Compliance with lipid-lowering therapy and its impact on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality

Differential Adherence to Free and Single-Pill Combination of Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe: Findings from a Real-World Analysis in Italy

INTRODUCTION

Adherence to cardiovascular drug treatment can significantly benefit from a reduced pill burden, but data on this matter derived from real-life settings are currently scanty. This analysis assessed the possible changes in adherence in patients treated with rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (ROS/EZE) as free multi-pill combination who switched to ROS/EZE as single-pill combination in the setting of real clinical practice in Italy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the administrative databases for a catchment area of about seven million health-assisted residents. Adults receiving ROS/EZE as a single-pill combination from January 2010 to June 2020 (followed up to 2021) were identified. The date of the first prescription of single-pill combination of ROS/EZE was considered as the index date. The analysis included the users of ROS/EZE as a free combination during the year before the index date. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were collected during the period of data availability prior to the index date. Adherence to therapy was evaluated as proportion of days covered (PDC), namely the percentage of days during which a patient had access to medication, in the 12-month interval preceding or following the index date (PDC < 25% non-adherence; PDC = 25-75% partial adherence; PDC > 75% adherence).

RESULTS

A total of 1219 patients (61.1% male, aged 66.2 ± 10.4 years) were included. Cardiovascular comorbidities were found in 83.3% of them, diabetes in 26.4%, and a combination of both in 16.2%. Single-pill combination of ROS/EZE was associated with a higher proportion of adherent patients compared to free-pill combination (75.2% vs 51.8%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world analysis suggested that switching from a regimen based on separate pills to one based on a single-pill combination resulted in improved adherence to ROS/EZE therapy.

Impact of poor medication adherence on clinical outcomes and health resource utilization in patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia: systematic review

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to summarize evidence on the effect of poor medication adherence on clinical outcomes and health resource utilization (HRU) among patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia.

AREAS COVERED

A systematic review of studies reporting clinical outcomes and HRU for patients by status of adherence to antihypertensives and/or lipid-lowering medications was searched using Embase, MEDLINE, and MEDLINE In-Process and supplemented by manual searches of conference abstracts. In total, 45 studies were included, with most being retrospective observational studies (n = 36). Patients with poor adherence to antihypertensives and lipid-lowering medications compared with those with good adherence showed less reduction of blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) after 6-12 months follow-up (∆ systolic BP: 1.2 vs. -4.5 mmHg; ∆LDL-c: -14.0 to -18.9 vs. -34.1 to -42.0 mg/dL). Poor adherence was also significantly associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events (HR: 1.1-1.9) and mortality (HR: 1.4-1.8) in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia and increased HRU (i.e. outpatient visits, risk of cardiovascular-related and all-cause hospitalization, annual inpatient days, total health-care costs).

EXPERT OPINION

Poor adherence is associated with poor clinical outcomes and increased HRU, highlighting the need to enhance medication adherence in patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia.

Adherence to Statin Among Diabetic Patients in Diabetic Centers in Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia

Background Dyslipidemia affects approximately one-third of Saudi Arabia's adult population. Dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes mellitus (DM), smoking, and a familial predisposition to cardiovascular disease (CVD) are significant risk factors for CVD. It can be prevented effectively through lifestyle changes and lifelong statin therapy; however, poor adherence limits its effectiveness. This study is designed to assess the level of adherence to statin prescription in patients with DM in diabetic centers in the Qassim region and to assess the factors associated with neglecting to take medication. Methodology A cross-sectional study was conducted among 226 diabetic patients who were prescribed statins. Medication adherence was assessed using the eight-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8). Demographic and clinical data were collected, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with medication adherence. Results Of the 226 patients, 29.7% had high adherence, 32.7% had medium adherence, and 37.6% had low adherence to statin medication. Patients diagnosed with diabetes for less than five years had the highest proportion of low adherence (41.2%). No significant associations were found between medication adherence and gender, nationality, or educational level. Conclusion The study found that medication adherence to statins in diabetic patients in the Al Qassim region of Saudi Arabia is suboptimal, with a significant proportion of patients having low adherence. Patients diagnosed with diabetes for less than five years had the highest proportion of low adherence, suggesting that patients with a shorter disease duration may require additional support or interventions to improve their medication adherence. Healthcare providers should emphasize the importance of medication adherence and work with patients to develop personalized treatment plans that include medication and lifestyle modifications to optimize lipid control and improve overall health outcomes in diabetic patients.

Statin adherence in patients with high cardiovascular risk: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Statin adherence is an essential problem although lifetime medication is recommended especially in patients with high cardiovascular risk. The importance of perceived risk as a predictor of adherence among cardiology patients has not been fully explored. This study aimed to test the importance of perceived risk as a predictor of statin adherence amongst hypercholesterolemic patients to identify predictors associated with poor adherence.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted at cardiology outpatient clinics of the University hospital in Ankara, Turkey. A total of 327 consecutive patients with high CV risk were recruited. Self-reported Morisky Green Levine Medication Adherence Scale was used to assess statin adherence.

RESULTS

Of the patients studied, 34.5% had concerns about side effects. Also, the mean age was 63.85 ± 11.29 years, 66.1% were men, 32.4% applied non-drug alternative therapies, 53.2% had a Mediterranean-style diet and 20.8% checked their lipid values irregularly. Participants reported 50.2% high, 30% moderate, and 19.9% low statin medication adherence. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), Total Cholesterol (TC), Triglyceride (TG) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) control rates were 44.6%, 74.3%, 61.5% and 41.6%. On multiple logistic regression, concern about side effects was associated with a statistically significant quadruple elevation of odds of non-adherence. Also, being male, former smokers, not having complementary interventions, having regular visits, being educated for more than 5 years, having low depressive symptom scores, living in a rural, being never or former smokers, employee were significant predictors of high medication adherence scores.

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of the patients reported high medication adherence. Proper strategies to improve adherence would include patient education efforts focused on patients with concerns about side effects and those who are female, less educated, current smokers, interested in complementary interventions, have irregular follow-up visits, and have depressive symptoms. Brief medication adherence scales may facilitate the assessment of patients' adherence.

Effects of diets containing proteins from fish muscles or fish by-products on the circulating cholesterol concentration in rodents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A high circulating cholesterol concentration is considered an important risk factor for the development of CVD. Since lean fish intake and fish protein supplementation have been associated with lower cholesterol concentration in some but not all clinical studies, the main aim of this study was to investigate the effect of diets containing proteins from fish muscles and fish by-products on the serum/plasma total cholesterol (TC) concentration in rodents. A systematic literature search was performed using the databases PubMed, Web of Science and Embase, structured around the population (rodents), intervention (type of fish and fraction, protein dose and duration), comparator (casein) and the primary outcome (circulating TC). Articles were assessed for risk of bias using the SYRCLE's tool. A meta-analysis was conducted in Review Manager v. 5·4·1 (the Cochrane Collaboration) to determine the effectiveness of proteins from fish on the circulating TC concentration. Thirty-nine articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, with data from 935 rodents. The risk of bias is unclear since few of the entries in the SYRCLE's tool were addressed. Consumption of proteins from fish resulted in a significantly lower circulating TC concentration when compared with control groups (mean difference -0·24 mmol/l, 95 % CI - 0·34, -0·15, P < 0·00001), with high statistical heterogeneity (I² = 71 %). To conclude, proteins from fish muscles and by-products show promise as a functional dietary ingredient or supplement by preventing high cholesterol concentration in rodents, thus reducing one of the most important risk factors for developing CVD.

Evaluation of the Therapeutic Pattern and Pharmaco-Utilization in Hypercholesterolemic Patients Treated with Statins: A Retrospective Study on Italian Real-World Data

Purpose

The study aimed to analyze, in hypercholesterolemic patients under statin medication, patient characteristics and their lipid profile at baseline, the therapeutic pathway, and the pharmaco-utilization, using real-world data in Italy.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective study was conducted using administrative databases of a sample of entities covering 6.5 million health-assisted individuals. Between January 2010 and June 2019, patients with non-familial hypercholesterolemia (nFH) were identified by 1) ≥1 low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) measurement (LDL-C assessment date was the index-date) and 2) statin prescription during 6 months before the index-date (pharmaco-utilization period). FH patients were defined by LDL-C evaluation, statin treatment during the pharmaco-utilization period, and a score ≥6 according to the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network criteria. nFH patients were divided into four exclusive cohorts based on CV-risk class: 1) with previous CV disease (CVD); 2) with diabetes mellitus; 3) with mixed-dyslipidemia diagnosis; 4) in primary-prevention. Based on LDL-C index values, patient was defined with LDL-C “controlled” if its levels were ≤70mg/dl (CVD), ≤100mg/dl (diabetes, FH), ≤130mg/dl (mixed-dyslipidemia, primary-prevention).

Results

Overall 164,161 nFH patients were included (mean age 72 years, 51% male); of these, 46,782 (28.5%) were CVD (mean age 74 years, 66% male), 34,803 (21.2%) were diabetic (mean age 72 years, 51% male), 1617 (1%) were with mixed-dyslipidemia (mean age 71 years, 48% male) and 80,959 (49.3%) were in primary-prevention (mean age 71 years, 42% male). The proportion of nFH patients with controlled LDL-C was 41.2% for CVD, 73.6% for diabetic, 80.7% for mixed-dyslipidemia, and 79.5% for primary-prevention patients; 49% of nFH patients were adherent to therapy. Overall, 1287 FH patients (mean age 64 years, 42% male) were included; in 39.2% of the patients, LDL-C was controlled, and 44% of the patients were adherent to therapy.

Conclusion

The results of this study highlighted non-optimal therapeutic management of hypercholesterolemic patients in Italian clinical practice, with a notable quote of patients non-adherent to therapy.

Factors Associated with Medication Non-Adherence in Patients with Dyslipidemia

Lack of medication adherence among patients with dyslipidemia negatively affects health-related outcomes. This study aims to evaluate medication adherence; we also aim to investigate the predictors of non-adherence among patients with dyslipidemia in Jordan. Medication adherence was evaluated in a total of 228 dyslipidemia patients. The Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire was also used to assess patients' beliefs about medications. The majority of the current study participants (73.2%) reported non-adherence to the prescribed medications. There were significant negative associations between medication adherence and concerns of prescription drug use (B = -0.41, p-value < 0.01), duration of dyslipidemia (B = -0.22, p-value < 0.01), and the number of medications (B = -0.64, p-value < 0.01). Positive associations were found between medication adherence and the necessity of prescription drug use (B = 0.43, p-value < 0.01), taking statin and fibrate (B = 2.04, p-value < 0.01), and moderate-intensity statin (B = 2.34, p-value < 0.01). As for patients' beliefs about medications, the item "My medicine to lower my cholesterol disrupted my life" had the highest mean (3.50 ± 0.99). This study revealed a low adherence rate to medication among patients with dyslipidemia. It also demonstrates modifiable factors such as beliefs regarding perceived risk, medication harms, treatment duration, and the number of medications associated with poor adherence in patients with dyslipidemia.

Assessing forgetfulness and polypharmacy and their impact on health-related quality of life among patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia in Greece during the COVID-19 pandemic

Purpose

We estimate the association between forgetfulness to take medications as prescribed and polypharmacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among a cohort of patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia or both in Greece during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A telephone survey of 1018 randomly selected adults was conducted in Greece in June 2020. Participants were included in the survey, if they (a) had a diagnosis of hypertension, dyslipidemia or both and (b) were on prescription treatment for these conditions. HRQoL was calculated using the short form (SF) -12 Patient Questionnaire. A multivariable generalized linear regression model (GLM) was used to estimate the association between forgetfulness and polypharmacy and HRQoL, controlling for sociodemographic and health-related covariates.

Results

Overall, 351 respondents met the inclusion criteria, of whom 28 did not fully complete the questionnaire (response rate: 92%, n = 323). Of those, 37% were diagnosed with hypertension only, 28% with dyslipidemia only, and 35% with both. Most reported good to average physical (64.1%) and mental health (48.6%). Overall, 25% indicated that they sometimes forget to take their prescribed medications, and 12% took two or more pills multiple times daily. Total HRQoL score was 68.9% (s.d. = 18.0%). About 10% of participants reported paying less attention to their healthcare condition during the pandemic. Estimates of multivariable analyses indicated a negative association between forgetfulness (− 9%, adjusted β: − 0.047, 95% confidence interval − 0.089 to − 0.005, p = 0.029), taking two or more pills multiple times daily compared to one pill once a day (− 16%, adjusted β: − 0.068, 95% confidence interval − 0.129 to − 0.008, p = 0.028) and total HRQoL.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that among adult patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia or both in Greece, those who forget to take their medications and those with more complex treatment regimens had lower HRQoL. Such patients merit special attention and require targeted approaches by healthcare providers to improve treatment compliance and health outcomes.

Association between Patient Experience and Medication Compliance of Dyslipidemia: Using Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2015)

Background

This study aimed to examine the relationship between patient experience and medication compliance of patients with dyslipidemia.

Methods

Based on data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in 2015, the study examined 764 patients treated with dyslipidemia medication. Subjects who responded to the question “Do you currently take medication to lower your blood cholesterol?” with “daily taking” were categorized as the compliant group, and the remaining subjects were classified under the non-compliant group. The patient experience survey included four indicators, in which subjects were divided into groups with a positive and negative patient experience. Data on sociodemographic factors, health-related behaviors, and self-reported comorbid conditions were also collected.

Results

After adjusting the variables, the group with a positive response for the patient experience indicator “doctor spends enough time with the patient during consultation” was 1.89 times more compliant than the group with a negative response (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03–3.48; P=0.04). For the indicator “doctor provides easy-to-understand explanations,” the group that showed a positive response was 2.74 times more compliant than the group with a negative response (95% CI, 1.39–5.39; P=0.004). For the indicator “doctor involves patients in decisions about care or treatment,” the group that showed a positive response was 2.07 times more compliant than the group with a negative response (95% CI, 1.02–4.22; P=0.04). However, for the indicator “doctor provides the patient a chance to ask questions about treatment,” positive patient experience had no significant association with medication compliance (95% CI, 0.77–2.36; P=0.30).

Conclusion

Building a good doctor-patient relationship with positive patient experiences can result in better outcomes for patient care through high medication compliance.

Intentionality in adherence to long-term therapies. Results from an online survey of 3,001 patients with cardio-metabolic pathologies in France

PURPOSE

Some patients make a rational choice not to follow medical prescriptions; others fail to take their medications for reasons beyond their control, such as mere forgetfulness or a weak medication routine. The aim of this study was to elucidate the functioning of patient intentionality in medication adherence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This online study was conducted in metropolitan France in 2019. A cross-sectional survey of 50 questions was conducted with 3001 respondents diagnosed with diabetes, hypertension, and/or hypercholesterolemia identified from a panel of 54,000 people. These questions included a validated six-item questionnaire to detect nonadherence, two questions to detect intentional nonadherence by patients, and three questions on the effects of habit. Our questionnaire also included questions on the feelings of respondents regarding their doctor's attitude to their problems and needs, their trust in general practitioners (GP) and specialists, their sense of being involved in treatment decisions, and the influence of side effects and habits on patients' adherence. This study used the strategy of focusing on strictly adherent patients in the hope of finding ways to improve adherence. For this reason, we defined adherence as the absence of a positive response to the 6-item nonadherence screening questionnaire.

RESULTS

Of 3001 respondents, 1804 were diagnosed with hypertension, 1458 with hypercholesterolemia, and 774 with diabetes. Of the total number of patients, 72% were afflicted with one disease, 21% with two ailments, and 7% with three simultaneous illnesses. One-third (33%) of the patients did not tender a positive answer to the adherence questionnaire and were deemed adherent. 1) Thirty-two percent of the patients reported occasionally omitting their medication deliberately, and 84% said they had a reason for missing doses. These statements suggesting intentional nonadherence were negatively associated with adherence as identified via multivariate analysis (P = 0.0012 and P < 0.0001, for the first and second statement, respectively). 2) Univariate analyses revealed strong associations (P < 0.0001) between strict adherence on one hand and lack of intentional nonadherence, patient age, absence of drug side effects, taking drugs by habit, feeling involved in treatment decisions, getting information about treatment, and disease, and trust in doctors, on the other hand. 3) Specifically, univariate analysis of the absence of reported side effects revealed strong associations (P < 0.0001) with adequate information about medicines and diseases and trust in GP. These original data were consistent with the concept of the nocebo effect. 4) We observed a strong association between the absence of intentional nonadherence (statement of never deliberately missing medication) and respondent statements about generally sticking to the routine (P < 0.0001), ie, "I take my medication because I am used to taking it." This important result suggests that patients are strictly adherent in two ways: the absence of intentional nonadherence and reliance on habit, which we term as "unintentional adherence." 5) Finally, a multiple correspondence analysis illustrated all statistically significant relationships found in this study.

CONCLUSION

We present a new global model of adherence in which patient adherence was improved both by reducing intentional nonadherence and by promoting the abovementioned unintentional adherence by habit. This model highlights the role of shared decision-making and the trust felt by patients in their doctors. These results could exert a major impact on medical practice and education by demonstrating the importance of physicians' attitudes, involving the patient in decisions (shared decision-making), offering information about medicines and diseases (patient education), understanding the problems of patients, and taking their needs into account (empathy). The development of these attitudes should be an important aspect of the medical curricula.

[Hospital medication adherence scale development in cardiovascular disorders]

OBJECTIVES

The consequences of non-adherence to prescribed cardiovascular drugs can be serious, with cardiovascular complications having been reported in both secondary and primary prevention. The objective of this study was to develop a new scale to assess medication adherence in patients with cardiovascular diseases during their hospitalization.

METHODS

A cohort of 219 high risk cardiovascular patients was evaluated for this study. Data on reasons for non-adherence were collected using the newly developed Medication Adherence Scale in Cardiovascular disorders (Mascard) and compared with physician assessment during medical consultations and the control of their cardiovascular risk factors.

RESULTS

The Mascard consists of 5 items has good psychometric properties and validity and correlated with physician assessment and control of cardiovascular risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This rapid and easy to use scale may be useful for health care practitioners in their assessment of medication adherence in inpatients with cardiovascular disorders.

Co-occurring reasons for medication nonadherence within subgroups of patients with hyperlipidemia

Medication nonadherence is a significant clinical problem among individuals taking statins. Poor adherence is often attributable to several reasons, yet most adherence interventions target a single reason. Baseline data were examined from a randomized clinical trial of 236 patients with hyperlipidemia. A latent class analysis was then performed on patients reporting any nonadherence (n = 109). A 4-class solution provided the most optimal fit and differentiation of classes. Class 1 (N = 59, 54%) included patients who reported occasionally forgetting. Class 2 (N = 16, 14%) represented patients who were concerned about side effects. Class 3 (N = 17, 16%) represented patients who reported out-of-routine life events as contributing to nonadherence. Class 4 (N = 17, 16%) represented patients who endorsed a large number reasons indiscriminately. Class membership was almost uniformly unrelated to any patient demographic factors or treatment arm. Each cluster of reasons defining these patients may be best addressed through different intervention strategies.

Socioeconomic inequality in medication persistence in primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease - A population-wide electronic cohort study

Background

Coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality in England fell by 36% between 2000 and 2007 and it is estimated that approximately 50% of the fall was due to improved treatment uptake. Marked socio-economic inequalities in CHD mortality in the United Kingdom (UK) remain, with higher age-adjusted rates in more deprived groups. Inequalities in the persistence of medication for primary and secondary prevention of CHD may contribute to the observed social gradient and we investigated this possibility in the population of Wales (UK).

Methods and findings

An electronic cohort of individuals aged over 20 (n = 1,199,342) in Wales (UK) was formed using linked data from primary and secondary care and followed for six years (2004–2010). We identified indications for medication (statins, aspirin, ACE inhibitors, clopidogrel) recommended in UK National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance for CHD (high risk, stable angina, stable angina plus diabetes, unstable angina, and myocardial infarction) and measured the persistence of indicated medication (time from initiation to discontinuation) across quintiles of the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation, an area-based measure of socio-economic inequality, using Cox regression frailty models. In models adjusted for demographic factors, CHD risk and comorbidities across 15 comparisons for persistence of the medications, none favoured the least deprived quintile, two favoured the most deprived quintile and 13 showed no significant differences.

Conclusions

During our study period (2004–2010) we found no significant evidence of socio-economic inequality in the persistence of recommended medication for primary and secondary prevention of CHD.

Endocrine Treatment of Gender-Dysphoric/Gender-Incongruent Persons: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

OBJECTIVE

To update the "Endocrine Treatment of Transsexual Persons: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline," published by the Endocrine Society in 2009.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants include an Endocrine Society-appointed task force of nine experts, a methodologist, and a medical writer.

EVIDENCE

This evidence-based guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to describe the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. The task force commissioned two systematic reviews and used the best available evidence from other published systematic reviews and individual studies.

CONSENSUS PROCESS

Group meetings, conference calls, and e-mail communications enabled consensus. Endocrine Society committees, members and cosponsoring organizations reviewed and commented on preliminary drafts of the guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Gender affirmation is multidisciplinary treatment in which endocrinologists play an important role. Gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons seek and/or are referred to endocrinologists to develop the physical characteristics of the affirmed gender. They require a safe and effective hormone regimen that will (1) suppress endogenous sex hormone secretion determined by the person's genetic/gonadal sex and (2) maintain sex hormone levels within the normal range for the person's affirmed gender. Hormone treatment is not recommended for prepubertal gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons. Those clinicians who recommend gender-affirming endocrine treatments-appropriately trained diagnosing clinicians (required), a mental health provider for adolescents (required) and mental health professional for adults (recommended)-should be knowledgeable about the diagnostic criteria and criteria for gender-affirming treatment, have sufficient training and experience in assessing psychopathology, and be willing to participate in the ongoing care throughout the endocrine transition. We recommend treating gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent adolescents who have entered puberty at Tanner Stage G2/B2 by suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists. Clinicians may add gender-affirming hormones after a multidisciplinary team has confirmed the persistence of gender dysphoria/gender incongruence and sufficient mental capacity to give informed consent to this partially irreversible treatment. Most adolescents have this capacity by age 16 years old. We recognize that there may be compelling reasons to initiate sex hormone treatment prior to age 16 years, although there is minimal published experience treating prior to 13.5 to 14 years of age. For the care of peripubertal youths and older adolescents, we recommend that an expert multidisciplinary team comprised of medical professionals and mental health professionals manage this treatment. The treating physician must confirm the criteria for treatment used by the referring mental health practitioner and collaborate with them in decisions about gender-affirming surgery in older adolescents. For adult gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons, the treating clinicians (collectively) should have expertise in transgender-specific diagnostic criteria, mental health, primary care, hormone treatment, and surgery, as needed by the patient. We suggest maintaining physiologic levels of gender-appropriate hormones and monitoring for known risks and complications. When high doses of sex steroids are required to suppress endogenous sex steroids and/or in advanced age, clinicians may consider surgically removing natal gonads along with reducing sex steroid treatment. Clinicians should monitor both transgender males (female to male) and transgender females (male to female) for reproductive organ cancer risk when surgical removal is incomplete. Additionally, clinicians should persistently monitor adverse effects of sex steroids. For gender-affirming surgeries in adults, the treating physician must collaborate with and confirm the criteria for treatment used by the referring physician. Clinicians should avoid harming individuals (via hormone treatment) who have conditions other than gender dysphoria/gender incongruence and who may not benefit from the physical changes associated with this treatment.

Factors Affecting Adherence to Statins in Hypercholesterolemic Kuwaiti Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

This study examined statin adherence amongst Kuwaiti hypercholesterolemic patients in order to identify factors associated with poor adherence and to determine whether or not an association exists between statin adherence and the risk profile of coronary heart disease (CHD).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Two hundred hypercholesterolemic patients (30-69 years of age) were recruited from Kuwaiti primary healthcare clinics and interviewed about demographic characteristics, pre-existing self-reported medical conditions and prescribed medications. The Morisky Medication Adherence Scale was used to assess statin adherence (a self-reported, medication-adherence questionnaire divided into 3 levels, with a score of 8 denoting high adherence, 6 to <8 denoting medium adherence and <6 denoting low adherence). Data regarding anthropometric, psychological and serum risk factors were collected using 2 additional questionnaires, laboratory tests and bioelectrical impedance scales. Binary logistic regression was used to determine predictors of adherence and general linear modelling was used to test relationships between continuous outcomes and statin adherence.

RESULTS

Of the 200 participants, 117 (58.5%) reported low adherence, 83 (41.5%) reported medium adherence and no patients (0%) scored high adherence. Younger patients (aged 30-50 years) had lower adherence than older patients (>50 years) [odds ratio (OR) 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.09] for every extra year; p < 0.01). Those without diabetes, i.e. 113 (56.5%), were less likely to report medium adherence than those with diabetes (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.23-0.75; p < 0.01). Low statin adherence was associated with higher levels of plasma cholesterol (p < 0.001) and low-density lipoprotein (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In this study, there was a high prevalence of low statin adherence, especially among younger patients with fewer concomitant diseases. The results indicated an inverse relationship between statin adherence and CHD risk profile.

Management of Hypercholesterolemia, Appropriateness of Therapeutic Approaches and New Drugs in Patients with High Cardiovascular Risk

Control of lipid levels is one of the most effective strategies for cardiovascular (CV) event prevention. In fact, many clinical trials have clearly demonstrated that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering, primarily with statins, reduces major CV events and mortality. The evidence from these trials has been useful in designing the cholesterol treatment guidelines, which are mainly aimed at preventing and managing cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, available data indicate that a large proportion of patients fail to achieve lipid goals, and this is particularly frequent in patients at high or very high CV risk. Furthermore, owing to side effects, a significant percentage of patients cannot tolerate statin treatment. Hence, researchers have focused their attention on novel LDL-C-lowering agents that act via mechanisms distinct from that of statins. Among the new compounds under investigation, the monoclonal antibodies to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) seem particularly promising, having recently been shown to be well tolerated and highly effective at lowering LDL-C, with a possible effect on the occurrence of CV events. Currently, alirocumab is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as an adjunct to diet and maximally tolerated statin therapy for use in adults with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) or those with atherosclerotic CV disease who require additional LDL-C lowering; it has also been recently approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for use in patients with heterozygous FH, non–familial hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia in whom statins are ineffective or not tolerated. Evolocumab is approved by the FDA as an adjunct to diet and maximally tolerated statins for adults with hetero- and homozygous FH and those with atherosclerotic CV disease who require additional lowering of LDL-C, and by the EMA in adults with primary hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia, as an adjunct to diet, in combination with a statin or a statin with other lipid lowering therapies in patients unable to reach LDL-C goals with the maximum tolerated dose of a statin; alone or in combination with other lipid lowering therapies in patients who are statin-intolerant, or those for whom a statin is contraindicated. Evolocumab is also indicated in adults and adolescents aged 12 years and over with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia in combination with other lipid-lowering therapies.

A contemporary cross-sectional study on dyslipidemia management, cardiovascular risk status, and patients' quality of life in Greece: The CHALLENGE study

BACKGROUND

Prior studies conducted in Greece consistently indicate that dyslipidemia is suboptimally managed, while the burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and related risk factors is rising.

METHODS

CHALLENGE was a multicenter, cross-sectional study carried out following the publication of guidelines advocating stricter low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets. It primarily aimed to depict LDL-C target attainment, and to assess the cardiovascular risk status and quality of life (QoL) of patients treated in a primary or secondary CVD prevention setting who had received any medical intervention for cardiovascular risk modification within 6months of enrollment.

RESULTS

Between December 2012 and April 2013, 500 patients (55% males) aged (mean±SD) 62.0±11.7years, participated in the study. Cardiovascular risk according to the 2011 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines was 'very high', 'high', and 'moderate' in 61.2%, 23.4%, and 15.4%, respectively. Overall, 92.0% of patients were on lipid-lowering treatment, yet only 23.3% had attained their ESC/EAS-defined LDL-C target. LDL-C target attainment was more likely among 'moderate' versus 'very high' cardiovascular risk patients (odds ratio: 4.04; 95% confidence interval: 2.32-7.06; p<0.001). QoL improved as cardiovascular risk decreased (EQ-VAS 71.8±16.2 in the 'very high' versus 78.3±15.1 and 80.3±15.7 in the 'high' and 'moderate' risk groups; p<0.001). Time constraints and difficulties in implementation in daily practice were the investigator's main barriers for guideline utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

During contemporary management of dyslipidemia in Greece, LDL-C target attainment is suboptimal. There is an undoubted need for improvement and implementation of cardiovascular risk assessment in routine clinical practice.

Suboptimal Control of Lipid Levels: Results from 29 Countries Participating in the Centralized Pan-Regional Surveys on the Undertreatment of Hypercholesterolaemia (CEPHEUS)

AIM

Five multicentre, cross-sectional Centralized Pan-Regional Surveys on the Undertreatment of Hypercholesterolaemia (CEPHEUS) were conducted in 29 countries across Asia, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. The surveys assessed the current use and efficacy of lipid-lowering drugs (LLDs) worldwide and identified possible patient and physician characteristics associated with failure to attain low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals. The aim of this analysis was to consolidate the global results from these surveys.

METHODS

The surveys involved patients aged ≥18 years who had been prescribed LLDs for at least 3 months without dose changes for at least 6 weeks. A single visit was scheduled for data collection, including fasting plasma lipid and glucose levels. Cardiovascular risk profile and LDL-C goal attainment were assessed according to the 2004 updated US National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines.

RESULTS

In total, 35 121 patients (mean age: 60.4 years) were included, and 90.3% had been prescribed statin monotherapy. Overall, only 49.4% of patients reached their recommended LDL-C level. LDL-C goals were attained in 54.8% (5084/9273) and 22.8% (3287/14 429) of patients were at high and very high cardiovascular risk, respectively. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of LDL-C goal attainment were lower baseline cardiovascular risk; presence of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or history of cardiovascular disease; and treatment with simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin (vs. all other LLDs).

CONCLUSION

LDL-C goal attainment in patients taking LLDs is suboptimal worldwide, particularly in patients at high and very high cardiovascular risk.

Treatment Gap in the National Health-screening Program in Korea: Claim-based Follow-up of Statin Use for Sustained Hypercholesterolemia

Participation in a screening program by itself may not improve clinical outcomes. Treatment gaps in the program may limit its full benefit. We evaluated statin prescription rates for subjects with sustained hypercholesterolemia to assess the treatment gaps in the National Health Screening Program (NHSP) in Korea. A retrospective, random cohort was established among National Health Insurance Corporation (NHIC) members. Finally, we examined 465,499 individuals who attended the NHSP from 2003 to 2010 without any history of dyslipidemia, statin prescription, or hospitalization for cardiovascular events until the end of 2002. The subsequent statin prescription rates were identified from the NHIC medical service claim database from 2003 to 2011. Descriptive data and odds ratio from multivariate logistic analyses on statin prescription rates and the corresponding correlations were evaluated. The NHSP detected 114,085 (24.5%) cases of newly diagnosed hypercholesterolemia. However, only 8.6% of these received statin prescription within 6 months of diagnosis. For cases of sustained hypercholesterolemia determined in the next screening visit by the NHSP, the statin prescription rate increased, but only to 12.2%. Statin prescriptions were more common among females, older individuals, and hypertension or diabetes patients. Furthermore, the statin prescription rates had increased over the study period. The NHSP exhibited low statin prescription rate which has been improving. For the NHSP to be effective, it would be worthwhile to decrease the gap between the diagnosis of hypercholesterolemia and the following treatment.

Impact of statin adherence on cardiovascular disease and mortality outcomes: a systematic review

AIMS

While suboptimal adherence to statin medication has been quantified in real-world patient settings, a better understanding of its impact is needed, particularly with respect to distinct problems of medication taking. Our aim was to synthesize current evidence on the impacts of statin adherence, discontinuation and persistence on cardiovascular disease and mortality outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed studies using a mapped search of Medline, Embase and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases. Observational studies that met the following criteria were included: defined patient population;statin adherence exposure; defined study outcome [i.e. cardiovascular disease (CVD), mortality]; and reporting of statin-specific results.

RESULTS

Overall, 28 studies were included, with 19 studies evaluating outcomes associated with statin adherence, six with statin discontinuation and three with statin persistence. Among adherence studies, the proportion of days covered was the most widely used measure, with the majority of studies reporting increased risk of CVD (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.22 to 5.26)and mortality (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.25 to 2.54) among non-adherent individuals. There was greater methodological variability in discontinuation and persistence studies. However, findings of increased CVD (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.22 to 1.67) and mortality (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.79 to 5.00) among nonpersistent individuals were also consistently reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Observational studies consistently report an increased risk of adverse outcomes associated with poor statin adherence. These findings have important implications for patients and physicians and emphasize the importance of monitoring and encouraging adherence to statin therapy.

Lipid target achievement among patients with very high and high cardiovascular risk in a lipid clinic

This was a retrospective study that assessed achievement of lipid-lowering treatment targets in the setting of a University Hospital Lipid Clinic. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment according to National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) and European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines was recorded in 1000 consecutive adult patients followed for ≥3 years (mean 8 years). The LDL-C targets according to the NCEP ATP III were attained by 66% and 86% of patients with "very high" (n = 477) and "high" (n = 408) cardiovascular risk, respectively. Fewer patients were within LDL-C goals according to the ESC/EAS guidelines: 25% and 42%. Overall, 92% of the patients were on statins: 67% were on statin monotherapy, while 33% were on combinations with ezetimibe (25%), ω-3 fatty acids (5%), fibrates (4%), or colesevelam (2%). Even in a specialist lipid clinic, a large proportion of patients are not at goal according to the recent ESC/EAS guidelines.

Negative impact of physician prescribed drug dosing schedule requirements on patient adherence to cardiovascular drugs

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine whether dosing schedule requirements impair overall cardiovascular drug adherence.

METHODS

A cohort study was performed with hospitalized patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease between April and September 2011. Patients were asked whether the prescribed time for taking their statin and antiplatelet drugs created any inconvenience in their daily routine and, if so, were asked to describe the reasons. Patient adherence to treatment was assessed using the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8). A cohort of physicians was separately studied between June and September 2011. Physicians were interviewed to determine their dosing schedule preference when prescribing statin and anti-platelet drugs, and the rationale for choosing a specific dosing schedule.

RESULTS

In the study, 103 patients and 59 physicians were included. Statins were most frequently prescribed in the evening (90%). Thienopyridines were prescribed both at lunch time (41%) and in the morning (35%). Aspirin was most frequently (65.3%) prescribed at lunch time. In total, 24.3% of patients reported being inconvenienced by their drug dosing schedule, and these subjects were less adherent to their drug regimen than those who did not report inconvenience (46.2% versus 16.7%, p = 0.014). Our results also demonstrate that there is no pharmacologic rationale for prescribing a particular drug dosing schedule for statin or anti-platelet drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians should assess patient convenience, when prescribing medication, to optimize treatment adherence.

Socioeconomic status and nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although conventional wisdom suggests that low socioeconomic status (SES) is a robust predictor of medication nonadherence, the strength of this association remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

1) To estimate the proportion of studies that identified SES as a potential risk indicator of nonadherence, 2) to describe the type of SES measurements, and 3) to quantify the association between SES and nonadherence to antihypertensive pharmacotherapy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis research design was used. We searched multiple electronic databases for studies in English or French examining nonadherence to antihypertensive medications measured by electronic prescription databases where explanatory factors were considered. Two authors independently assessed quality, described the SES measure(s), and recorded its association with nonadherence to antihypertensives. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed, and heterogeneity was examined by using the I(2) statistic.

RESULTS

Fifty-six studies with 4,780,293 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four of these studies (43%) did not report any SES measures. When it was reported (n = 32), only seven (13%) examined more than one component but none performed a multidimensional assessment. Most of the studies relied on income or income-related measures (such as prescription-drug benefits or co-payments) (27 of 32 [84%]). Meta-analysis could be quantified in 40 cohorts reported in 30 studies. Overall, the pooled adjusted risk estimate for nonadherence according to SES (high vs. low) was 0.89 (95% confidence interval 0.87-0.92; I(2) = 95%; P < 0.001). Similar patterns were observed in all subgroups examined.

CONCLUSIONS

Published studies have not found a strong association between low SES and nonadherence to antihypertensive medications. However, important limitations in the assessment of SES can be identified in virtually all studies. Future studies are required to ascertain whether a stronger association is observed when SES is determined by comprehensive measures.

Efficacy and safety of alternate day therapy with atorvastatin and fenofibrate combination in mixed dyslipidemia: a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The long half-life of atorvastatin and fenofibrate makes them suitable for alternate day therapy. Hence, we aimed to study the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of alternate day therapy with atorvastatin and fenofibrate combination in mixed dyslipidemia.

METHODS

Eligible patients with mixed dyslipidemia were randomly allotted into 2 equal parallel groups-alternate day therapy group (group 1) and daily therapy group (group 2). Patients in groups 1 and 2 received fixed dose combination of atorvastatin 10 mg and fenofibrate 160 mg on alternate days and daily, respectively, for 12 weeks. Mean percentage change from baseline in triglycerides (TGLs), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), HDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and TC-HDL ratio, incidence of adverse effects, and cost-effectiveness were compared in both the groups.

RESULTS

Among 110 patients randomized, 99 completed the study till 12 weeks treatment duration. The TGLs, non-HDL-C, TC, and LDL-C decreased by 56.4%, 49.7%, 36.5%, and 39.2%, respectively, in alternate day therapy group and by 57.5%, 51.2%, 37.5%, and 39.4%, respectively, in daily therapy group. The HDL-C levels increased by 20.1% in alternate day therapy group compared to 21.8% in daily therapy group. No statistically significant difference was seen between both the groups in mean percentage change in lipid parameters from baseline to end of 12 weeks. Incidence of adverse events was reasonably less in alternate day therapy group.

CONCLUSION

Alternate day therapy with atorvastatin-fenofibrate combination is an effective and safe alternative to daily therapy in mixed dyslipidemia. Apart from significant cost savings, reasonable reduction in the incidence of adverse events is seen with alternate day regimen. However, larger studies are needed to more reliably confirm our interesting but preliminary results.

Older patient, physician and pharmacist perspectives about community pharmacists' roles

OBJECTIVES

To investigate older patient, physician and pharmacist perspectives about the role of pharmacists in pharmacist-patient interactions.

METHODS

Eight focus-group discussions were held in senior centres, community pharmacies and primary care physician offices. Participants were 42 patients aged 63 years and older, 17 primary care physicians and 13 community pharmacists. Qualitative analysis of the focus-group discussions was performed.

KEY FINDINGS

Participants in all focus groups indicated that pharmacists are a good resource for basic information about medications. Physicians appreciated pharmacists' ability to identify drug interactions, yet did not comment on other specific aspects related to patient education and care. Physicians noted that pharmacists often were hindered by time constraints that impeded patient counselling. Both patient and pharmacist participants indicated that patients often asked pharmacists to expand upon, reinforce and explain physician-patient conversations about medications, as well as to evaluate medication appropriateness and physician treatment plans. These groups also noted that patients confided in pharmacists about medication-related problems before contacting physicians. Pharmacists identified several barriers to patient counselling, including lack of knowledge about medication indications and physician treatment plans.

CONCLUSIONS

Community-based pharmacists may often be presented with opportunities to address questions that can affect patient medication use. Older patients, physicians and pharmacists all value greater pharmacist participation in patient care. Suboptimal information flow between physicians and pharmacists may hinder pharmacist interactions with patients and detract from patient medication management. Interventions to integrate pharmacists into the patient healthcare team could improve patient medication management.

Determining the feasibility of objective adherence measurement with blister packaging smart technology

PURPOSE

The results of a feasibility study of blister-pack smart technology for monitoring medication adherence are reported.

METHODS

Research in the area of objective therapy compliance measurement has led to the development of microprocessor-driven systems that record the time a unit dose is removed from blister packaging. One device under development is the Smart Blister-a label imprinted with event-detection circuitry that can be affixed to standard commercial blister cards. In the first trial of the device in actual clinical practice, 115 community-dwelling Dutch patients receiving valsartan maintenance therapy (160 mg once daily) were given 14-day blister packages equipped with the Smart Blister. On the return of empty blister cards to the 20 participating community pharmacies, the stored information was scanned and downloaded for data analysis and patient counseling purposes.

RESULTS

A total of 245 Smart Blister-equipped packages were used by valsartan recipients during the eight-month study. The device was largely effective in recording patient and blister-card identification data and other desired information. However, in 17% of cases, the Smart Blister system registered multiple tablet-removal events at the same time, presumably indicating unintentional breakage of nearby conductive circuits and the need for design refinements. The Smart Blister-equipped medication cards were generally well received by patients and pharmacies.

CONCLUSION

An evaluation of the functionality and robustness of the Smart Blister in a real-world clinical practice situation yielded some promising results, but the findings also indicated a need for design refinements and additional performance testing of the device.

Provider views about responsibility for medication adherence and content of physician-older patient discussions

OBJECTIVES

To investigate provider opinions about responsibility for medication adherence and examine physician-patient interactions to illustrate how adherence discussions are initiated.

DESIGN

Focus group discussions with healthcare providers and audio taped outpatient office visits with a separate group of providers.

SETTING

Focus group participants were recruited from multispecialty practice groups in New Jersey and Washington, District of Columbia. Outpatient office visits were conducted in primary care offices in Northern California.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-two healthcare providers participated in focus group discussions. One hundred patients aged 65 and older and 28 primary care physicians had their visits audio taped.

MEASUREMENTS

Inductive content analysis of focus groups and audio taped encounters.

RESULTS

Focus group analyses indicated that providers feel responsible for assessing medication adherence during office visits and for addressing mutable factors underlying nonadherence, but they also believed that patients were ultimately responsible for taking medications and voiced reluctance about confronting patients about nonadherence. The 100 patients participating in audio taped encounters were taking a total of 410 medications. Of these, 254 (62%) were discussed in a way that might address adherence; physicians made simple inquiries about current patient medication use for 31.5%, but they made in-depth inquiries about adherence for only 4.3%. Of 39 identified instances of nonadherence, patients spontaneously disclosed 51%.

CONCLUSION

The lack of intrusive questions about medication taking during office visits may reflect poor provider recognition of the questions needed to assess adherence fully. Alternatively, provider beliefs about patient responsibility for adherence may hinder detailed queries. A paradigm of joint provider-patient responsibility may be needed to better guide discussions about medication adherence.

Implementation of patient education at first and second dispensing of statins in Dutch community pharmacies: the sequel of a cluster randomized trial

Background

As a result of the previous part of this trial, many patients with cardiovascular disease were expected to receive a statin for the first time. In order to provide these patients with comprehensive information on statins, as recommended by professional guidance, education at first and second dispensing of statins had to be implemented. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of an intensive implementation program targeted at pharmacy project assistants on the frequency of providing education at first dispensing (EAFD) and education at second dispensing (EASD) of statins in community pharmacies.

Methods

The participating community pharmacies were clustered on the basis of local collaboration, were numbered by a research assistant and subsequently an independent statistician performed a block randomization, in which the cluster size (number of pharmacies in each cluster) was balanced. The pharmacies in the control group received a written manual on the implementation of EAFD and EASD; the pharmacies in the intervention group received intensive support for the implementation. The impact of the intensive implementation program on the implementation process and on the primary outcomes was examined in a random coefficient logistic regression model, which took into account that patients were grouped within pharmacy clusters.

Results

Of the 37 pharmacies in the intervention group, 17 pharmacies (50%) provided EAFD and 12 pharmacies (35.3%) provided EASD compared to 14 pharmacies (45.2%, P = 0.715) and 12 pharmacies (38.7%, P = 0.899), respectively, of the 34 pharmacies in the control group. In the intervention group a total of 72 of 469 new statin users (15.4%) received education and 49 of 393 patients with a second statin prescription (12.5%) compared to 78 of 402 new users (19.4%, P = 0.944) and 35 of 342 patients with a second prescription (10.2%, P = 0.579) in the control group.

Conclusion

The intensive implementation program did not increase the frequency of providing EAFD and EASD of statins in community pharmacies.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov NCT00509717

Adherence to single-pill combination versus multiple-pill combination lipid-modifying therapy among patients with mixed dyslipidemia in a managed care population

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal adherence to lipid-lowering therapies is associated with and potentially contributes to increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Single-pill combination (SPC) lipid-modifying therapies may improve patient adherence due to decreased pill burden and increased convenience for the patient.

OBJECTIVE

To compare adherence to SPC versus multi-pill combination (MPC) lipid-modifying medications.

METHODS

This retrospective study used pharmacy and medical claims and laboratory result data from a national managed care dataset to evaluate patients who were newly prescribed simvastatin plus ezetimibe, simvastatin plus niacin, and lovastatin plus niacin either as SPC or MPC. Patients were considered adherent to therapy if they had a proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 0.80.

RESULTS

The mean PDC was 0.76 and 0.70 in the first 3 months of therapy, 0.54 and 0.45 in the second 3 months, and 0.50 and 0.41 for the remaining 30 months of follow-up for the SPC and MPC groups, respectively. SPC patients were 32% (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 1.27-1.36; P < 0.01) more likely to be adherent to treatment than MPC patients.

CONCLUSION

Adherence was significantly higher among patients receiving SPC than MPC. Although only associations and not temporality were assessed due to the observational design of this study, the use of SPC may be a successful method for improving adherence in a real-world setting.

Dose-dependent cholesterol-lowering effects of phytosterol/phytostanol-enriched margarine in statin users and statin non-users under free-living conditions

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness (extent to which an intervention works in daily medical practice) of the use of phytosterol/phytostanol-enriched margarines to lower total and non-HDL cholesterol levels in users and non-users of statins.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Data were obtained from questionnaires on health and food intake from a population-based longitudinal cohort linked to pharmacy-dispensing records.

SUBJECTS

The analysis included 3829 men and women (aged 31-71 years) who were examined during 1998-2002 and re-examined at 5-year follow-up during 2003-2007.

RESULTS

Recommended doses of margarines were consumed by only 9 % of the subjects. Serum total cholesterol decreased by respectively -0·16 (95 % CI -0·26, -0·05) mmol/l, -1·40 (95 % CI -1·51, -1·30) mmol/l and -1·64 (95 % CI -1·91, -1·37) mmol/l in subjects who started to use phytosterols/phytostanols only, statins only or a combination of both compounds at some point in time between examination and re-examination, compared with subjects who did not start using phytosterols/phytostanols or statins. Cholesterol-lowering effects of the phytosterols/phytostanols were similar in statin users and statin non-users and increased with increasing intake of enriched margarine (no intake, 0; low intake, -0·017 (95 % CI -0·16, 0·13) mmol/l; medium intake, -0·089 (95 % CI -0·22, 0·038) mmol/l; high intake, -0·32 (95 % CI -0·50, -0·14) mmol/l).

CONCLUSIONS

Although recommended intake levels of the enriched margarines were not reached by all persons, these data show that under customary conditions of use phytosterols/phytostanols are effective in lowering cholesterol levels in both statin users and non-users.

Low-fat diets for acquired hypercholesterolaemia

BACKGROUND

Hypercholesterolaemia, characterised by raised blood cholesterol levels, is not a disease itself but a metabolic derangement that often contributes to many diseases, notably cardiovascular disease. In most cases, elevated cholesterol levels are associated with high-fat diet, especially saturated fat, coupled with an inactive lifestyle. Less commonly, raised cholesterol may be related to an inherited disorder, familial hypercholesterolaemia. This systematic review is only concerned with acquired hypercholesterolaemia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of low-fat diets for acquired hypercholesterolaemia and to investigate the incidence of adverse effects from low-fat dietary interventions. We planned to compare the relative effectiveness of low-fat diets with calorie-restricted diets for acquired hypercholesterolaemia. We also wanted to look into the relative effectiveness of low-fat diets and pharmacological interventions for acquired hypercholesterolaemia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Studies were obtained from computerised searches of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and databases of ongoing trials. Date of last search was February 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Otherwise healthy adults (equal to or greater than 18 years) with acquired (not familial) hypercholesterolaemia. We defined hypercholesterolaemia as either total cholesterol greater than 5.2 mmol/L, LDL-cholesterol greater than 3.0 mmol/L, HDL-cholesterol less than 1.0 mmol/L or a combination thereof, although investigators' definitions were also accepted. We wanted to include any low-fat dietary intervention, like low-fat and low-saturated fat diets, intended to lower serum total and LDL-cholesterol or to raise HDL-cholesterol. A low-fat diet was considered as a fat calorie intake less than 20% of the total calories. The minimum duration of the intervention had to be six months. We excluded studies in unhealthy people.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors were planned to independently assess risk of bias and extract data.

MAIN RESULTS

No study met our inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Well designed, adequately powered randomised controlled trials investigating patient-relevant outcomes of low-fat diets for otherwise healthy people with hypercholesterolaemia are required.

Emerging options in the treatment of dyslipidemias: a bright future?

INTRODUCTION

Hypercholesterolemia is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction has been demonstrated to decrease CVD-related morbidity and mortality. However, several patients do not reach LDL-C target levels with the currently available lipid lowering agents, particularly statins. Lipid and non-lipid parameters other than LDL-C may account for the residual CVD risk after adequate LDL-C lowering with statins.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the efficacy and safety of emerging drugs aiming at high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) elevation (i.e., recombinant or plasma-derived wild-type apolipoprotein (apo) A-I, apo A-I mimetic peptides, reconstituted mutant HDL, partially delipidated HDL and cholesterol ester transfer protein inhibitors), microsomal triglyceride transfer protein inhibitors and antisense oligonucleotides.

EXPERT OPINION

Several lipid modifying agents in development may potently reduce the residual CVD risk. Ongoing and future studies with clinical outcomes will clarify their efficacy in clinical practice.

Statin use and decreased risk of benign prostatic enlargement and lower urinary tract symptoms

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether statin use is associated with a decreased risk of developing benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study of 2447 men, 40-79 years of age, residing in Olmsted County, MN, USA, in 1990, and followed these men biennially through 2007. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess associations between statin use and new onset of moderate/severe LUTS (American Urological Association Symptom Index score >7), a decreased maximum urinary flow rate (<12 mL/s) or BPE (prostate volume >30 mL).

RESULTS

Statin use was inversely associated with new onset of LUTS (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.49), a decreased maximum flow rate (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.34-0.82) and BPE (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.23-0.69) after adjustment for baseline age and body mass index, diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, smoking, alcohol use, activity level and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory use. The longest duration of statin use was associated with the lowest risk of developing each outcome (all tests for trend: P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this study, statin use was associated with a 6.5- to 7-year delay in the new onset of moderate/severe LUTS or BPE. While men typically take statin medications to prevent coronary heart disease events and related outcomes, these data suggest that men who use statins may also receive urologic benefits.

Management of dyslipidemias with fibrates, alone and in combination with statins: role of delayed-release fenofibric acid

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) represents the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Lifestyle modifications, along with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, remain the highest priorities in CVD risk management. Among lipid-lowering agents, statins are most effective in LDL-C reduction and have demonstrated incremental benefits in CVD risk reduction. However, in light of the residual CVD risk, even after LDL-C targets are achieved, there is an unmet clinical need for additional measures. Fibrates are well known for their beneficial effects in triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and LDL-C subspecies modulation. Fenofibrate is the most commonly used fibric acid derivative, exerts beneficial effects in several lipid and nonlipid parameters, and is considered the most suitable fibrate to combine with a statin. However, in clinical practice this combination raises concerns about safety. ABT-335 (fenofibric acid, Trilipix^®) is the newest formulation designed to overcome the drawbacks of older fibrates, particularly in terms of pharmacokinetic properties. It has been extensively evaluated both as monotherapy and in combination with atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin in a large number of patients with mixed dyslipidemia for up to 2 years and appears to be a safe and effective option in the management of dyslipidemia.

Centralized Pan-European Survey on the Undertreatment of Hypercholesterolemia in Patients Using Lipid Lowering Drugs–The CEPHEUS-Greece Survey

Surveys evaluating plasma lipid goal attainment in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) show that hypercholesterolemia is inadequately treated. CEPHEUS (CEntralized Pan-European survey on tHE Undertreatment of hypercholeSterolemia)-Greece was part of a European multicenter, cross-sectional survey to evaluate the proportion of patients on lipid-lowering drugs (LLDs) for ≥3 months, without dose modifications for at least 6 weeks, who reach their low-density lipoprotein—cholesterol (LDL-C) target. A total of 1321 Greek patients comprised the full analysis set (FAS); 28% were smokers, while 60.7%, 35.4%, 32.1%, and 25.1% had a history of hypertension, CHD, metabolic syndrome, and diabetes mellitus, respectively; 49.7% of the study population reached the Third Joint European Task Force (TJETF) LDL-C goals and 49.3% achieved the 2004-updated National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATPIII) targets. Hypercholesterolemia is suboptimally managed in Greece, with almost 50% of patients on LLDs not reaching the LDL-C target.

Association between adherence to calcium-channel blocker and statin medications and likelihood of cardiovascular events among US managed care enrollees

Background

Prior studies have found that patients taking single-pill amlodipine/atorvastatin (SPAA) have greater likelihood of adherence at 6 months than those taking 2-pill calcium-channel blocker and statin combinations (CCB/statin). This study examines whether this adherence benefit results in fewer cardiovascular (CV) events.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative claims data from the IMS LifeLink: US Health Plan Claims database, identifying adults already taking CCB or statin (but not both) who had an index event of either initiating treatment with SPAA or adding CCB to statin (or vice versa) between April 1, 2004 to August 31, 2005. Inclusion criteria included age 18+ years, continuously enrolled for minimum of 6 months prior and 18 months following treatment initiation, >1 diagnosis of hypertension, and no prescription claims for SPAA or added CCB or statin for 6 months prior. Exclusion criteria included >1 claim with missing or invalid days supplied, age 65+ years and not enrolled in Medicare Advantage, or history of prior CV events, cancer diagnosis, or chronic renal failure. The primary outcome measure was the rate of CV events (myocardial infarction, heart failure, angina, other ischemic heart disease, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, or revascularization procedure) from 6 to 18 months following index date, analyzed at three levels: 1) all adherent vs. non-adherent patients, 2) SPAA vs. dual-pill patients (regardless of adherence level), and 3) adherent SPAA, adherent dual-pill, and non-adherent SPAA patients vs. non-adherent dual-pill patients.

Results

Of 1,537 SPAA patients, 56.5% were adherent at 6 months, compared with 21.4% of the 17,910 CCB/statin patients (p < 0.001). Logistic regression found SPAA patients more likely to be adherent (OR = 4.7, p < 0.001) than CCB/statin patients. In Cox proportional hazards models, being adherent to either regimen was associated with significantly lower risk of CV event (HR = 0.77, p = 0.003). A similar effect was seen for SPAA vs. CCB/statin patients (HR = 0.68, p = 0.02). In a combined model, the risk of CV events was significantly lower for adherent CCB/statin patients (HR = 0.79, p = 0.01) and adherent SPAA patients (HR = 0.61, p = 0.03) compared to non-adherent CCB/statin patients.

Conclusions

Patients receiving SPAA rather than a 2-pill CCB/statin regimen are more likely to be adherent. In turn, adherence to CCB and statin medications is associated with lower risk of CV events in primary prevention patients.

The association between statin use and the diagnosis of prostate cancer in a population based cohort

PURPOSE

The effect of statin medication use on the risk of prostate cancer is unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We examined data from a longitudinal, population based cohort of 2,447 men between 40 and 79 years old who were followed from 1990 to 2007. Information on statin use was self-reported and obtained by biennial questionnaires. A randomly selected subset of men (634, 26%) completed biennial urological examinations that included serum prostate specific antigen measurements. Information on prostate biopsy and prostate cancer was obtained through review of community medical records.

RESULTS

Of 634 statin users 38 (6%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer vs 186 (10%) of 1,813 nonstatin users. Statin use was associated with a decreased risk of undergoing prostate biopsy (HR 0.31; 95% CI 0.24, 0.40), receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis (HR 0.36; 95% CI 0.25, 0.53) and receiving a high grade (Gleason 7 or greater) prostate cancer diagnosis (HR 0.25; 95% CI 0.11, 0.58). Statin use was also associated with a nonsignificantly decreased risk of exceeding a prostate specific antigen threshold of 4.0 ng/ml (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.35, 1.13). In addition, a longer duration of statin use was associated with a lower risk of these outcomes (all tests for trend p <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Statin use is associated with a decreased risk of prostate cancer diagnosis. This association may be explained by decreased detection or cancer prevention.

Cholesterol, triglycerides, and the Five-Factor Model of personality

Unhealthy lipid levels are among the leading controllable risk factors for coronary heart disease. To identify the psychological factors associated with dyslipidemia, this study investigates the personality correlates of cholesterol (total, LDL, and HDL) and triglycerides. A community-based sample (N=5532) from Sardinia, Italy, had their cholesterol and triglyceride levels assessed and completed a comprehensive personality questionnaire, the NEO-PI-R. All analyses controlled for age, sex, BMI, smoking, drinking, hypertension, and diabetes. Low Conscientiousness and traits related to impulsivity were associated with lower HDL cholesterol and higher triglycerides. Compared to the lowest 10%, those who scored in top 10% on Impulsivity had a 2.5 times greater risk of exceeding the clinical threshold for elevated triglycerides (OR=2.51, CI=1.56-4.07). In addition, sex moderated the association between trait depression (a component of Neuroticism) and HDL cholesterol, such that trait depression was associated with lower levels of HDL cholesterol in women but not men. When considering the connection between personality and health, unhealthy lipid profiles may be one intermediate biomarker between personality and morbidity and mortality.

Validity of the adherence estimator in the prediction of 9-month persistence with medications prescribed for chronic diseases: a prospective analysis of data from pharmacy claims

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article was to assess the predictive validity of the Adherence Estimator--a 3-item instrument designed to estimate a patient's propensity to adhere to medications prescribed for chronic disease.

METHODS

The Adherence Estimator was a 3-item part of a larger survey mailed to adults aged >or=40 years who had a qualifying index prescription filled in June 2008. A qualifying prescription was defined as one for a medication indicated for the treatment of 1 of 5 chronic diseases (cardiovascular disease, dyslipidemia [lipid-lowering drugs], diabetes [oral antihyperglycemics], osteoporosis [oral bisphosphonates], or asthma). Outcomes were compared between the adherence risk groups derived from the Adherence Estimator (low risk = score of 0, medium risk = score of 2-7, and high risk = score of 8-36). Treatment persistence over a period of 9 months was measured using pharmacy claims data. The primary outcome was the median proportion of days covered (PDC) by >or=1 medication during the first 9 months after the index fill. Secondary outcomes included adherence to the index medication, defined as PDC dichotomized to >or=0.80 or <0.80; rate of obtaining a second fill within 30 days of the index fill; and medication possession ratio (MPR) for refill adherence.

RESULTS

There were 1676 usable responses. Ages ranged from 40 to 88 years, with a mean of 64.6 years. Almost two thirds (1076/1676 [64.2%]) of the sample were female, and 1483/1676 (88.5%) were white. Statistically significant associations for all 3 pairwise comparisons (low vs medium risk, low vs high risk, and medium vs high risk) were observed between the Adherence Estimator risk groups for: (1) median PDC (0.655, 0.598, and 0.484 in the low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, respectively [all, false discovery rate [FDR] <0.05]); (2) PDC categorized (293/711 [41.21%], 200/588 [34.01%], and 105/377 [27.85%] [all, FDR <0.05]); and (3) rate of obtaining a second fill for the index medication within 30 days (489/711 [68.78%], 374/588 [63.61%], and 207/377 [54.91%] [all, FDR <0.05]). The low- and high-risk groups differed from one another on: (1) persistence with the index medication at 9 months (265/711 [37.27%] and 95/377 [25.20%]); (2) persistence with >1 medication at 9 months (291/711 [40.93%] and 108/377 [28.65%]); and (3) obtaining a second fill for any medication within 30 days (501/711 [70.46%] and 219/377 [59.09%]) (all, P < 0.05). The low- and high-risk groups differed significantly from one another in MPR for refill adherence (0.912 vs 0.866). Results observed within diseases mirrored those for the total sample, but with less precision.

CONCLUSION

In the present analysis of the validity of the Adherence Estimator in predicting adherence, baseline propensity to adhere to medications prescribed for chronic diseases was statistically associated with several measures of adherence and persistence, as derived from pharmacy claims data, over a 9-month period.

Dorsal (Posterior) Versus Medial Approach for the Surgical Repair of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms

The surgical approach-of-choice for the management of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) remains controversial. We compared the results of the medial (MA) and dorsal (posterior) surgical approach (DA). Fifty patients (44 males/6 females; median age [range]: 59 [49-84] years) treated for 58 atherosclerotic PAAs were studied (MA: 29 PAAs; DA: 29 PAAs). The 3-year graft patency rates were higher after DA compared with MA (76% vs 52%, respectively), but the difference was not significant (P = .056). There were no differences between the 2 approaches in amputation, restenosis, reoperation, and wound infection rates. Dorsal approach and the MA may be alternative approaches with similar long-term results. Due to the controversial results reported so far, a meta-analysis may be necessary to establish the surgical approach-of-choice. Future studies should take into account additional factors, other than the surgical technique, when assessing outcome (eg, preoperative statin use, age, and emergency vs routine surgery).