Assessment of Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring for Statin Treatment Strategy according to ACC/AHA Guidelines in Asymptomatic Korean Adults

Role of Coronary Calcium Score to Identify Candidates for ASCVD Prevention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we describe the mechanism behind coronary artery calcification formation and detection, as well as its implication in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk stratification, intervention, and prognosis in asymptomatic individuals.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple cohort and population studies have shown that coronary artery calcium scoring is effective and reproducible in predicting the risk for cardiovascular disease. The updated 2018 ACC/AHA guideline has incorporated consideration of coronary artery calcification testing into cardiovascular disease risk stratification and therapy guidance. Coronary artery calcification's evidence-based role in detection, risk stratification, and ultimately its unique influence on therapeutic intervention and prognosis of cardiovascular disease in asymptomatic population is increasingly being recognized..

PRavastatin Versus FlUVastatin After Statin Intolerance: The PRUV-Intolerance Study With Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available on the relapse of statin intolerance after resumption of statins. We aimed to evaluate the relapse rates of statin intolerance in patients who subsequently received pravastatin or fluvastatin and to identify associated factors.

METHODS

This retrospective, propensity score-matched cohort study screened data obtained from a tertiary university hospital between 2006 and 2015. Of 8073 patients screened, 488 with statin intolerance who received pravastatin or fluvastatin with regular follow-up were enrolled. After propensity score matching of patients, 384 were finally analyzed. The primary outcome variables were relapse of statin intolerance and stopping (ie, discontinuation or switching to other statins) rate for the 2 statins.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up period of 37 months, the rate of relapse of intolerance was 10.4% and 18.2% among users of pravastatin and fluvastatin, respectively (P = 0.04). However, the log-rank test showed no difference in the relapse-free rates between the 2 groups (P = 0.34). The stopping rates of the 2 statins were 36.5% and 42.2% (P = 0.30), respectively, for various reasons, including low efficacy of the drugs. After adjustment, chronic kidney disease (hazard ratio [HR] 1.83, P = 0.03) and previous creatine kinase elevation (HR 3.13, P = 0.001) were identified as independent determinants of relapse. Older age (HR 1.03, P = 0.057) and female sex (HR 1.70, P = 0.059) were associated, but not significantly, with relapse.

CONCLUSION

Although a small proportion of patients taking pravastatin or fluvastatin experienced a relapse of intolerance, many patients eventually discontinued or changed these agents. Chronic kidney disease and history of creatine kinase elevation were independent determinants of relapse.

Use of Risk Assessment Tools to Guide Decision-Making in the Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Special Report From the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology

Risk assessment is a critical step in the current approach to primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Knowledge of the 10-year risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease identifies patients in higher-risk groups who are likely to have greater net benefit and lower number needed to treat for both statins and antihypertensive therapy. Current US prevention guidelines for blood pressure and cholesterol management recommend use of the pooled cohort equations to start a process of shared decision-making between clinicians and patients in primary prevention. The pooled cohort equations have been widely validated and are broadly useful for the general US clinical population. But, they may systematically underestimate risk in patients from certain racial/ethnic groups, those with lower socioeconomic status or with chronic inflammatory diseases, and overestimate risk in patients with higher socioeconomic status or who have been closely engaged with preventive healthcare services. If uncertainty remains for patients at borderline or intermediate risk, or if the patient is undecided after a patient-clinician discussion with consideration of risk enhancing factors (eg, family history), additional testing with measurement of coronary artery calcium can be useful to reclassify risk estimates and improve selection of patients for use or avoidance of statin therapy. This special report summarizes the rationale and evidence base for quantitative risk assessment, reviews strengths and limitations of existing risk scores, discusses approaches for refining individual risk estimates for patients, and provides practical advice regarding implementation of risk assessment and decision-making strategies in clinical practice.

Use of Risk Assessment Tools to Guide Decision-Making in the Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Special Report From the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology

Risk assessment is a critical step in the current approach to primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Knowledge of the 10-year risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease identifies patients in higher-risk groups who are likely to have greater net benefit and lower number needed to treat for both statins and antihypertensive therapy. Current U.S. prevention guidelines for blood pressure and cholesterol management recommend use of the pooled cohort equations to start a process of shared decision-making between clinicians and patients in primary prevention. The pooled cohort equations have been widely validated and are broadly useful for the general U.S. clinical population. But, they may systematically underestimate risk in patients from certain racial/ethnic groups, those with lower socioeconomic status or with chronic inflammatory diseases, and overestimate risk in patients with higher socioeconomic status or who have been closely engaged with preventive healthcare services. If uncertainty remains for patients at borderline or intermediate risk, or if the patient is undecided after a patient-clinician discussion with consideration of risk enhancing factors (e.g., family history), additional testing with measurement of coronary artery calcium can be useful to reclassify risk estimates and improve selection of patients for use or avoidance of statin therapy. This special report summarizes the rationale and evidence base for quantitative risk assessment, reviews strengths and limitations of existing risk scores, discusses approaches for refining individual risk estimates for patients, and provides practical advice regarding implementation of risk assessment and decision-making strategies in clinical practice.