Treatment Inertia in Patients With Familial Hypercholesterolemia.

Background We studied care gap in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with respect to lipid-lowering therapy. Methods and Results We enrolled patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or FH and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol >2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. During follow-up physicians received online reminders of treatment recommendations of 2009 patients (median age, 63 years, 42% women), 52.4% had CVD only, 31.7% FH only, and 15.9% both CVD and FH. Patients with FH were younger and more likely to be women and non-White with significantly higher baseline low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level (mmol/L) as compared with patients with CVD (FH 3.92±1.48 versus CVD 2.96±0.94, P<0.0001). Patients with FH received less statin (70.6% versus 79.2%, P=0.0001) at baseline but not ezetimibe (28.1% versus 20.4%, P=0.0003). Among patients with FH only, 45.3% were at low-density lipoprotein target (≥ 50% reduction from pre-treatment level or low-density lipoprotein <2.5 mmol/L) at baseline and increasing to 65.8% and 73.6% by visit 2 and 3, respectively. Among patients with CVD only, none were at recommended level (≤2.0 mmol/L) at baseline and 44.3% and 53.3% were at recommended level on second and third visit, respectively. When primary end point was analyzed as a difference between baseline and last available follow-up observation, only 22.0% of patients with FH only achieved it as compared with 45.8% with CVD only (P<0.0001) and 55.2% with both FH+CVD (P<0.0001). Conclusions There is significant treatment inertia in patients with FH including those with CVD. Education focused on patients with FH should continue to be undertaken.

Supporting a call to action for peripheral artery disease: insights from two prospective clinical registries.

BACKGROUND: Patients affected by peripheral arterial disease (PAD) incur a heightened risk of adverse cardiovascular events, including stroke, myocardial infarction, and vascular mortality. We examined risk factors, medications, and prognosis of outpatients with PAD enrolled in two national, prospective, practice-based Canadian registries that encompassed 484 physician practices: the Vascular Protection and Guideline Oriented Approach in Lipid Lowering registries. METHODS: The 2 registries were combined to analyze 9810 patients with vascular disease, diabetes mellitus, or age 65 years or older plus at least 2 additional cardiovascular risk factors. Risk factors, medications, and major cardiovascular events were recorded at baseline and again at 6 months' follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with patients without PAD (n = 8303), those with PAD (n = 1507) had substantially worse risk factor profiles and were more likely to have coexisting coronary or cerebrovascular disease. Both groups received high rates of treatment with evidence-based therapies, including antiplatelet drugs, statins, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Despite this, patients with PAD had a nearly twofold higher risk of major cardiovascular events at 6 months than non-PAD patients (7.3% vs 4.1%; P < .0001). After adjustment for multiple confounding factors, the presence of PAD at baseline continued to predict a heightened risk of adverse vascular sequelae (odds ratio, 1.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.01; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: These data support a strong relationship between PAD and worsened vascular prognosis that is independent of both conventional vascular risk factors and concomitant cardiovascular disease. The presence of PAD should therefore provide a clear impetus for intensive risk factor modification and use of preventive medical therapy in affected patients.