefelt1, Kathleen M Fox2, Sara Hallberg1, Ming-Hui Tai3, Mats Eriksson4, Guillermo Villa5, Maria K Svensson6, Yi Qian3.   

Abstract

AIMS: This study aimed to estimate the rate of cardiovascular (CV) events in the real world in patients at high risk of recurrent CV events similar to the FOURIER trial population. METHODS AND
RESULTS: A retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted using Swedish national registers from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2015. Patients in the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) prevalent cohort met the FOURIER-like inclusion criteria, including treatment with high/moderate-intensity statins, on 1 July 2006. Additionally, two cohorts defined by diagnosis of incident ischaemic stroke (IS) and incident myocardial infarction (MI), meeting the FOURIER-like inclusion criteria were followed from date of diagnosis. Event rates were calculated for the hard major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) composite: MI, IS, and CV death; and the ASCVD composite: MI, IS, unstable angina, coronary revascularization, and CV death. Approximately half of patients experienced a CV event (ASCVD composite) during follow-up. The MACE composite rates/100 person-years were 6.3, 11.9, and 12.3 in the ASCVD prevalent (n = 54 992), MI incident (n = 45 895), and IS incident (n = 36 134) cohorts, respectively. The ASCVD composite rates/100 person-years were 7.0, 21.7, and 12.9 in the ASCVD prevalent, MI incident, and IS incident cohorts, respectively. The multiple-event MACE composite rates/100 person-years were 8.5 (ASCVD prevalent cohort), 15.4 (MI incident cohort), and 14.4 (IS incident cohort).
CONCLUSION: In this real-world setting, CV event rates were high in all studied cohorts. In particular, the MACE composite rates were two to three times higher than in the FOURIER clinical trial, indicating a substantial disease burden despite treatment with moderate or high-intensity statins.
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASCVD; Cardiovascular event rates; Cardiovascular outcomes; Secondary prevention

Year:  2019        PMID: 30649251      PMCID: PMC6613595          DOI: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy058

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes        ISSN: 2058-1742


Introduction

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one cause of death worldwide, accounting for nearly 18 million of global deaths in 2013, of which approximately 7.4 million were related to coronary heart disease (CHD) and 6.7 million were due to stroke., Cardiovascular disease burden is rapidly growing due to the increase of major risk factors such as obesity, hypertension, and Type 2 diabetes., The global economic burden of CVD, including cost of screening, primary prevention, secondary prevention, acute hospital care, and lost productivity, is anticipated to reach 1044 billion US dollar in 2030. Patients at high-risk of experiencing cardiovascular (CV) events are defined as those with CHD, or other forms of arteriosclerotic disease, diabetes, and multiple risk factors that confer a 10-year risk for CHD >20% (estimated by Framingham risk scores). Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) has been shown to be a key risk factor of CVD and the treatment of hypercholesterolaemia represents an important strategy to reduce new CV events as well as mortality. The evidence to support the effectiveness of statin therapy in secondary prevention is well proven, where high-risk patients are recommended more intensive statin regimens. Recent meta-analyses of data from clinical trials evaluating therapies specifically designed to lower LDL-C, including statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors, have shown that reducing LDL-C reduces the risk of CV events proportional to the absolute achieved reduction in LDL-C., Established CVD is associated with a higher risk for recurrent CV events following the first event. The majority of data informing CV-specific event rates in patients with existing CVD is derived from clinical trial populations. While such data is informative, clinical trials may underestimate event rates for a variety of reasons including disproportionate recruitment from high performing academic centres, higher quality of care received by clinical trial participants, or potential patient selection bias., Given the large number of patients who are living with CVD, there is a need to evaluate the CV risk of this patient-group outside of large clinical trials. Further, the availability and future emergence of highly potent therapies that may have clinical value in this population make development of a predictive model in this Subgroup of patients of clinical value. The study ‘Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With Elevated Risk’ (FOURIER) was a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicentre study assessing the impact of additional LDL-C reduction on major CV events when evolocumab is used in combination with statin therapy in patients with clinically evident CVD. The current study aimed to address current gaps in the existing literature by estimating the rate of CV events in the real world among patients meeting FOURIER-like population criteria.

Methods

Study design

A retrospective population‐based cohort study was conducted using Swedish national-based population registers. The study included adult patients, 40–85 years of age, at high risk of CV events receiving statin therapy who were followed for the occurrence of subsequent CV events. The study period ranged from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2015. Patients were followed until either CV event, death, or end of the study period.

Data sources

Patient-level data from the (i) National Patient Register, (ii) Cause of Death Register, and (iii) Prescription Drug Register, were linked together by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare using unique personal identifiers. The three national registers are mandatory to report to and are associated with a high degree of completeness., Therefore, the registers enable complete nation-wide coverage of the Swedish population. The Prescription Drug Register includes data on all prescriptions filled at pharmacies, including drug type, dispensing date, dose and pack size. Information on diagnoses, hospitalizations, surgical and non-surgical procedures, and outpatient specialist visits were collected from the National Patient Register for the complete observable period for each patient. The Cause of Death Register provided confirmed dates of death together with cause of death, allowing for removing patients from the analyses when they were no longer under observation and for identifying deaths as either CV-related or non-CV-related. Ethical approval was obtained from the regional ethical review board in Stockholm on 3 March 2016; reference number 2016/456-31/2. Individual patient informed consent is not required for register studies on retrospective data in Sweden and was therefore not collected.

Patient population

Three study cohorts were identified and followed separately for outcomes; (i) the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) prevalent cohort which included patients with myocardial infarction (MI), ischaemic stroke (IS), or peripheral artery disease (PAD) who met the FOURIER-like criteria as of 1 July 2006 (index date); (ii) the MI incident cohort which included patients with an incident MI who met the FOURIER-like criteria at the time of the MI event (variable index dates from 1 July 2006 to 31 December 2014); (iii) the IS incident cohort which included patients with an incident IS who met the FOURIER-like criteria at the time of the IS event (variable index dates from 1 July 2006 to 31 December 2014). The three study cohorts were identified in the Swedish dataset by applying the FOURIER-like inclusion criteria within a real-world clinical practice setting. All three cohorts needed to fulfil the FOURIER-like criteria at index date, including; age between 40 and 85 at index date; one or more (≥1) filled statin prescriptions of moderate and/or high-intensity during the 1-year period prior to the index date; at least one (≥1) major risk factor or two (≥2) minor risk factors, as defined in Table . Statin dose intensity was defined in accordance with the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for cholesterol treatment (Table ). While not included in the ACC/AHA guidelines, simvastatin 80 mg was defined as high-intensity based on its expected LDL-C reduction of nearly 50%. Risk factors included in the FOURIER-like inclusion criteria MI, myocardial infarction; IS, ischaemic stroke; PAD, peripheral artery disease. Statin dose intensity Patients were excluded if they had a new MI or IS event within 4 weeks after the index date, had a known history of haemorrhagic stroke, or were recipient of any major organ transplant. Data used in the FOURIER trial criteria, which were not available in Swedish registers included LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, smoking information, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and other lab data such as blood pressure, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and creatinine kinase levels. The study cohorts were not mutually exclusive. Patients could thus be included in both the prevalent and an incident cohort. In addition, patients could be included in both incident cohorts if they had a MI and an IS during follow-up, if the FOURIER-like criteria were fulfilled at the time of the index event. Each new CV event during follow-up, i.e. each outcome event, was counted in the appropriate cohort.

Study outcomes

The study outcomes were composites of CV events occurring during follow-up. The hard major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) composite was defined as MI, IS, or CV death; the ASCVD composite was defined as MI, IS, unstable angina (UA), coronary revascularization (coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention), or CV death. CV events were defined as hospitalizations with a primary ICD-10 diagnosis for the included outcome events: MI, UA, IS, or CV death, or as coronary revascularization using procedure codes. Demographics and clinical characteristics, including age at index, gender, follow-up time, diabetes, hypertension, medication use, Charlson comorbidity index, and history of CV, was assessed during the baseline period. CV history during baseline included MI, UA, IS, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), heart failure (HF), and coronary revascularization. A minimum of 30 days was required between outcome events of the same type to be considered as separate events. If a MI or UA was followed by a coronary revascularization, a minimum of 30 days was required to have passed for the revascularization procedure to be considered as a separate event. CV death was defined as death from any CV-related cause (ICD-10-CM codes I00 to I78), or as death within 30 days of hospitalization due to a CV event. Non-CV death was defined as death from any other cause than CV-related one.

Statistical analysis

The baseline period was defined as the 5-year period prior to the index date and was used to observe demographic and clinical characteristics as well as the patient selection criteria. Statin-use was observed during the 1-year period prior to index date and patients were followed until either CV event, lost to follow-up, or end of study. Patient characteristics were assessed during the baseline period and presented as mean and standard deviation for continuous variables, and absolute numbers (n) or proportions (%) for categorical variables. Rates of incident CV events were calculated by dividing the number of first events by the person-years of follow-up until the event, death, or end of follow-up, expressed per 100 person-years. Cardiovascular event rates for multiple events were calculated as the total number of events divided by the total follow-up time, until either death or end of follow-up (31 December 2015). All conditions in the register data were identified based on the ICD-10 coding system, which includes diagnoses, and the KVÅ coding system, which includes medical procedures. All data management and statistical analysis was performed using MySQL and Stata 14 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).

Results

The number of patients meeting the study inclusion criteria was 54 992 for the ASCVD prevalent cohort, 45 895 for the MI incident cohort, and 36 134 for the IS incident cohort (Table ). The overall high ASCVD risk study population had a mean age of >70 years, at least 60% were men, and the majority of all patients had hypertension. Few patients (3–10%) were receiving high-intensity statin therapy at baseline, while 25% of patients in the MI incident cohort and 11% of patients in the IS incident cohort received a high-intensity statin on the first filled prescription date following index event. Approximately half of patients (ASCVD prevalent cohort: 43.8%; MI incident cohort: 54.0%; IS incident cohort: 40.0%) experienced a CV event of either MI, UA, IS, coronary revascularization, or CV death, during a mean follow-up of 7.3 years, 3.9 years, and 3.7 years in the ASCVD prevalent cohort, the MI incident cohort, and the IS incident cohort, respectively (Table ). A large proportion of patients had more than one (≥2) CV event during follow-up; the hard MACE composite: 13.8% (ASCVD prevalent cohort), 12.2% (MI incident cohort), 10.1% (IS incident cohort); the ASCVD composite: 16.1% (ASCVD prevalent cohort), 19.2% (MI incident cohort), and 10.9% (IS incident cohort). The most frequent CV event within both outcome composites was CV death (Table ). Patient characteristics at baseline ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CABG/PCI, coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention; IS, ischaemic stroke; MI, myocardial infarction; SD, standard deviation; UA, unstable angina. Including the index event (myocardial infarction/ischaemic stroke). Frequency of cardiovascular events during follow-up within the ASCVD composite and the hard MACE composite The ASCVD composite includes myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischaemic stroke, revascularization procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention), and cardiovascular death. The hard MACE composite includes myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and cardiovascular death. ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; IS, ischaemic stroke; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; MI, myocardial infarction; N, number of patients. Distribution of events (%) within the ASCVD composite and the hard MACE composite for multiple events The ASCVD composite includes myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischaemic stroke, revascularization procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention), and cardiovascular death. The hard MACE composite includes myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and cardiovascular death. ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CABG/PCI, coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention; CV death, cardiovascular death; IS, ischaemic stroke; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; MI, myocardial infarction; UA, unstable angina. The largest proportion of patients experiencing an incident MI during follow-up was seen in the MI incident cohort. Similarly, the largest proportion of patients that had an incident IS during follow-up was seen in the IS incident cohort. The CV death rate per 100 person-years were 4.7, 5.3, and 7.2 in patients with one prior CV event (MI, UA, IS, TIA, coronary revascularization, HF) vs. 6.7, 8.7, and 8.0 in patients with two or more (≥2) prior events in the ASCVD prevalent, the MI incident and the IS incident cohort, respectively (Table ). Cardiovascular event rates for incident events and multiple events are presented in Table . The rates of incident CV events per 100 person-years for the hard MACE composite were 6.3 (ASCVD prevalent cohort), 11.9 (MI incident cohort), and 12.3 (IS incident cohort). Within the ASCVD prevalent cohort, the hard MACE composite rate was found to be higher (7.3 per 100-person years) for the subgroup of patients with a diabetes mellitus (type 1 or 2) diagnosis, compared with the overall study cohort. The rates of incident CV events for the ASCVD composite were 7.0 (ASCVD prevalent cohort), 21.7 (MI incident cohort), and 12.9 (IS incident cohort). The multiple-event MACE composite rates were 8.5, 15.4, and 14.4, respectively, in the ASCVD prevalent, MI incident, and IS incident cohorts. The multiple-event ASCVD composite rate was 9.6, 22.5, and 15.2, in the ASCVD prevalent cohort, the MI incident cohort, and the IS incident cohort, respectively. Cardiovascular death rates by event count ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; IS, ischaemic stroke; MI, myocardial infarction; N, number of patients; P-Y, person-year; SE, standard error. Event count includes myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, unstable angina, transient ischaemic attack, and heart failure. Cardiovascular event rates per 100 person-years: incident and multiple-event rates, by outcome The ASCVD composite includes myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischaemic stroke, revascularization procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention), and cardiovascular death. The hard MACE composite includes MI, IS, and cardiovascular death. ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CV, cardiovascular; IS, ischaemic stroke; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; MI, myocardial infarction; P-Y, person-years; SE, standard error.

Discussion

Existing data informing rates of incident CV events are mainly derived from clinical trial populations which may underestimate event rates due to potential patient selection bias from trial recruitment, or to the stringent clinical care received by clinical trial participants. Real-world evidence from this retrospective cohort study demonstrates that CVD burden among high-risk patients with clinically evident ASCVD being treated with moderate or high-intensity statin therapy is substantial, especially in close proximity to an incident CV event. According to the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias, patients with either documented CVD, very high levels of individual risk factors (such as increased lipid or blood pressure levels), or chronic kidney disease are at very high or high total CV risk. The population in this study is similar to the very high-risk population defined in the ESC/EAS guidelines, which advocate for active management of all risk factors. Despite treatment with moderate or high-intensity statins, almost 44% of the patients in the ASCVD prevalent cohort experienced a new event (MI, UA, IS, coronary revascularization, or CV-related death) during a mean follow-up of 7.3 years. In the two incident cohorts CV burden was even higher, with approximately 54% in the MI incident cohort and 40% in the IS incident cohort experiencing at least one new CV event within the ASCVD composite during a mean follow-up of almost 4 years. These findings are in line with previous real-world data showing a high burden of CVD among high-risk patients. Toth et al. applied the FOURIER eligibility criteria to identify patients in UK medical records and showed that approximately 33% of patients in the high-risk ASCVD cohort (similar to the ASCVD prevalent cohort) experienced at least one (≥1) new event (MI, IS, UA, coronary revascularization, or CV death) during a mean follow-up of 5.4 years. The corresponding proportions in UK incident cohorts were 27% and 40% over 2.8 years, defined by diagnosis of IS or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (MI or UA), respectively. The rates of incident CV events per 100 person-years based on UK data were 7.5, 21.1, and 11.9, respectively, for the high-risk ASCVD cohort, the ACS incident cohort, and the IS incident cohort. In addition, Punekar et al. showed that 33.9% of high-risk patients experienced at least one new event (MI, IS, coronary revascularization, UA, TIA, or HF) over 2 years follow-up, based on US administrative claims data. The relatively large share of patients (ASCVD prevalent cohort: 16.2%; MI incident cohort: 19.2%; IS incident cohort: 10.9%) who experienced two or more recurrent CV events (≥2 events) in the current study is in line with the results found by Punekar et al. where 12.9% of high-risk patients had three or more (≥3) CV events. For the two incident cohorts, survivors of MI and IS are at immediate risk of having an additional CV event where in most cases, subsequent events are of the same type as previously experienced by the patient. A significant proportion of patients (37.4% in the ASCVD prevalent cohort, 28.6% in the MI incident cohort, and 46.3% in the IS incident cohort) died due to CVD despite moderate or high-intensity statin use. Cardiovascular death rates increased with the number of events, showing that patients who experienced two or more recurrent CV events are at greater risk of dying due to CVD. Most clinical trials examining CV event rates often present results focusing on the first CV event after the index date. However, to fully understand the CV burden and its impact on patients and the healthcare system, it is important to also evaluate subsequent CV events experienced by patients. In addition to the first CV event, this study quantified and captured both the occurrence of multiple and of recurrent events, by also following patients with established CVD past their first outcome event until either death or end of follow-up. This study analysed a large study population combined with long follow-up to study CV outcomes. Mean follow-up was longer in all three study cohorts compared with the 2.2 years of follow-up in the FOURIER clinical trial. The primary outcome in the FOURIER clinical trial, incidence of CV death, MI, IS, hospitalization for UA, or coronary revascularization (corresponding to the ASCVD composite), occurred in 14.6% of participants in the placebo group. The key secondary endpoint, a composite of MI, IS, or CV related death (corresponding to the hard MACE composite), occurred in 7.4% of patients. The multiple-events MACE composite rates in this study were more than two to three times higher compared with the placebo plus standard background therapy arm in the FOURIER trial (4.2 per 100 person-years). Several differences may account for the discrepancies between the clinical trial rates and the rates reported from this real-world study. The majority of the high ASCVD risk patients in this study were on moderate-intensity statin treatment at the time of index. As for the FOURIER clinical trial, most participants were high-intensity statin users; the placebo group included 69.1% patients on high-intensity statin therapy, 30.7% on moderate-intensity statin therapy, and 0.2% of patients were classified as low-intensity statin users, unknown intensity, or no data. In addition, the quality of care may differ between the real-world setting and a clinical trial for a variety of reasons including disproportionate recruitment from high performing academic centres, whereas this study comprised patients from nationwide population-based registers with complete coverage. Further, the proportion of women in the current study (ASCVD prevalent cohort: 36.8%; the MI incident cohort: 33.1%; the IS incident cohort: 39.9%) was larger than in the FOURIER outcomes trial (25.0%). Strengths of this study include the high degree of validity, completeness and data quality in the Swedish national registers,,, which enable reliable real-world estimates. The National Patient Register contains more than 99% of hospitalizations, while The Prescription Drug Register covers all prescriptions distributed via pharmacies. Using ICD-10 codes when identifying CV events can be seen as a limitation in the study. Ludvigsson et al. have found that positive predictive values of the recorded diagnoses were 85–95% for most diagnoses in the Swedish National Patient Register, when comparing to information in medical records. Further, approximately 90% of patients with a primary diagnosis of MI, had MI as the underlying cause of death according to medical records. Another limitation to the study is that laboratory values, including LDL-C and other lipid values (HDL-C, triglycerides), are not available in the Swedish national registers. The study population’s LDL-C level was thus unknown. The lack of lipid values is anticipated to have limited impact since the patients will be of similar CV risk as the FOURIER trial population based on the inclusion criteria of history of CV events (MI, IS, PAD) as well as statin treatment for elevated LDL-C and other CV risk factors (e.g. diabetes). According to Swedish treatment guidelines, high-risk patients (based on the SCORE-model, ≥10%) and patients with a cholesterol level >4.9 mmol/L, are recommended moderate or high-intensity statin treatment., Thus, filled prescriptions of moderate and/or high-intensity statins are considered an appropriate proxy for LDL-C. Other risk factors include familial hypercholesterolaemia status and lifestyle conditions such as smoking which were not possible to account for in this real-world data, nor was it the focus of the study to investigate their impact on the risk of CV events. Another limitation is that statin use was not studied during follow-up, meaning that patients may have discontinued their statin treatment several years before experiencing an event. In fact, findings from the EUROASPIRE IV survey, showed that 11.6% of patients discontinued their statin therapy during the one-year period after hospital discharged after a coronary event. However, statin adherence is difficult to study in a retrospective dataset based on national registers, compared with a clinical setting such as the FOURIER trial where patients are assumed to receive optimal lipid lowering treatment with statins. The study findings highlight the unmet need and clinical burden among high-risk patients treated with high or moderate-intensity statin therapy and indicate the need for additional and alternative therapeutic options. Evidence from the FOURIER trial indicates that evolocumab, a PCSK9 inhibitor, may provide additional benefit for CV event reduction as add-on compared with moderate or high-intensity statin therapy alone. Furthermore, more recent AHA/ACC recommendations state that in very high-risk patients with multiple high-risk clinical factors, and if LDL-C levels remain ≥70 mg/dL (≥1.8 mmol/L), adding a PCSK9 inhibitor is reasonable if the cost/benefit ratio is favourable.

Conclusions

Despite treatment with moderate- or high-intensity statins, the population with clinically evident ASCVD experiences high CV event rates, especially in close proximity to an earlier event. A large proportion of patients experience recurrent CV events and CV death rates show that patients who have recurrent CV events are at greater risk of dying. In this real-world setting, the multiple-event MACE composite rates were more than two to three times higher than in the FOURIER clinical trial, indicating a substantial burden for patients and health care system.

Funding

This study was funded by Amgen, Inc. Conflict of interest: M.L., J.B., and S.H. are employed by Quantify Research, a contract research organization that provides consultancy services for the pharmaceutical industry. K.M.F. has received consulting fees from Amgen, Inc. M.E. has no conflicts of interest to disclose. M.T., Y.Q. are employed by Amgen, Inc., and own Amgen stock/stock options. G.V. is employed by Amgen (Europe) GmbH, and owns Amgen stock/stock options. M.K.S. is employed by Amgen AB, and owns Amgen stock/stock options.
Table 1

Risk factors included in the FOURIER-like inclusion criteria

Major risk factors—one or more (≥1) requiredDiabetes (Type 1 or Type 2)
Age ≥65 years and ≤85 years at time of index date
If qualifying with MI; the MI event occurred during 6 months prior to the index date, or the patient has a history of IS and/or PAD in the baseline period
If qualifying with IS; the IS event occurred during 6 months prior to index date, or the patient has a history of MI and/or PAD in the baseline period
Minor risk factors—two or more (≥2) requiredCoronary revascularization with no history of MI
Coronary artery disease
Metabolic syndrome

MI, myocardial infarction; IS, ischaemic stroke; PAD, peripheral artery disease.

Table 2

Statin dose intensity

IntensityStatin type and strength for daily doses
Moderate-intensity statinFluvastatin 40 mg twice daily
Fluvastatin XL 80 mg
Lovastatin 40 mg
Pravastatin 40 mg and 80 mg
Simvastatin 20–40 mg
Atorvastatin 10 mg and 20 mg
Rosuvastatin 5 mg and 10 mg
Pitavastatin 2–4 mg
High-intensity statinAtorvastatin 40–80 mg
Rosuvastatin 20 mg and 40 mg
Simvastatin 80 mg
Table 3

Patient characteristics at baseline

ASCVD prevalent cohort (n = 54 992)
MI incident cohort (n = 45 895)
IS incident cohort (n = 36 134)
Mean or proportionSD or countMean or proportionSD or countMean or proportionSD or count
Age (years)72.58.371.09.672.98.7
Gender, male (%)63.234 75466.930 70460.121 719
CV history (%)
 History of MI68.237 480100a45 89514.75321
 History of UA17.9984112.155465.31903
 History of IS34.619 0248.73981100a36 134
 History of HF20.811 44527.112 41317.56331
 History of TIA5.128274.5205211.24048
 History of CABG/PCI8.9488421.498193.41230
Charlson comorbidity index2.51.83.22.23.002.1
Follow-up length (years)7.33.03.92.73.72.6
Diabetes (%)36.420 01442.919 69939.114 140
Hypertension (%)98.053 91699.645 72496.834 961
Chronic kidney disease (%)2.614477.132614.91772
High-intensity statin at index (%)3.3181410.648477.72792
High-intensity statin as first filled prescription following index event (%)25.111 51610.93947
Anti-thrombotic medication (%)48.126 43851.523 64059.121 365
Anti-hypertensive medication (%)47.225 97651.923 82357.420 726

ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CABG/PCI, coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention; IS, ischaemic stroke; MI, myocardial infarction; SD, standard deviation; UA, unstable angina.

Including the index event (myocardial infarction/ischaemic stroke).

Table 4

Frequency of cardiovascular events during follow-up within the ASCVD composite and the hard MACE composite

Event countASCVD prevalent cohort
MI incident cohort
IS incident cohort
ASCVD composite
Hard MACE composite
ASCVD composite
Hard MACE composite
ASCVD composite
Hard MACE composite
N Percentage N Percentage N Percentage N Percentage N Percentage N Percentage
Total with ≥1 incident CV event24 10043.822 42740.824 80654.018 02139.314 47040.014 03938.9
115 22227.714 82527.015 99734.912 41427.010 54629.210 40128.8
2575610.551979.5541511.835627.828407.926867.4
318923.415632.819424.212302.77552.16831.9
≥412302.28421.514523.28151.83290.92690.7

The ASCVD composite includes myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischaemic stroke, revascularization procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention), and cardiovascular death.

The hard MACE composite includes myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and cardiovascular death.

ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; IS, ischaemic stroke; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; MI, myocardial infarction; N, number of patients.

Table 5

Distribution of events (%) within the ASCVD composite and the hard MACE composite for multiple events

ASCVD prevalent cohort
MI incident cohort
IS incident cohort
ASCVD compositeHard MACE compositeASCVD compositeHard MACE compositeASCVD compositeHard MACE composite
MI (%)30.034.032.046.913.714.4
IS (%)20.823.57.611.135.237.0
CV death (%)37.442.428.642.046.348.7
UA (%)6.913.82.4
CABG/PCI (%)4.918.02.5

The ASCVD composite includes myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischaemic stroke, revascularization procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention), and cardiovascular death.

The hard MACE composite includes myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and cardiovascular death.

ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CABG/PCI, coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention; CV death, cardiovascular death; IS, ischaemic stroke; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; MI, myocardial infarction; UA, unstable angina.

Table 6

Cardiovascular death rates by event count

ASCVD prevalent cohort
MI incident cohort
IS incident cohort
Event counta N P-YRate per 100 P-YSE per 100 P-Y N P-YRate per 100 P-YSE per 100 P-Y N P-YRate per 100 P-YSE per 100 P-Y
1401085 3214.71.5270951 3495.31.9204628 4447.22.1
≥2472170 0686.71.4393845 3218.71.5157419 7278.02.4

ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; IS, ischaemic stroke; MI, myocardial infarction; N, number of patients; P-Y, person-year; SE, standard error.

Event count includes myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, unstable angina, transient ischaemic attack, and heart failure.

Table 7

Cardiovascular event rates per 100 person-years: incident and multiple-event rates, by outcome

ASCVD prevalent cohort
MI incident cohort
IS incident cohort
EndpointEventsP-YRate per 100 P-YSE per 100 P-YEventsP-YRate per 100 P-YSE per 100 P-YEventsP-YRate per 100 P-YSE per 100 P-Y
Hard MACE composite22 427356 3086.30.718 021151 31711.90.714 039113 98212.30.8
ASCVD composite24 100345 1137.00.624 806114 47221.70.614 470112 35112.90.8
Hard MACE composite— multiple events33 886400 6858.50.527 255177 05715.40.619 058132 18914.40.7
ASCVD composite— multiple events38 406400 6859.60.439 917177 05722.50.420 031132 18915.20.7

The ASCVD composite includes myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischaemic stroke, revascularization procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention), and cardiovascular death.

The hard MACE composite includes MI, IS, and cardiovascular death.

ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CV, cardiovascular; IS, ischaemic stroke; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; MI, myocardial infarction; P-Y, person-years; SE, standard error.

  25 in total

1.  Executive Summary of The Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, And Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol In Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III).

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-05-16       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  The new Swedish Prescribed Drug Register--opportunities for pharmacoepidemiological research and experience from the first six months.

Authors:  Björn Wettermark; Niklas Hammar; Carl Michael Fored; C MichaelFored; Andrejs Leimanis; Petra Otterblad Olausson; Ulf Bergman; Ingemar Persson; Anders Sundström; Barbro Westerholm; Måns Rosén
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.890

3.  High-dose atorvastatin vs usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Terje R Pedersen; Ole Faergeman; John J P Kastelein; Anders G Olsson; Matti J Tikkanen; Ingar Holme; Mogens Lytken Larsen; Fredrik S Bendiksen; Christina Lindahl; Michael Szarek; John Tsai
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin in patients with stable coronary disease.

Authors:  John C LaRosa; Scott M Grundy; David D Waters; Charles Shear; Philip Barter; Jean-Charles Fruchart; Antonio M Gotto; Heiner Greten; John J P Kastelein; James Shepherd; Nanette K Wenger
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-03-08       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Early intensive vs a delayed conservative simvastatin strategy in patients with acute coronary syndromes: phase Z of the A to Z trial.

Authors:  James A de Lemos; Michael A Blazing; Stephen D Wiviott; Eldrin F Lewis; Keith A A Fox; Harvey D White; Jean-Lucien Rouleau; Terje R Pedersen; Laura H Gardner; Robin Mukherjee; Karen E Ramsey; Joanne Palmisano; David W Bilheimer; Marc A Pfeffer; Robert M Califf; Eugene Braunwald
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-08-30       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Reduction in recurrent cardiovascular events with intensive lipid-lowering statin therapy compared with moderate lipid-lowering statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes from the PROVE IT-TIMI 22 (Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 22) trial.

Authors:  Sabina A Murphy; Christopher P Cannon; Stephen D Wiviott; Carolyn H McCabe; Eugene Braunwald
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes.

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

8.  Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials.

Authors:  C Baigent; L Blackwell; J Emberson; L E Holland; C Reith; N Bhala; R Peto; E H Barnes; A Keech; J Simes; R Collins
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2010-11-08       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  External review and validation of the Swedish national inpatient register.

Authors:  Jonas F Ludvigsson; Eva Andersson; Anders Ekbom; Maria Feychting; Jeong-Lim Kim; Christina Reuterwall; Mona Heurgren; Petra Otterblad Olausson
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-06-09       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Reduction in recurrent cardiovascular events with prasugrel compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes from the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial.

Authors:  Sabina A Murphy; Elliott M Antman; Stephen D Wiviott; Govinda Weerakkody; Giorgio Morocutti; Kurt Huber; Jose Lopez-Sendon; Carolyn H McCabe; Eugene Braunwald
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 29.983

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Novel Treatment Strategies for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness.

Authors:  Clara Marquina; Ella Zomer; Sandra Vargas-Torres; Sophia Zoungas; Richard Ofori-Asenso; Danny Liew; Zanfina Ademi
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  High-Intensity Statin Use Among Patients With Atherosclerosis in the U.S.

Authors:  Adam J Nelson; Kevin Haynes; Sonali Shambhu; Zubin Eapen; Mark J Cziraky; Michael G Nanna; Sara B Calvert; Kerrin Gallagher; Neha J Pagidipati; Christopher B Granger
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 27.203

3.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Evolocumab in Adult Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Canada.

Authors:  Jean Grégoire; Salimah Champsi; Manon Jobin; Laura Martinez; Michael Urbich; Raina M Rogoza
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 4.070

4.  Effects of lipid-lowering treatment intensity and adherence on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a recent myocardial infarction: a Swedish register-based study.

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

5.  Cost-effectiveness of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition with evolocumab in patients with a history of myocardial infarction in Sweden.

Authors:  Ulf Landmesser; Peter Lindgren; Emil Hagström; Ben van Hout; Guillermo Villa; Peter Pemberton-Ross; Jorge Arellano; Maria Eriksson Svensson; Mahendra Sibartie; Gregg C Fonarow
Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes       Date:  2022-01-05

6.  Cardiovascular event rate and death in high-risk secondary prevention patient cohort in Finland: A registry study.

Authors:  Iiro Toppila; Liisa Ukkola-Vuoti; Julia Perttilä; Outi Törnwall; Juha Sinisalo; Juha Hartikainen; Seppo Lehto
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 3.287

7.  Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels exceed the recommended European threshold for PCSK9i initiation: lessons from the HEYMANS study.

Authors:  Kausik K Ray; Nafeesa Dhalwani; Mahendra Sibartie; Ian Bridges; Christoph Ebenbichler; Pasquale Perrone-Filardi; Guillermo Villa; Anja Vogt; Eric Bruckert
Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes       Date:  2022-06-06

8.  Cost-effectiveness of Ezetimibe plus statin lipid-lowering therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-utility studies.

Authors:  Akhil Sasidharan; Bhavani Shankara Bagepally; S Sajith Kumar; Kayala Venkata Jagadeesh; Meenakumari Natarajan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 3.752

9.  Cardiovascular Event Rates After Myocardial Infarction or Ischaemic Stroke in Patients with Additional Risk Factors: A Retrospective Population-Based Cohort Study.

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

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.