Apolipoprotein B: Bridging the Gap Between Evidence and Clinical Practice.

Despite data suggesting that apolipoprotein B (apoB) measurement outperforms low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level measurement in predicting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk, apoB measurement has not become widely adopted into routine clinical practice. One barrier for use of apoB measurement is lack of consistent guidance for clinicians on how to interpret and apply apoB results in clinical context. Whereas guidelines have often provided clear low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets or triggers to initiate treatment change, consistent targets for apoB are lacking. In this review, we synthesize existing data regarding the epidemiology of apoB by comparing guideline recommendations regarding use of apoB measurement, describing population percentiles of apoB relative to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, summarizing studies of discordance between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apoB levels, and evaluating apoB levels in clinical trials of lipid-lowering therapy to guide potential treatment targets. We propose evidence-guided apoB thresholds for use in cholesterol management and clinical care.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease." METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. STRUCTURE: This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

Achievement of LDL-C <55 mg/dL among US Adults : Findings from the cvMOBIUS2 Registry.

BACKGROUND: Reflecting clinical trial data showing improved outcomes with lower LDL-C levels, guidelines across the globe are increasingly recommending a goal of LDL-C <55 mg/dL in persons with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). What proportion of patients with ASCVD are already meeting those goals in the US remains understudied. METHODS: Using electronic health record data from 8 large US health systems, we evaluated lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), LDL-C levels, and factors associated with an LDL-C <55 mg/dL in persons with ASCVD treated between 1/1/2021-12/31/2021. Multivariable modeling was used to evaluate factors associated with achievement of an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. RESULTS: Among 167,899 eligible patients, 22.6% (38,016) had an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. While 76.1% of individuals overall were on a statin, only 38.2% were on a high-intensity statin,;5.9% were on ezetimibe, and 1.7% were on a PCSK9i monoclonal antibody (mAb). Factors associated with lower likelihood of achieving an LDL-C <55 mg/dL included: younger age (odds ratio [OR] 0.91 per 10y), female sex (OR 0.69), Black race (OR 0.76), and non-coronary artery disease forms of ASCVD including peripheral artery disease (OR 0.72) and cerebrovascular disease (OR 0.85), while high-intensity statin use was associated with increased odds of LDL-C <55 mg/dL (OR 1.55). Combination therapy (statin+ezetimibe or statin+PCSK9i mAb) was rare (4.4% and 0.5%, respectively) and was associated with higher odds of an LDL-C <55 mg/dL (OR 1.39 and 3.13, respectively). CONCLUSION: Less than a quarter of US patients with ASCVD in community practice are already achieving an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. Marked increases in utilization of both high intensity statins and combination therapy with non-statin therapy will be needed to achieve LDL-C levels <55 mg/dL at the population level in secondary prevention.

Obicetrapib on top of maximally tolerated lipid-modifying therapies in participants with or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: rationale and designs of BROADWAY and BROOKLYN.

BACKGROUND: Obicetrapib, a novel, selective cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitor, reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), LDL particles, apolipoprotein (Apo) B, and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and increases high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) when added to statins with or without ezetimibe. By substantially reducing LDL-C, obicetrapib has the potential to lower atherogenic lipoproteins in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) whose LDL-C levels remain high despite treatment with available maximally tolerated lipid-modifying therapies, addressing an unmet medical need in a patient population at high risk for cardiovascular events. METHODS AND RESULTS: BROADWAY (NCT05142722) and BROOKLYN (NCT05425745) are ongoing placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized Phase III trials designed to examine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of obicetrapib as an adjunct to dietary intervention and maximally tolerated lipid-modifying therapies in participants with a history of ASCVD and/or underlying HeFH whose LDL-C is not adequately controlled. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percent change in LDL-C from baseline to day 84. Other endpoints included changes in Apo B, non-HDL-C, HDL-C, Apo A1, Lp(a), and triglycerides in addition to parameters evaluating safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics. BROADWAY also included an adjudicated assessment of major adverse cardiovascular events, measurements of glucose homeostasis, and an ambulatory blood pressure monitoring substudy. A total of 2,532 participants were randomized in BROADWAY and 354 in BROOKLYN to receive obicetrapib 10 mg or placebo (2:1) for 365 days with follow-up through 35 days after the last dose. Results from both trials are anticipated in 2024. CONCLUSION: These trials will provide safety and efficacy data to support the potential use of obicetrapib among patients with ASCVD or HeFH with elevated LDL-C for whom existing therapies are not sufficiently effective or well-tolerated.

Generalizability of an EHR-network dataset to the United States for cardiovascular disease conditions: Comparison of Cerner real world data with the national inpatient sample.

BACKGROUND: Electronic Health Record (EHR) data from health systems are increasingly being combined for clinical research purposes. Yet, it remains unclear whether these large EHR data sources provide a representative assessment of national disease prevalence and treatment. To evaluate this, we compared Cerner RealWorldData (CRWD), a large EHR data source, to those seen in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) for 3 cardiovascular conditions (myocardial infarction (MI), congestive heart failure (CHF), and stroke. METHODS: Adult patients (age ≥18 years) hospitalized with MI, CHF, and stroke were identified in both CRWD (86 health systems) and the NIS (4,782 hospitals). Patient demographics, comorbidities, procedures, outcomes (length of stay and in-hospital mortality) and hospital type (teaching or nonteaching) were compared between NIS and CRWD patients. RESULTS: Of 86 health systems participating in CRWD, 33 were excluded for potential data quality issues which accounted for about 11% of hospitalizations in the dataset, leaving 53 for inclusion in analysis which accounted for about 89% of hospitalizations in the dataset. Between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018, 116,956 MI, 188,107 CHF, and 93,968 stroke hospitalizations were identified in CRWD vs 2,245,300 MI, 4,310,745 CHF, and 1,333,480 stroke hospitalizations in the NIS. Patient demographics were similar among patients in CWRD and the NIS for all 3 cardiovascular groups except for ethnicity, with underrepresentation of Hispanic individuals in CRWD vs the NIS. Patients hospitalized in CRWD had a slightly higher proportion of coded co-morbidities compared with NIS hospitalizations due to a longer potential look-back period. For patients with MI, hospital mortality, length of stay, coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) rates, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) rates were similar between CRWD and NIS. Additionally, there was similar in hospital mortality and length of stay for those with CHF and stroke hospitalizations between CRWD and NIS. CONCLUSIONS: On aggregate, characteristics of hospitalizations for MI, CHF, and stroke using EHR data from one nationwide EHR-derived database, CRWD, appears similar to characteristics of hospitalizations in the nationally representative NIS. Important limitations of CRWD include lack of geographic representativeness, under-representation of Hispanic adults, and the need to exclude health systems for missing data.

Primary prevention statin therapy in older adults.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to assess the evidence for primary prevention statin treatment in older adults, within the context of the most recent guideline recommendations, while also highlighting important considerations for shared decision-making. RECENT FINDINGS: As the average lifespan increases and the older adult population grows, the opportunity for prevention of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease is magnified. Randomized trials and meta-analyses have demonstrated a clear benefit for primary prevention statin use through age 75, with uncertainty beyond that age. Despite these data supporting their use, current guidelines conflict in their statin treatment recommendations in those aged 70-75 years. Reflecting the paucity of evidence, the same guidelines are equivocal around primary prevention statins in those beyond age 75. Two large ongoing randomized trials (STAREE and PREVENTABLE) will provide additional insights into the treatment benefits and risks of primary prevention statins in the older adult population. In the meantime, a holistic approach in treatment decisions remains paramount for older patients. SUMMARY: The benefits of primary prevention statin treatment are apparent through age 75, which is reflected in the current ACC/AHA and USPSTF recommendations. Ongoing trials will clarify the utility in those beyond age 75.

Lepodisiran, an Extended-Duration Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lipoprotein(a): A Randomized Dose-Ascending Clinical Trial.

Importance: Epidemiological and genetic data have implicated lipoprotein(a) as a potentially modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic disease and aortic stenosis, but there are no approved pharmacological treatments. Objectives: To assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and effects of lepodisiran on lipoprotein(a) concentrations after single doses of the drug; lepodisiran is a short interfering RNA directed at hepatic synthesis of apolipoprotein(a), an essential component necessary for assembly of lipoprotein(a) particles. Design, Setting, and Participants: A single ascending-dose trial conducted at 5 clinical research sites in the US and Singapore that enrolled 48 adults without cardiovascular disease and with lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations of 75 nmol/L or greater (or ≥30 mg/dL) between November 18, 2020, and December 7, 2021; the last follow-up visit occurred on November 9, 2022. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive placebo or a single dose of lepodisiran (4 mg, 12 mg, 32 mg, 96 mg, 304 mg, or 608 mg) administered subcutaneously. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the safety and tolerability of the single ascending doses of lepodisiran. The secondary outcomes included plasma levels of lepodisiran for 168 days after dose administration and changes in fasting lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations through a maximum follow-up of 336 days (48 weeks). Results: Of the 48 participants enrolled (mean age, 46.8 [SD, 11.6] years; 35% were women), 1 serious adverse event occurred. The plasma concentrations of lepodisiran reached peak levels within 10.5 hours and were undetectable by 48 hours. The median baseline lipoprotein(a) concentration was 111 nmol/L (IQR, 78 to 134 nmol/L) in the placebo group, 78 nmol/L (IQR, 50 to 152 nmol/L) in the 4 mg of lepodisiran group, 97 nmol/L (IQR, 86 to 107 nmol/L) in the 12-mg dose group, 120 nmol/L (IQR, 110 to 188 nmol/L) in the 32-mg dose group, 167 nmol/L (IQR, 124 to 189 nmol/L) in the 96-mg dose group, 96 nmol/L (IQR, 72 to 132 nmol/L) in the 304-mg dose group, and 130 nmol/L (IQR, 87 to 151 nmol/L) in the 608-mg dose group. The maximal median change in lipoprotein(a) concentration was -5% (IQR, -16% to 11%) in the placebo group, -41% (IQR, -47% to -20%) in the 4 mg of lepodisiran group, -59% (IQR, -66% to -53%) in the 12-mg dose group, -76% (IQR, -76% to -75%) in the 32-mg dose group, -90% (IQR, -94% to -85%) in the 96-mg dose group, -96% (IQR, -98% to -95%) in the 304-mg dose group, and -97% (IQR, -98% to -96%) in the 608-mg dose group. At day 337, the median change in lipoprotein(a) concentration was -94% (IQR, -94% to -85%) in the 608 mg of lepodisiran group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 1 study of 48 participants with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, lepodisiran was well tolerated and produced dose-dependent, long-duration reductions in serum lipoprotein(a) concentrations. The findings support further study of lepodisiran. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04914546.

Trends of blood pressure control in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic.

IMPORTANCE: COVID-19 altered lifestyles and disrupted routine health care. Whether blood pressure (BP) control worsened during COVID-19 is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To understand whether home BP control worsened during COVID-19 across the United States (US) . DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A population-based analysis of home BP data from 72,706 participants enrolled in a digital health hypertension control program. Data was compared before (January 2019 to March 2020) and during (April 2020 to August 2020) COVID-19. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Monthly mean home BP readings, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were quantified before and during the pandemic. Multivariable adjustments were made for age, sex, race, region, and months enrolled. Home BP readings were also classified based on monthly averages and highest home BP readings into risk groups: Stage 2 HTN: BP> = 135 or DBP> = 85; Uncontrolled HTN: SBP> = 145 or DBP> = 95; or Severely uncontrolled HTN: SBP> = 160 or DBP> = 100). RESULTS: Overall, 72,706 participants were enrolled in a digital health hypertension program between 1/1/2019 and 8/31/2020. Compared with participants pre-COVID-19 (n = 33,440), those during COVID-19 (n = 39,266) were of similar age (mean 53.0 ± 10.7 years vs 53.3 ± 10.8 years); sex (46% vs 50.6% female) and race (29.1% vs 34.2% non-white). Relative to pre-Covid (Apr-Aug 2019) the mean monthly number of home BP readings rose during COVID-19 (Apr-Aug, 2020), from 7.3 to 9.3 per month (P < .001). During COVID-19, participants had higher monthly adjusted mean SBP (131.6 mmHg vs. 127.5 mmHg, P < .001); DBP (80.2 mmHg vs. 79.2 mmHg, P < .001); and MAP (97.4 mmHg vs. 95.3 mmHg; P < .001). Relative to the pre-pandemic period, during COVID-19 the proportion of participants with a mean monthly BP classified as uncontrolled or severely uncontrolled hypertension also rose, 15% vs 19% and 4% vs 5%, respectively CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Based on home BP readings, mean monthly BP rose modestly after COVID-19, despite increased utilization of home monitoring. Further studies are needed to examine the longitudinal effects of the pandemic on cardiovascular disease risk factors, the impact of these on long-term population health.

COVID-19 and Cardiometabolic Health: Lessons Gleaned from the Pandemic and Insights for the Next Wave.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the current evidence regarding the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on cardiometabolic health, with a focus on strategies to help mitigate adverse effects on population health. RECENT FINDINGS: Individuals with cardiometabolic disease are particularly vulnerable to worse outcomes with COVID-19 infection. In addition, the pandemic itself has had significant deleterious impact on the cardiometabolic health of the population, including declines in physical activity, increases in smoking and alcohol use, worsening blood pressure and glycemic control, and detrimental effects on mental health. Targeted interventions at the patient and community level will be needed to mitigate the long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on population cardiometabolic health. The COVID-19 pandemic has worsened cardiometabolic health, but there are several opportunities and enhanced tools available to counteract these changes.

Use of negative control outcomes to assess the comparability of patients initiating lipid-lowering therapies.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials have demonstrated efficacy of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) in reducing risk of cardiovascular disease events, but effectiveness in routine clinical care has not been well-studied. We used negative control outcomes to assess potential confounding in an observational study of PCSK9i versus ezetimibe or high-intensity statin. METHODS: Using commercial claims, we identified U.S. adults initiating PCSK9i, ezetimibe, or high-intensity statin in 2015-2018, with other lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) use in the year prior (LLT cohort) or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in the past 90 days (ASCVD cohort). We compared initiators of PCSK9i to ezetimibe and high-intensity statin by estimating one-year risks of negative control outcomes influenced by frailty or health-seeking behaviors. Inverse probability of treatment and censoring weighted estimators of risk differences (RDs) were used to evaluate residual confounding after controlling for covariates. RESULTS: PCSK9i initiators had lower one-year risks of negative control outcomes associated with frailty, such as decubitus ulcer in the ASCVD cohort (PCSK9i vs. high-intensity statin RD = -3.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -4.6%, -2.5%; PCSK9i vs. ezetimibe RD = -1.3%, 95% CI: -2.1%, -0.6%), with similar but attenuated associations in the LLT cohort. Lower risks of accidents and fractures were also observed for PCSK9i, varying by cohort. Risks were similar for outcomes associated with health-seeking behaviors, although trended higher for PCSK9i in the ASCVD cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Observed associations suggest lower frailty and potentially greater health-seeking behaviors among PCSK9i initiators, particularly those with a recent ASCVD diagnosis, with the potential to bias real-world analyses of treatment effectiveness.

Cardiovascular Risk and Health Among People With Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Eligible for Primary Prevention: Insights From the REPRIEVE Trial.

BACKGROUND: In addition to traditional cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, antiretroviral therapy, lifestyle, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-related factors may contribute to future CV events in persons with HIV (PWH). METHODS: Among participants in the global REPRIEVE randomized trial, we characterized demographics and HIV characteristics relative to ACC/AHA pooled cohort equations (PCE) for atherosclerotic CV disease predicted risk and CV health evaluated by Life's Simple 7 (LS7; includes smoking, diet, physical activity, body mass index, blood pressure, total cholesterol, and glucose). RESULTS: Among 7382 REPRIEVE participants (31% women, 45% Black), the median PCE risk score was 4.5% (lower and upper quartiles Q1, Q3: 2.2, 7.2); 29% had a PCE score <2.5%, and 9% scored above 10%. PCE score was related closely to known CV risk factors and modestly (<1% difference in risk score) to immune function and HIV parameters. The median LS7 score was 9 (Q1, Q3: 7, 10) of a possible 14. Only 24 participants (0.3%) had 7/7 ideal components, and 36% had ≤2 ideal components; 90% had <5 ideal components. The distribution of LS7 did not vary by age or natal sex, although ideal health was more common in low sociodemographic index countries and among Asians. Poor dietary and physical activity patterns on LS7 were seen across all PCE scores, including the lowest risk categories. CONCLUSIONS: Poor CV health by LS7 was common among REPRIEVE participants, regardless of PCE. This suggests a critical and independent role for lifestyle interventions in conjunction with conventional treatment to improve CV outcomes in PWH. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02344290. AIDS Clinical Trials Group study number: A5332.

The Cumulative Impact of Chronic Stressors on Risks of Myocardial Infarction in US Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the association between cumulative exposure to chronic stressors and the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) in US older adults. METHODS: Nationally representative prospective cohort data of adults 45 years and older (n = 15,109) were used to investigate the association between the cumulative number of chronic stressors and the incidence of MI in US older adults. Proportional hazards models adjusted for confounding risk factors and differences by sex, race/ethnicity, and history of MI were assessed. RESULTS: The median age of participants was 65 years, 714 (4.7%) had a prior MI, and 557 (3.7%) had an MI during follow-up. Approximately 84% of participants reported at least one chronic stressor at baseline, and more than half reported two or more stressors. Multivariable models showed that risks of MI increased incrementally from one chronic stressor (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20-1.37) to four or more chronic stressors (HR = 2.71, 95% CI = 2.08-3.53) compared with those who reported no stressors. These risks were only partly reduced after adjustments for multiple demographic, socioeconomic, psychosocial, behavioral, and clinical risk factors. In adults who had a prior MI (p value for interaction = .038), we found that risks of a recurrent event increased substantially from one chronic stressor (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.09-1.54) to four or more chronic stressors (HR = 2.85, 95% CI = 1.43-5.69). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic life stressors are significant independent risk factors for cardiovascular events in US older adults. The risks associated with multiple chronic stressors were especially high in adults with a previous MI.

Quantifying Importance of Major Risk Factors for Coronary Heart Disease.

BACKGROUND: To optimize preventive strategies for coronary heart disease (CHD), it is essential to understand and appropriately quantify the contribution of its key risk factors. Our objective was to compare the associations of key modifiable CHD risk factors-specifically lipids, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diabetes mellitus, and smoking-with incident CHD events based on their prognostic performance, attributable risk fractions, and treatment benefits, overall and by age. METHODS: Pooled participant-level data from 4 observational cohort studies sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute were used to create a cohort of 22 626 individuals aged 45 to 84 years who were initially free of cardiovascular disease. Individuals were followed for 10 years from baseline evaluation for incident CHD. Proportional hazards regression was used to estimate metrics of prognostic model performance (likelihood ratio, C index, net reclassification, discrimination slope), hazard ratios, and population attributable fractions for SBP, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), diabetes mellitus, and smoking. Expected absolute risk reductions for antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment were assessed. RESULTS: Age, sex, and race capture 63% to 80% of the prognostic performance of cardiovascular risk models. In contrast, adding either SBP, non-HDL-C, diabetes mellitus, or smoking to a model with other risk factors increases the C index by only 0.004 to 0.013. However, primordial prevention could have a substantial effect as demonstrated by population attributable fractions of 28% for SBP≥130 mm Hg and 17% for non-HDL-C≥130 mg/dL. Similarly, lowering the SBP of all individuals to <130 mm Hg or lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 30% would be expected to lower a baseline 10-year CHD risk of 10.7% to 7.0 and 8.0, respectively (absolute risk reductions: 3.7% and 2.7%, respectively). Prognostic performance decreases with age (C indices for age groups 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84 are 0.75, 0.72, 0.66, and 0.62, respectively), whereas absolute risk reductions increase (SBP: 1.1%, 2.3%, 5.4%, 10.3%, respectively; non-HDL-C: 1.1%, 2.0%, 3.7%, 5.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although individual modifiable CHD risk factors contribute only modestly to prognostic performance, our models indicate that eliminating or controlling these individual factors would lead to substantial reductions in total population CHD events. Metrics used to judge importance of risk factors should be tailored to the research objectives.

Beliefs, risk perceptions, and lipid management among patients with and without diabetes: Results from the PALM registry.

Intensive lipid management is critical to reduce cardiovascular (CV) risk for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: We performed an observational study of 7628 patients with (n = 2943) and without DM (n = 4685), enrolled in the Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry and treated at 140 outpatient clinics across the United States in 2015. Patient self-estimated CV risk, patient-perceived statin benefit and risk, observed statin therapy use and dosing were assessed. RESULTS: Patients with DM were more likely to believe that their CV risk was elevated compared with patients without DM (39.1% vs 29.3%, P < .001). Patients with DM were more likely to receive a statin (74.2% vs 63.5%, P < .001) but less likely to be treated with guideline-recommended statin intensity (36.5% vs 46.9%, P < .001), driven by the low proportion (16.5%) of high risk (ASCVD risk ≥7.5%) primary prevention DM patients treated with a high intensity statin. Patients with DM treated with guideline-recommended statin intensity were more likely to believe they were at high CV risk (44.9% vs 38.4%, P = .005) and that statins can reduce this risk (41.1% vs 35.6%, P = .02), compared with patients treated with lower than guideline-recommended statin intensity. Compared with patients with an elevated HgbA1c, patients with well-controlled DM were no more likely to be on a statin (77.9% vs 79.3%, P = .43). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide study, the majority of patients with DM were treated with lower than guideline-recommended statin intensity. Patient education and engagement may help providers improve lipid therapy for these high-risk patients.

The Accuracy of Cardiovascular Pooled Cohort Risk Estimates in U.S. Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: The ACC/AHA guidelines for primary prevention rely on the Pooled Cohort Risk Equations (PCE) risk estimates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) to guide treatment decisions. In light of the PCE being derived in younger populations, their accuracy in older adults is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive accuracy and calibration of the PCE in older individuals. DESIGN AND SETTING: We estimated CVD predicted and observed risk among individuals from four large prospective cohort studies: Cardiovascular Health Study, Multiethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, Framingham Original, and Framingham Offspring. PARTICIPANTS: 12,527 overall individuals without ASCVD, including 9864 individuals aged 40-74 years and 2663 aged ≥75 years. MEASUREMENTS: We examined the operating characteristics of the PCE to estimate 5-year risk of stroke, MI, and CHD death overall and by age and sex strata. The associations between individual components of the PCE and cardiovascular events by age group (≥75 vs 40-74 years) were also evaluated. RESULTS: The PCE had low discrimination for 5-year ASCVD risk in older (≥75 years) (c-statistic = 0.62, 95% CI 0.60-0.65) vs. younger (40-74 years) adults (c-statistic = 0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.76). Calibration of the PCE was suboptimal in both older and younger adults, overestimating risk in the highest risk groups. Performance of the PCE in older adults was similarly poor when stratified by sex and age ≥ 80 years. LIMITATIONS: Since the PCE were derived from similar cohorts, though using different age groups and exams, this analysis likely overestimates the performance of the PCE. CONCLUSION: The performance of the PCE for ASCVD risk estimation in older adults is suboptimal; new models to effectively risk-stratify older adults are needed.

Mechanistic insights into cardiovascular protection for omega-3 fatty acids and their bioactive lipid metabolites.

Patients with well-controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, but persistent high triglycerides, remain at increased risk for cardiovascular events as evidenced by multiple genetic and epidemiologic studies, as well as recent clinical outcome trials. While many trials of low-dose ω3-polyunsaturated fatty acids (ω3-PUFAs), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) have shown mixed results to reduce cardiovascular events, recent trials with high-dose ω3-PUFAs have reignited interest in ω3-PUFAs, particularly EPA, in cardiovascular disease (CVD). REDUCE-IT demonstrated that high-dose EPA (4 g/day icosapent-ethyl) reduced a composite of clinical events by 25% in statin-treated patients with established CVD or diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors. Outcome trials in similar statin-treated patients using DHA-containing high-dose ω3 formulations have not yet shown the benefits of EPA alone. However, there are data to show that high-dose ω3-PUFAs in patients with acute myocardial infarction had reduced left ventricular remodelling, non-infarct myocardial fibrosis, and systemic inflammation. ω3-polyunsaturated fatty acids, along with their metabolites, such as oxylipins and other lipid mediators, have complex effects on the cardiovascular system. Together they target free fatty acid receptors and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors in various tissues to modulate inflammation and lipid metabolism. Here, we review these multifactorial mechanisms of ω3-PUFAs in view of recent clinical findings. These findings indicate physico-chemical and biological diversity among ω3-PUFAs that influence tissue distributions as well as disparate effects on membrane organization, rates of lipid oxidation, as well as various receptor-mediated signal transduction pathways and effects on gene expression.

Availability and Use of Shared Data From Cardiometabolic Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Sharing of patient-level clinical trial data has been widely endorsed. Little is known about how extensively these data have been used for cardiometabolic diseases. We sought to evaluate the availability and use of shared data from cardiometabolic clinical trials. METHODS: We extracted data from ClinicalStudyDataRequest.com, a large, multisponsor data-sharing platform hosting individual patient-level data from completed studies sponsored by 13 pharmaceutical companies. RESULTS: From January 2013 to May 2017, the platform had data from 3374 clinical trials, of which 537 (16%) evaluated cardiometabolic therapeutics (phase 1, 36%; phase 2, 17%; phase 2/3, 1%; phase 3, 42%; phase 4, 4%). They covered 74 therapies and 398 925 patients. Diabetes mellitus (60%) and hypertension (15%) were the most common study topics. Median time from study completion to data availability was 79 months. As of May 2017, ClinicalStudyDataRequest.com had received 318 submitted proposals, of which 163 had signed data-sharing agreements. Thirty of these proposals were related to cardiometabolic therapies and requested data from 79 unique studies (15% of all trials, 29% of phase 3/4 trials). Most (96%) data requesters of cardiometabolic clinical trial data were from academic centers in North America and Western Europe, and half the proposals were unfunded. Most proposals were for secondary hypothesis-generating questions, with only 1 proposed reanalysis of the original study primary hypothesis. To date, 3 peer-reviewed articles have been published after a median of 19 months (9-32 months) from the data-sharing agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Despite availability of data from >500 cardiometabolic trials in a multisponsor data-sharing platform, only 15% of these trials and 29% of phase 3/4 trials have been accessed by investigators thus far, and a negligible minority of analyses have reached publication.

Practice-level variation in statin use and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control in the United States: Results from the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to guideline-recommended statin recommendations in the United States is suboptimal. Patients' likelihood to be treated according to guidelines may vary by the practice in which they are treated. METHODS: Variation in the use of statin therapy in 5445 patients, with known or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and meeting a statin treatment indication, was examined across 74 US Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) Registry clinics. Multivariable generalized linear mixed modeling was used to determine the median odds ratio (MOR) for statin use and 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline-recommended statin intensity by practice. MOR quantifies between-practice variation by comparing the odds of receiving guideline-recommended statin treatment in a patient from a randomly selected practice with a similar patient from another random practice. Risk-adjusted low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) control (<100 and <70 mg/dL) was compared among practice tertiles based on percentage of eligible patients receiving recommended statin intensity. RESULTS: Among 74 practices (43.2% cardiology) comprised of 300 healthcare providers enrolling 5445 patients (56.2% with ASCVD), statin use at the guideline-recommended intensity at practices varied widely (12.7-71.4%; adjusted MOR 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-1.64). Results were consistent when evaluated for any statin use overall (adjusted MOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.48-1.99) and when stratified by primary versus secondary prevention patients. Relative to practices with lowest or mid-tertile statin use of statins, highest tertile clinics were more frequently cardiology practices (68.0% vs 48.0% vs 12.5%, P < .001). Compared with lowest tertile clinics, patients at highest tertile clinics were more likely to achieve LDL-C <70 mg/dL (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.49, 95% CI 1.08-2.04) and <100 mg/dL (adjusted OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.41-2.25). CONCLUSIONS: US clinics varied widely in their adherence to guideline recommendations for statin therapy, which contributed to significant differences in LDL-C levels.