Adherence to Blood Cholesterol Treatment Guidelines Among Physicians Managing Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

A Web-Based Application for Risk Stratification and Optimization in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

In addition to aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, statins, and lifestyle modification interventions, novel pharmacological agents have been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease patients, including new antithrombotics, antihyperglycemics, and lipid-modulating therapies. Despite their benefits, the uptake of these guideline-directed therapies remains a challenge. There is a need to develop strategies to support knowledge translation for the uptake of secondary prevention therapies.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to test the feasibility and usability of Stratification and Optimization in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease (STOP-CVD), a point-of-care application that was designed to facilitate knowledge translation by providing individualized risk stratification and optimization guidance.

METHODS

Using the REACH (Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) Registry trial and predictive modeling (which included 67,888 patients), we designed a free web-based secondary risk calculator. Based on demographic and comorbidity profiles, the application was used to predict an individual's 20-month risk of cardiovascular events and cardiovascular mortality and provides a comparison to an age-matched control with an optimized cardiovascular risk profile to illustrate the modifiable residual risk. Additionally, the application used the patient's risk profile to provide specific guidance for possible therapeutic interventions based on a novel algorithm. During an initial 3-month adoption phase, 1-time invitations were sent through email and telephone to 240 physicians that refer to a regional cardiovascular clinic. After 3 months, a survey of user experience was sent to all users. Following this, no further marketing of the application was performed. Google Analytics was collected postimplementation from January 2021 to December 2021. These were used to tabulate the total number of distinct users and the total number of monthly uses of the application.

RESULTS

During the 1-year pilot, 47 of the 240 invited clinicians used the application 1573 times, an average of 131 times per month, with sustained usage over time. All 24 postimplementation survey respondents confirmed that the application was functional, easy to use, and useful.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot suggests that the STOP-CVD application is feasible and usable, with high clinician satisfaction. This tool can be easily scaled to support the uptake of guideline-directed medical therapy, which could improve clinical outcomes. Future research will be focused on evaluating the impact of this tool on clinician management and patient outcomes.

Challenges in Improving Adherence to Diet and Drug Treatment in Hypercholesterolemia Patients

Poor adherence to chronic disease treatment may seriously compromise the effectiveness of therapy, characterizing itself as a critical element for the population's health, both from the point of view of quality of life and health economics. The causes of low adherence are many and can depend on the patient, the physician and the healthcare system. Low adherence to dietary recommendations and lipid-lowering drug therapy for hypercholesterolemia is a widespread phenomenon that may strongly limit the great advantages of serum lipid reduction strategies in primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention. Many patients discontinue treatment, and adherence decreases with time. Increasing therapeutic adherence can have a much greater impact on the health of the population than any other therapeutic advance. There are numerous strategies to increase therapy adherence according to behavior change theories. They concern the doctor and the patient. Some must be implemented at the time of prescription, others later during the follow-up. The active role of the patient in the therapeutic decision and the shared definition of LDL cholesterol targets are of paramount importance. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize evidence on current levels of adherence to lipid-lowering strategies, the causes of the lack of adequate adherence and possible physician-applicable strategies to improve it.

Two Decades of Overuse and Underuse of Interventions for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review

Quality use of anti-hypertensive and cholesterol-lowering medications is crucial for successful cardiovascular disease management. This systematic review aimed to estimate levels of over and underuse of services for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases from 2000 to 2020: overprescribing/underprescribing, overtesting/undertesting and overutilization/ underutilization of procedures compared to clinical practice guideline recommendations. Thirteen studies from USA, Europe, Asia and Australia were included. Wide practice variation was identified. Six studies reported overuse (eg, perioperative cardiac consultations, anti-hypertensive overprescribing for normotensive or pre-hypertensive people); and ten studies reported underuse (eg, under-prescribing of statins when indicated and under-screening for familial hypercholesterolemia). Lifestyle recommendations for cardiovascular disease prevention were largely underused. In summary, lack of adherence to published guidelines was prevalent over the past 2 decades for both primary and secondary prevention across settings. Further investigation of potentially justifiable deviations from guidelines are warranted to verify the estimates and identify points for intervention.

Physicians and pharmacists' clinical knowledge of statin therapy and monitoring parameters, and the barriers to guideline implementation in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Millions of individuals worldwide use statins, and their significant impact on cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been well-established. However, a lack of knowledge about the up-to-date guideline recommendations regarding statin therapy is a common barrier to implementation in clinical practice. Therefore, the present study aimed to assess the current clinical knowledge about statin therapy and its monitoring parameters. Also, we evaluated the barriers to cholesterol management guideline implementation in Yemen.

METHODS

This observational cross-sectional study was conducted over four months, from June/2021 to September/2021, in Sana'a, Yemen. A validated questionnaire was distributed face-to-face to 650 participants (350 physicians and 300 pharmacists). Physicians and pharmacists from governmental and private hospitals and those working in private clinics or community pharmacies were included in the study.

RESULTS

A total of 496 participants filled out the survey, with 22 being excluded due to incomplete data. So, the study has an overall response rate of 72.9% (474). The majority of pharmacists (81.8%) and physicians (78.7%) could not identify the patient group that needed ASCVD risk assessment before statin therapy initiation. Although a significant proportion of respondents knew of the fact that high-intensity statins are recommended for patients with ASCVD (65.4%) and primary hypercholesterolemia (58.4%), the majority of physicians and pharmacists could not identify the high (61.6% and 66.7.3%, respectively) and moderate statin-intensity doses (72.2% and 68.6%, respectively). Only 21.9% of all respondents knew that atorvastatin and rosuvastatin can be administered at any time of the day. Similarly, a low overall rate of respondents (19.6%) knew that atorvastatin does not need dose adjustment in chronic kidney diseases, with a statistically significant difference in knowledge between physicians and pharmacists (12.5% vs. 25.6%, p <0.001, respectively). Notably, only 39.2% of participants were aware that statins are not safe to use during breastfeeding. Around half of respondents (52.3%) correctly identify the duration (4 to 12 weeks) at which LD-C measuring is recommended after therapy initiation or dose change. The lowest knowledge scores for respondents were related to statin-drug interactions. Age, experience, degree, and previous guideline exposure were all significantly associated with the knowledge scores (p <0.05). The four most perceived barriers to implementing cholesterol management guidelines were no audit on adherence to the guidelines in the workplace (73.4%), insufficient resources to adequately implement and follow up on the guideline's recommendations (73.6%), patient's financial status (75.7%), and lack of familiarity about the guideline's latest recommendations (63.3%).

CONCLUSION

Physicians and pharmacists had suboptimal clinical knowledge regarding statin therapy, dose intensities, drug-drug interaction, contraindications, and monitoring parameters. Therefore, physicians' and pharmacists' educational interventions regarding the up-to-date recommendation about statins are recommended.

There is urgent need to treat atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk earlier, more intensively, and with greater precision: A review of current practice and recommendations for improved effectiveness

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is epidemic throughout the world and is etiologic for such acute cardiovascular events as myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, unstable angina, and death. ASCVD also impacts risk for dementia, chronic kidney disease peripheral arterial disease and mobility, impaired sexual response, and a host of other visceral impairments that adversely impact the quality and rate of progression of aging. The relationship between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and risk for ASCVD is one of the most highly established and investigated issues in the entirety of modern medicine. Elevated LDL-C is a necessary condition for atherogenesis induction. Basic scientific investigation, prospective longitudinal cohorts, and randomized clinical trials have all validated this association. Yet despite the enormous number of clinical trials which support the need for reducing the burden of atherogenic lipoprotein in blood, the percentage of high and very high-risk patients who achieve risk stratified LDL-C target reductions is low and has remained low for the last thirty years. Atherosclerosis is a preventable disease. As clinicians, the time has come for us to take primordial and primary prevention more serously. Despite a plethora of therapeutic approaches, the large majority of patients at risk for ASCVD are poorly or inadequately treated, leaving them vulnerable to disease progression, acute cardiovascular events, and poor aging due to loss of function in multiple visceral organs. Herein we discuss the need to greatly intensify efforts to reduce risk, decrease disease burden, and provide more comprehensive and earlier risk assessment to optimally prevent ASCVD and its complications. Evidence is presented to support that treatment should aim for far lower goals in cholesterol management, should take into account many more factors than commonly employed today and should begin significantly earlier in life.

LDL-C target attainment in secondary prevention of ASCVD in the United States: barriers, consequences of nonachievement, and strategies to reach goals

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the leading cause of death in the United States. Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a major causal risk factor for ASCVD. Current evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that lowering LDL-C reduces the risk of secondary cardiovascular events in patients with previous myocardial infarction or stroke. There is no lower limit for LDL-C: large, randomized studies and meta-analyses have found continuous benefit and no safety concerns in patients achieving LDL-C levels <25 mg/dL. As 'Time is plaque' in patients with ASCVD, early, sustained reductions in LDL-C are critical to slow or halt disease progression. However, despite use of lipid-lowering medications, <30% of patients with ASCVD achieve guideline-recommended reductions in LDL-C, resulting in a substantial societal burden of preventable cardiovascular events and early mortality. LDL-C goals are not met due to several factors: lipid-lowering therapy is not initiated and intensified as directed by clinical guidelines (clinical inertia); most patients do not adhere to prescribed medications; and high-risk patients are frequently denied access to add-on therapies by their insurance providers. Promoting patient and clinician education, multidisciplinary collaboration, and other interventions may help to overcome these barriers. Ultimately, achieving population-level guideline-recommended reductions in LDL-C will require a collaborative effort from patients, clinicians, relevant professional societies, drug manufacturers, and payers.

A Checklist Approach for Enhanced Outpatient Guideline-Directed Management in the Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

Compelling results from clinical trials supporting intensive risk-reduction therapies to reduce associated morbidity and mortality in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) provided the impetus for medical societies to integrate these evidence-based results into clinical practice guidelines. Current evidence, however, points toward gaps in the management of patients with established ASCVD. Some of these gaps are related to barriers to guideline implementation, and strategies are needed to overcome these barriers. In this review, we propose a framework incorporating comprehensive tools for enhanced guideline-directed management in secondary prevention of ASCVD. This aid includes a 13-point checklist with supporting educational and system-based tools for effective evidence-based pharmacological and nonpharmacological care. This proposed tool targets primary care providers and cardiologists in the outpatient setting who provide direct medical care for patients with established ASCVD.

An exploratory survey on the awareness and usage of clinical practice guidelines among clinical pharmacists

Background

The NHLBI has not developed clinical practice guidelines since 2007. As a result, multiple organizations have released competing guidelines. This has created confusion and debate among clinicians as to which recommendations are most applicable for practice.

Objectives

To explore preliminary attitudes, awareness, and usage of clinical practice guidelines in practice and teaching for hypertension, dyslipidemia and asthma among clinical pharmacists.

Methods

Clinical pharmacists across the US were surveyed electronically over a two week period in Spring 2019 regarding utilization and knowledge of practice guidelines for hypertension, dyslipidemia, and asthma. Clinical cases were included to evaluate application of guidelines. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square analysis, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were conducted. Statistical significance level was set to 0.01 to account for multiple tests conducted on the same survey participants.

Results

Forty-eight, 34, and 28 pharmacists voluntarily completed hypertension, dyslipidemia, and asthma survey questions, respectively. Interactions by disease state (p < 0.001) revealed more pharmacists (93%) reporting to have ≤50% patient load in managing asthma and more pharmacists (95%) had read the full summary/report of the most recent hypertension guideline. Primary reasons why the most recent guideline was not selected were also significantly different by disease state (interaction; p < 0.001). For dyslipidemia and asthma, pharmacists had a higher mean rating of agreement (p < 0.007) in having the most confidence in the most recent as compared to older guidelines. Proportionally more clinical cases were answered correctly (interaction; p < 0.001) when pharmacists applied the most recent guideline for hypertension (84%), while the opposite outcome was found for asthma (27%).

Conclusion

While more pharmacists selected the most recent guideline for practice and teaching, there was inconsistent application of guidelines to clinical cases. Further studies with a larger representation of pharmacists are warranted to more definitively determine factors influencing guideline preference and usage.

Geographic variations in lipid-lowering therapy utilization, LDL-C levels, and proportion retrospectively meeting the ACC/AHA very high-risk criteria in a real-world population of patients with major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events in the United States

OBJECTIVE

We assessed national- and state-level geographic variations among patients with a history of ≥1 major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event in: (1) the proportion of patients with retrospectively identified 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline very high-risk (VHR) ASCVD criteria; (2) utilization of guideline-directed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT); and (3) the proportion of patients with persistent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) elevations despite statin and/or ezetimibe use.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using the Prognos LDL-C database linked to IQVIA longitudinal medical and prescription claims databases. The study period was from January 01, 2011, to November 30, 2019 and the index period was from January 01, 2016, to November 30, 2019; the index date was defined as the most recent LDL-C test during the index period. The study included patients aged ≥18 years at index who had a measured LDL-C level during the index period and had ≥1 inpatient/outpatient claim for ASCVD during the 5-year pre-index period.

RESULTS

Of patients with any ASCVD (N=4652,468), 1537,514 (33.1%) patients had ≥1 major ASCVD event. Among patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event, the VHR ASCVD criteria were retrospectively identified in 1139,018 (74.1%) patients; Hawaii had the highest (81.7%) and Colorado the lowest (65.0%) proportion of these patients. Nationally, 48.8% and 50.2% of patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event and retrospectively identified VHR ASCVD criteria, respectively, had current LLT use; Massachusetts and Colorado had the highest and lowest proportions, respectively. After standardizing for age and sex, 57.3% and 58.8% of patients with ≥1 major ASCVD event and retrospectively identified VHR ASCVD criteria, respectively, had LDL-C ≥70 mg/dL (≥1.8 mmol/L) despite statin and/or ezetimibe use, with substantial state-level variations observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights high rates of elevated LDL-C and pervasive underuse of LLT in health-insured patients with a history of major ASCVD events treated in the United States, with state-level geographic variations observed.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering in real-world patients treated with evolocumab

Background

Low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) is a risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). There are limited real‐world data on LDL‐C lowering with evolocumab in United States clinical practice.

Hypothesis

We assessed LDL‐C lowering during 1 year of evolocumab therapy.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used linked laboratory (Prognos) and medical claims (IQVIA Dx/LRx and PharMetrics Plus^®) data. Patients with a first fill for evolocumab between 7/1/2015 and 10/31/2019 (index event) and LDL‐C ≥ 70 mg/dL were included (overall cohort; N = 5897). Additionally, a patient subgroup with a recent myocardial infarction (MI) within 12 months (median 130 days) before the first evolocumab fill was identified (N = 152). Reduction from baseline LDL‐C was calculated based on the lowest LDL‐C value recorded during a 12‐month follow‐up period.

Results

The mean (SD) age was 65 (10) years; 61.9% of patients had ASCVD diagnoses and 70.7% of patients were in receipt of lipid‐lowering therapy. Following evolocumab treatment, changes in LDL‐C from baseline were −60% in the overall cohort (median [interquartile range (IQR)] 146 [115–180] mg/dL to 58 [36–84] mg/dL) and −65% in the recent MI subgroup (median [IQR] 137 [109–165] mg/dL to 48 [30–78] mg/dL). In the overall cohort and recent MI subgroup, 62.1% and 69.7% of patients achieved LDL‐C < 70 mg/dL, respectively.

Conclusions

In this real‐world analysis, evolocumab was associated with significant reductions in LDL‐C comparable to that seen in the FOURIER clinical trial, which were durable over 1 year of treatment.

Effect of Pharmacogenetic Testing for Statin Myopathy Risk vs Usual Care on Blood Cholesterol: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Nonadherence to statin guidelines is common. The solute carrier organic anion transporter family member 1B1 (SLCO1B1) genotype is associated with simvastatin myopathy risk and is proposed for clinical implementation. The unintended harms of using pharmacogenetic information to guide pharmacotherapy remain a concern for some stakeholders.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of delivering SLCO1B1 pharmacogenetic results to physicians on the effectiveness of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) prevention (measured by low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] levels) and concordance with prescribing guidelines for statin safety and effectiveness.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This randomized clinical trial was performed from December 2015 to July 2019 at 8 primary care practices in the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System. Participants included statin-naive patients with elevated ASCVD risk. Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to September 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

SLCO1B1 genotyping and results reporting to primary care physicians at baseline (intervention group) vs after 1 year (control group).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the 1-year change in LDL-C level. The secondary outcomes were 1-year concordance with American College of Cardiology-American Heart Association and Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for statin therapy and statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS).

RESULTS

Among 408 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.1 [7.8] years; 25 women [6.1%]), 193 were randomized to the intervention group and 215 were randomized to the control group. Overall, 120 participants (29%) had a SLCO1B1 genotype indicating increased simvastatin myopathy risk. Physicians offered statin therapy to 65 participants (33.7%) in the intervention group and 69 participants (32.1%) in the control group. Compared with patients whose physicians did not know their SLCO1B1 results at baseline, patients whose physicians received the results had noninferior reductions in LDL-C at 12 months (mean [SE] change in LDL-C, -1.1 [1.2] mg/dL in the intervention group and -2.2 [1.3] mg/dL in the control group; difference, -1.1 mg/dL; 90% CI, -4.1 to 1.8 mg/dL; P < .001 for noninferiority margin of 10 mg/dL). The proportion of patients with American College of Cardiology-American Heart Association guideline-concordant statin prescriptions in the intervention group was noninferior to that in the control group (12 patients [6.2%] vs 14 patients [6.5%]; difference, -0.003; 90% CI, -0.038 to 0.032; P < .001 for noninferiority margin of 15%). All patients in both groups were concordant with CPIC guidelines for safe statin prescribing. Physicians documented 2 and 3 cases of SAMS in the intervention and control groups, respectively, none of which was associated with a CPIC guideline-discordant prescription. Among patients with a decreased or poor SLCO1B1 transporter function genotype, simvastatin was prescribed to 1 patient in the control group but none in the intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Clinical testing and reporting of SLCO1B1 results for statin myopathy risk did not result in poorer ASCVD prevention in a routine primary care setting and may have been associated with physicians avoiding simvastatin prescriptions for patients at genetic risk for SAMS. Such an absence of harm should reassure stakeholders contemplating the clinical use of available pharmacogenetic results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02871934.

Adherence to Current Lipid Guidelines by Physicians in Kuwait

BACKGROUND

Alarmingly high rates of dyslipidemia have been found in the Gulf region in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome, with the highest being found in Kuwait (37%). Therefore, it is of utmost importance to treat dyslipidemia promptly and effectively. In an effort to understand the practices of local physicians, the use of evidence-based medicine, and adherence to lipid treatment guidelines, the objective of this study was to survey and assess the current standards of care.

METHODS

A survey questionnaire, designed to assess physicians' attitudes and practice towards lipid guidelines, was completed by 279 participants and returned between October 2015 and June 2016. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS.

RESULTS

Over 90% of physicians claimed to use lipid guidelines, with the majority rating themselves as knowledgeable. Younger physicians were found to be less knowledgeable and consequently used guidelines less frequently. The most important factor influencing clinical decision-making was the availability of clinical guidelines. The majority (72.4%) of physicians identified time limitation as a key barrier. The most commonly selected lipid guideline in daily practice was a guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol published by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association in 2013. The most common risk assessment tool used was the Framingham risk score.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple interventions to improve guideline adherence are proposed in this study. We have taken into account the barriers to adherence, i.e., attitude, behavior, and (most importantly) knowledge, all 3 of which were reaffirmed in our investigation in Kuwait.