Efficacy and Safety of Midostaurin in Advanced Systemic Mastocytosis.

BACKGROUND: Advanced systemic mastocytosis comprises rare hematologic neoplasms that are associated with a poor prognosis and lack effective treatment options. The multikinase inhibitor midostaurin inhibits KIT D816V, a primary driver of disease pathogenesis. METHODS: We conducted an open-label study of oral midostaurin at a dose of 100 mg twice daily in 116 patients, of whom 89 with mastocytosis-related organ damage were eligible for inclusion in the primary efficacy population; 16 had aggressive systemic mastocytosis, 57 had systemic mastocytosis with an associated hematologic neoplasm, and 16 had mast-cell leukemia. The primary outcome was the best overall response. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49 to 70); 45% of the patients had a major response, which was defined as complete resolution of at least one type of mastocytosis-related organ damage. Response rates were similar regardless of the subtype of advanced systemic mastocytosis, KIT mutation status, or exposure to previous therapy. The median best percentage changes in bone marrow mast-cell burden and serum tryptase level were -59% and -58%, respectively. The median overall survival was 28.7 months, and the median progression-free survival was 14.1 months. Among the 16 patients with mast-cell leukemia, the median overall survival was 9.4 months (95% CI, 7.5 to not estimated). Dose reduction owing to toxic effects occurred in 56% of the patients; re-escalation to the starting dose was feasible in 32% of those patients. The most frequent adverse events were low-grade nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. New or worsening grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia occurred in 24%, 41%, and 29% of the patients, respectively, mostly in those with preexisting cytopenias. CONCLUSIONS: In this open-label study, midostaurin showed efficacy in patients with advanced systemic mastocytosis, including the highly fatal variant mast-cell leukemia. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00782067.).

An Internet-based Controlled Trial Aimed to Improve Osteoporosis Prevention among Chronic Glucocorticoid Users.

OBJECTIVE: To address the low prevention and treatment rates for those at risk of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP), we evaluated the influence of a direct-to-patient, Internet-based educational video intervention using "storytelling" on rates of antiosteoporosis medication use among chronic glucocorticoid users who were members of an online pharmacy refill service. METHODS: We identified members who refilled ≥ 5 mg/day of prednisone (or equivalent) for 90 contiguous days and had no GIOP therapy for ≥ 12 months. Using patient stories, we developed an online video addressing risk factors and treatment options, and delivered it to members refilling a glucocorticoid prescription. The intervention consisted of two 45-day "Video ON" periods, during which the video automatically appeared at the time of refill, and two 45-day "Video OFF" periods, during which there was no video. Members could also "self-initiate" watching the video by going to the video link. We used an interrupted time series design to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention on GIOP prescription therapies over 6 months. RESULTS: Among 3017 members (64.8%) exposed to the intervention, 59% had measurable video viewing time, of which 3% "self-initiated" the video. The GIOP prescription rate in the "Video ON" group was 2.9% versus 2.7% for the "Video OFF" group. There was a nonsignificant trend toward greater GIOP prescription in members who self-initiated the video versus automated viewing (5.7% vs 2.9%, p = 0.1). CONCLUSION: Among adults at high risk of GIOP, prescription rates were not significantly affected by an online educational video presented at the time of glucocorticoid refill. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01378689.

Prasugrel but not high dose clopidogrel overcomes the lansoprazole neutralizing effect of P2Y12 inhibition: Results of the randomized DOSAPI study.

AIMS: The potential negative metabolic interaction between proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel is an unsolved issue. We hypothesized that doubling the clopidogrel maintenance dose (150 mg) would be less effective than switching to prasugrel 10 mg maintenance dose (MD) to overcome this negative interaction. METHOD AND RESULTS: In a randomized study with a factorial design, 82 stable coronary artery disease patients treated with 75 mg clopidogrel MD and aspirin were assigned to receive in a double blind fashion lansoprazole (30 mg/day) or placebo and to receive in an open fashion 150 mg clopidogrel MD or 10 mg prasugrel MD. The primary endpoint was the relative change in residual platelet reactivity over the 14-day study period [(RPA14day-RPAbaseline)/RPAbaseline]. The effect of doubling the clopidogrel MD on relative change in RPA was neutralized by lansoprazole (-53.6±48.4% versus +0.8±53.7% without and with lansoprazole, respectively, p = 0.02) whereas 10 mg of prasugrel MD dramatically reduced RPA irrespective of lansoprazole co-administration (-81.8 %±24.8% vs. -72.9%±32.9% without and with lansoprazole, respectively, p = NS). Lansoprazole exposure was the only parameter with a significant interaction with RPA among subgroups. CONCLUSION: The higher platelet inhibitory effect obtained by doubling the clopidogrel MD was totally neutralized by the co-administration of lansoprazole. This drug interaction was not observed with prasugrel 10 mg.

Sigmoidal maximal effect modeling of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration and annual incidence of coronary heart disease events in secondary prevention trials.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentration and the annual incidence of combined coronary heart disease (CHD) events­death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (NFMI)­by using sigmoidal maximal effect (sEmax) modeling of published data in various populations at risk for CHD events, and to use the best performing sEmax model generated to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent a single CHD death or NFMI event across a range of LDL-C concentrations. DESIGN: Literature-based modeling analysis. PATIENTS: A total of 95,955 patients from 22 published cardiovascular secondary prevention trials. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Four distinct sEmax models were created based on intervention approach and CHD event risk for each trial population. Model outputs included the following: Emax (maximum CHD death/NFMI rate), E0 (minimum CHD death/NFMI rate), and fit parameters. The best-fitting sEmax model was compared with linear, log-linear, and logit models, and it was used for calculation of annualized NNT to prevent one CHD death or NFMI event with statins. The best fitting sEmax model was constructed from nine statin intervention trials in 60,483 clinically stable patients with CHD or CHD risk equivalents (Emax = 4.84%/year [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.11­5.41%/year], E0 = 1.24%/year [95% CI 0.64­1.83%/year]) and was superior to linear, log-linear, and logit models. Reduction of CHD death/NFMI incidence diminished at an LDL-C level near 90 mg/dl and became near static at an LDL-C level of 60­70 mg/dl. Annual NNT for LDL-C reduction from a baseline of 130­100 mg/dl, 90, and 70 mg/dl was 129, 104, and 83, respectively, and from a baseline of 100­70 mg/dl was 232. CONCLUSION: An sEmax model fully characterized the relationship between LDL-C concentration and incidence of CHD death or NFMI in a high-risk population receiving statins, with diminishing event reduction at an LDL-C level less than 90 mg/dl, and limited projected event reduction beyond an LDL-C level of ~60­70 mg/dl. As baseline LDL-C level declines, the NNT sharply increases.

Twelve-month frequency of drug-metabolizing enzyme and transporter-based drug-drug interaction potential in patients receiving oral enzyme-targeted kinase inhibitor antineoplastic agents.

OBJECTIVE: To describe 12-month rates and patterns of coprescription of drugs that potentially create drug-drug interactions (DDIs) through shared metabolic or transport pathways for 9 enzyme-targeted kinase inhibitor oral antineoplastic drugs (OADs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used a deidentified pharmacy claims database identifying patients prescribed dasatinib, erlotinib, everolimus, imatinib, lapatinib, nilotinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, or sunitinib between January 1, 2008, and May 31, 2010. Coprescribing was 1 or more overlapping days of supply between the OAD and potential DDI drugs during the 12-month period beginning on the OAD index date. Product labels identified the cytochrome P450 metabolic enzymes used and whether P-glycoprotein was used by the OADs. Drugs that induce and/or inhibit these pathways were identified from the label and online resources. RESULTS: Sample sizes ranged from 96 (pazopanib group) to 4617 (imatinib group). Coprescribing rates with drugs that may decrease OAD effectiveness were 359/1546 (23%) (sunitinib group) to 1851/3263 (57%) (erlotinib group). Coprescribing rates with drugs that may increase OAD toxicity were 364/1546 (24%) (sunitinib group) to 71/96 (74%) (pazopanib group). Patients coprescribed DDI drugs had a median of 1 to 4 more medications present on the OAD index date than those not coprescribed a DDI drug. Most groups coprescribed DDI drugs had a median of 180 or more OAD days of supply during follow-up. The proportion of OAD days of supply with overlapping days of DDI drugs ranged from 7% to 85%. Generally, oncologists prescribed the OAD and nononcologists the DDI drug. CONCLUSION: Coprescription of drugs that induce or inhibit metabolic pathways used by enzyme-targeted kinase inhibitor OADs is high. The clinical consequences need further study.

Physician Awareness and Utilization of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-Approved Labeling for Pharmacogenomic Testing Information.

We surveyed 10,303 United States physicians on where they obtain pharmacogenomic testing information. Thirty-nine percent indicated that they obtained this from drug labeling. Factors positively associated with this response included older age, postgraduate instruction, using other information sources, regulatory approval/ recommendation of testing, reliance on labeling for information, and perception that patients have benefited from testing. Physicians use pharmacogenomic testing information from drug labeling, highlighting the importance of labeling information that is conducive to practice application.

Paradoxical progression of atherosclerosis related to low-density lipoprotein reduction and exposure to ezetimibe.

AIMS: Ezetimibe reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) but has complex actions on cholesterol transport and metabolism, and thus, LDL-C reduction may not solely define its overall effects. We explored the relationship between treatment effects and cumulative exposure to ezetimibe, with its effects on carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) in ARBITER 6-HALTS. METHODS AND RESULTS: This analysis includes the 159 patients randomized to ezetimibe within ARBITER 6-HALTS that completed the final imaging endpoint assessment. Eligibility criteria for ARBITER 6-HALTS included known coronary artery disease (CAD) or high risk for coronary heart disease, and treatment with a statin with LDL-C <100 mg/dL and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol <50 or 55 mg/dL for men and women, respectively. The mean CIMT was measured in the far wall of the distal common carotid artery. We analysed the univariate and multivariate relationships of the change in CIMT with baseline characteristics, on-treatment effects, and cumulative ezetimibe exposure (treatment duration × dose × adherence). Ezetimibe reduced LDL-C from 84 ± 23 to 66 ± 20 mg/dL. No net effect on CIMT was observed (baseline CIMT 0.898 ± 0.151 mm; net change -0.002 mm; P = 0.52). There was an inverse relationship between LDL-C and change in CIMT such that greater reductions in LDL-C were associated with greater CIMT progression (r = -0.266; P < 0.001). Change in CIMT also had univariate associations with baseline LDL-C, triglycerides (TG), high-sensitive C-reactive protein, and systolic blood pressure and was directly associated with the change in TG and inversely associated with the change in high-sensitive C-reactive protein. Multivariable models controlling for change in LDL-C, cumulative ezetimibe exposure, and baseline and on-treatment variables showed that both increased LDL-C reduction (P = 0.005) and cumulative drug exposure (P = 0.02) were associated with ezetimibe-associated CIMT progression. CONCLUSION: Among CAD and high-risk patients on statin therapy in the ARBITER-6 trial, ezetimibe leads to paradoxical progression of CIMT in association with both greater LDL-C reduction and cumulative drug exposure. These findings may suggest the presence of off-target actions of ezetimibe. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00397657.

On pharmacogenomics in pharmacy benefit management.

Recently, the separate trajectories of pharmacy benefit management and pharmacogenomics converged. Pharmacogenomic tests have become more widely available for clinical use and at costs within the range of typical health care services. Pharmacy benefit payers continue to seek the precision they can apply to their coverage policies and clinical programs that pharmacogenomics offers. We describe how pharmacogenomics can now make sense as part of a pharmacy benefit and also how pharmacogenomics can be applied in a benefit coverage policy and clinical programs. Detail is provided on clinical program development and implementation processes featuring pharmacogenomics. We also discuss the research needed to support ongoing program development involving pharmacogenomics and describe the current roles of benefit payers and administrators in these research efforts. The legal and ethical dimensions of applying pharmacogenomics in pharmacy benefits are covered and in particular how benefit payers and administrators need to navigate between genetic exceptionalism and applicable laws and regulations. Finally, some thoughts are provided on future opportunities and challenges for pharmacogenomics in pharmacy benefit management and pharmacy in general.

Impact of proton pump inhibitors on the effectiveness of clopidogrel after coronary stent placement: the clopidogrel Medco outcomes study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate the potential impact of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on the effectiveness of clopidogrel in preventing recurrent ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent placement. DESIGN: Population-based, retrospective cohort study. DATA SOURCE: National medical and pharmacy benefit claims database comprising approximately 19 million members. PATIENTS: A total of 16,690 patients who had undergone PCI with stent placement and who were highly adherent to clopidogrel therapy alone (9862 patients) or to clopidogrel with a PPI (6828 patients) between October 1, 2005, and September 30, 2006. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point was the occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event during the 12 months after stent placement. These events were defined as hospitalization for a cerebrovascular event (stroke or transient ischemic attack), an acute coronary syndrome (myocardial infarction or unstable angina), coronary revascularization (PCI or coronary artery bypass graft), or cardiovascular death. A composite event rate was compared between patients who received clopidogrel alone and those who received concomitant clopidogrel-PPI therapy. Baseline differences in covariates were adjusted by using Cox proportional hazards models. In the 9862 patients receiving clopidogrel alone, 1766 (17.9%) experienced a major adverse cardiovascular event compared with 1710 patients (25.0%) who received concomitant clopidogrel-PPI therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 1.39-1.64, p<0.0001). Similar associations of increased risk were observed for each PPI studied (omeprazole, esomeprazole, pantoprazole, and lansoprazole). CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of a PPI and clopidogrel compared with clopidogrel alone was associated with a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events within 1 year after coronary stent placement.

The ARBITER 6-HALTS Trial (Arterial Biology for the Investigation of the Treatment Effects of Reducing Cholesterol 6-HDL and LDL Treatment Strategies in Atherosclerosis): final results and the impact of medication adherence, dose, and treatment duration.

OBJECTIVES: This report describes the final results of the ARBITER 6-HALTS (Arterial Biology for the Investigation of the Treatment Effects of Reducing Cholesterol 6-HDL and LDL Treatment Strategies in Atherosclerosis) trial. BACKGROUND: The ARBITER 6-HALTS trial was terminated early on the basis of a pre-specified interim analysis showing superiority of niacin over ezetimibe on change in carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT). After termination, an additional 107 subjects completed a close-out assessment. METHODS: Patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) or CHD equivalent with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dl and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol <50 mg/dl for men or 55 mg/dl for women while receiving stable statin treatment were randomly assigned to ezetimibe (10 mg/day) or extended-release niacin (target dose, 2,000 mg/day). The primary end point was change in mean CIMT, analyzed according to a last observation carried forward method. The relationships of study medication adherence, dosage, and cumulative exposure (product of adherence, dose, and time) with change in CIMT were explored. RESULTS: Results in 315 patients included 208 with 14-month follow-up and 107 after mean treatment of 7 +/- 3 months. Niacin (n = 154) resulted in significant reduction (regression) in mean CIMT (-0.0102 +/- 0.0026 mm; p < 0.001) and maximal CIMT (-0.0124 +/- 0.0036 mm; p = 0.001), whereas ezetimibe (n = 161) did not reduce mean CIMT (-0.0016 +/- 0.0024 mm; p = 0.88) or maximal CIMT (-0.0005 +/- 0.0029 mm; p = 0.88) compared with baseline. There was a significant difference between ezetimibe and niacin treatment groups on mean changes in CIMT, favoring niacin, for both mean CIMT (p = 0.016) and maximal CIMT (p = 0.01). Increased cumulative drug exposure was related to regression of CIMT with niacin, and progression of CIMT with ezetimibe. CONCLUSIONS: Niacin induces regression of CIMT and is superior to ezetimibe for patients taking statins. (Comparative Study of the Effect of Ezetimibe Versus Extended-Release Niacin on Atherosclerosis; NCT00397657).

Extended-release niacin or ezetimibe and carotid intima-media thickness.

BACKGROUND: Treatment added to statin monotherapy to further modify the lipid profile may include combination therapy to either raise the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level or further lower the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level. METHODS: We enrolled patients who had coronary heart disease or a coronary heart disease risk equivalent, who were receiving long-term statin therapy, and in whom an LDL cholesterol level under 100 mg per deciliter (2.6 mmol per liter) and an HDL cholesterol level under 50 mg per deciliter for men or 55 mg per deciliter for women (1.3 or 1.4 mmol per liter, respectively) had been achieved. The patients were randomly assigned to receive extended-release niacin (target dose, 2000 mg per day) or ezetimibe (10 mg per day). The primary end point was the between-group difference in the change from baseline in the mean common carotid intima-media thickness after 14 months. The trial was terminated early, on the basis of efficacy, according to a prespecified analysis conducted after 208 patients had completed the trial. RESULTS: The mean HDL cholesterol level in the niacin group increased by 18.4% over the 14-month study period, to 50 mg per deciliter (P < 0.001), and the mean LDL cholesterol level in the ezetimibe group decreased by 19.2%, to 66 mg per deciliter (1.7 mmol per liter) (P < 0.001). Niacin therapy significantly reduced LDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels; ezetimibe reduced the HDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels. As compared with ezetimibe, niacin had greater efficacy regarding the change in mean carotid intima-media thickness over 14 months (P = 0.003), leading to significant reduction of both mean (P = 0.001) and maximal carotid intima-media thickness (P < or = 0.001 for all comparisons). Paradoxically, greater reductions in the LDL cholesterol level in association with ezetimibe were significantly associated with an increase in the carotid intima-media thickness (R = -0.31, P < 0.001). The incidence of major cardiovascular events was lower in the niacin group than in the ezetimibe group (1% vs. 5%, P = 0.04 by the chi-square test). CONCLUSIONS: This comparative-effectiveness trial shows that the use of extended-release niacin causes a significant regression of carotid intima-media thickness when combined with a statin and that niacin is superior to ezetimibe. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00397657.)

Flushing and the HDL-C response to extended-release niacin.

BACKGROUND: Several lines of evidence suggest that a linkage between niacin efficacy and flushing is plausible. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between niacin-induced flushing and clinical endpoints among participants of the Arterial Biology for the Investigation of the Treatment Effects of Reducing Cholesterol (ARBITER) 2 study. METHODS: Seventy-seven subjects were randomized to extended-release niacin (1 g/day) and completed the 12-month endpoint assessment of ARBITER 2. The relationships between self-reported flushing and changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and change in carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) at 12 months were evaluated. RESULTS: Flushing was reported by 53 subjects (68.8%) over 12 months. Mean increases in HDL-C at 12 months were significantly greater among subjects with flushing versus those without flushing (7.3 ± 6.6 vs 4.0 ± 6.9 mg/dL; P < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, HDL-C increase was significantly associated with self-reported flushing, controlling for age, gender, diabetes, baseline HDL-C and triglycerides, aspirin use, and medication adherence (P = 0.019). There was a nonsignificant trend for less progression of CIMT among subjects with flushing (0.011 ± 0.012 vs 0.033 ± 0.026 mm; P = 0.38). Medication adherence assessed by pill counts was high and was similar among those with (90%) and without (92%) flushing. CONCLUSION: In the ARBITER 2 trial, niacin-induced flushing was independently associated with a greater HDL-C response and with a directional trend for slowed CIMT progression.

Achieving optimal lipid values in patients with dyslipidemia is associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular events.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular (CV) event risk is significantly lower in patients with combined low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides (TG) at desired levels versus those without lower levels. However, this has not been investigated relative to specific patterns of baseline lipid abnormalities. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between desired combined lipid value achievement and risk of CV events in patients with different baseline lipid profiles. METHODS: A retrospective managed care database analysis among treatment-naïve adults with elevated CV event risk, ≥12 months follow-up, and full lipid panel from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2001 plus ≥1 panel before a CV event or study end. Patients were stratified into three baseline cohorts: isolated high LDL-C (Cohort 1), high LDL-C + low HDL-C or high TG (Cohort 2), and high LDL-C, low HDL-C, and high TG (Cohort 3). CV event risk stratified by combined desired lipid value achievement was assessed in each cohort. RESULTS: Achievement of combined desired lipid values/median days to achievement was 29% in 385 days (Cohort 1), 11% in 413 days (Cohort 2), and 7% in 505 days (Cohort 3). Achievement of combined desired lipid values was associated with an adjusted 25%-46% lower CV event risk in Cohort 1 (hazards ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval 0.65-0.87), Cohort 2 (hazards ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.67), and Cohort 3 (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval 0.37-0.78). CONCLUSION: Patients with combined desired lipid values had lower risk of CV events versus those without such values. The risk reduction was greatest among patients with multiple lipid abnormalities, suggesting a potential benefit of interventions targeting low HDL-C and/or high TG in addition to high LDL-C.

Risk of cardiovascular events in patients at optimal values for combined lipid parameters.

BACKGROUND: Current prevention guidelines support efforts to achieve optimal high-density lipoprotein (HDL-C) and triglyceride (TG) values, in addition to low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) in order to reduce cardiovascular (CV) events. The study objective was to evaluate the risk of CV events in patients attaining versus not attaining combined (LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG) optimal lipid values. METHODS/RESULTS: This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using a 1.1 million member managed care database. Eligible patients had a full lipid panel between 10/1/99 and 9/30/00, were naive to lipid therapy, and had health plan eligibility 12 months pre- and post-index (baseline) lipid laboratory value. Optimal lipid values (LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG) were established using the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel (NCEP ATP III) guidelines, and patients were placed into one of four groups: none, one, two, or three lipid components non-optimal at baseline. The presence of cardiovascular risk, disease, and events were determined by selected International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9 CM) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT codes). The definition of a CV event included: diagnosis of ischemic heart disease, peripheral arterial disease, stroke/TIA, or revascularization procedure. Odds ratios (OR) for a CV event associated with attainment of each optimal lipid fraction were determined by multivariate logistic regression. The study cohort included 30,348 patients, with a mean follow-up of 27 +/- 8 months. Mean age was 66 +/- 12 years; 16,549 (54%) were male; and 17,289 (57%) patients had coronary heart disease (CHD) or CHD risk equivalent. There were 5955 CV events that occurred in 4059 (13%) study patients. The presence of a single non-optimal lipid value slightly increased CV event risk [OR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.95-1.18], whereas two or all three non-optimal lipid values significantly increased the risk of a CV event [OR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.08-1.37; and 1.45; 95% CI: 1.24-1.68, respectively]. LIMITATIONS: As with all large observational databases there are potential limitations including: patient selection bias (e.g., more interventions in patients with greater illness, lack of mortality data, and frequency of lipid monitoring), unknown confounding variables, and potential coding errors. CONCLUSION: Not attaining optimal combined lipid values, independently and significantly, increased the risk of CV events in this large at-risk population with approximately 68,283 patient years of follow-up. The combination of non-attainment of optimal LDL-C with non-attainment of optimal HDL-C or TG values, or both, increased the adjusted risk of CV events by 22-45%. Thus, therapeutic strategies should focus on assessment and management of multiple lipid abnormalities, and not on single lipid risk factor modification.

Achievement of optimal combined lipid values in a managed care setting: is a new treatment paradigm needed?

BACKGROUND: Published guidelines suggest the management of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglyceride (TG) values after the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal is achieved. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the attainment of optimal combined lipid values (LDL-C, HDL-C, and TGs) and associated therapy over time. METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted among managed-care patients who had a baseline lipid panel taken between October 1, 1999, and September 30, 2000; were naive to lipid therapy; and had plan eligibility for at least 12 months before and 12 to 36 months after the baseline lipid values. Patients were categorized as elevated-risk primary prevention (ERP) or as coronary heart disease (CHD) and CHD risk equivalents (CHD-RE). The attainment of optimal combined lipid values was assessed at baseline and quarterly thereafter. Associations between lipid values and the use of lipid-altering therapy were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 30,348 patients were monitored for a mean (SD) duration of 27 (8) months. Mean (SD) age was 66 (12) years and 55% (16,549/30,348) were men; 43% (13,059/30,348) were categorized as ERP and 57% (17,289/30,348) as CHD-RE. Combined lipid values were optimal in 14% (4167/30,348),18% (5508/30,348), and 22% (2936/13,100) of patients at baseline, 12 months, and 36 months, respectively. After 36 months, 78% (10,164/13,100) of patients did not attain optimal combined lipid values. Lipid therapy, primarily statin monotherapy (87% [7992/ 92251), was prescribed in 30% (9225/30,348) of patients. After 36 months, 34% (4492/13,100) of patients had isolated elevated LDL-C and 20% (2588/13,100) had non-optimal HDL-C and/or TGs. Lipid therapy was associated with the attainment of optimal combined values for LDL-C and TGs (both, P < 0.05), but not for HDL-C. Because the study was retrospective, causality cannot be determined. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this study, use of combination lipid therapy and targeted therapy aimed at the specific lipid abnormalities may increase the attainment of optimal lipid parameters.

Opportunity for intervention to achieve American Heart Association guidelines for optimal lipid levels in high-risk women in a managed care setting.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association (AHA) recently established evidence-based recommendations for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in women, including lipid management. This study evaluated optimal lipid-level attainment and treatment patterns on the basis of these guidelines in high-risk women in a managed care setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a historical prospective cohort analysis of a 1.1-million-member, integrated, managed-care database. Eligible high-risk women were those with evidence of previous CVD or risk equivalent who had a full lipid panel available between October 1, 1999, and September 30, 2000; were naive to lipid therapy; and had a minimum of 12 months health plan eligibility preindex and postindex lipid panel. Optimal lipid levels were defined as LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) <100 mg/dL, HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) >50 mg/dL, non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL, and triglycerides <150 mg/dL. Laboratory values and lipid pharmacotherapy were assessed longitudinally over the postindex follow-up (up to 36 months). A total of 8353 high-risk women (mean age, 66+/-14 years) with a mean follow-up of 27+/-8 months were included. Only 7% attained optimal combined lipid levels initially, and this increased to 12% after 36 months. Lipid-modifying therapy was initiated in 32% of patients, including 35% of women with LDL-C > or =100 mg/dL and 15% with LDL-C <100 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk women, few attained the AHA's standards for all lipid fractions, and only one third received recommended drug therapy, highlighting significant opportunities to apply evidence-based recommendations to manage lipid abnormalities in high-risk women.

Dyslipidemias and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor prescription in heart transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of dyslipidemias in orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) recipients is not highlighted in the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel guidelines. Emerging data suggest that hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) safely reduce the risk of transplant rejection and coronary artery vasculopathy in OHT patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the proportion of patients from our institution reaching the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target of <100 mg/dL, evaluate the impact of statins in reaching this goal, and evaluate the prescribing practice for statins in US OHT centers. METHODS: The management of dyslipidemia of OHT recipients followed at our institution was retrospectively evaluated. In addition, the use of statins in adult OHT centers in the US that performed >or=15 OHTs per year was assessed through a survey. RESULTS: Of the 328 patients from our institution, 58.5% achieved an LDL-C <100 mg/dL. Patients prescribed statins were more likely to reach this goal (p < 0.01). A total of 85.0% of centers responding to the survey use statins as a part of their post-OHT protocol, primarily to reduce coronary artery vasculopathy (70.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Due to the potential for improved outcomes, a large proportion of patients are prescribed a statin. Our results support previous findings that statins are safe and effective in reducing LDL-C in the management of dyslipidemias in OHT recipients. Nonetheless, dyslipidemias are suboptimally managed in many post-OHT patients.