Effectiveness of Statins as Primary Prevention in People With Different Cardiovascular Risk: A Population-Based Cohort Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Garcia-Gil M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6174924 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundStatins were initially used to improve cardiovascular outcomes in people with established coronary artery disease, but recently their use has become more common in people at low cardiovascular risk. We did a systematic review of randomized trials to assess the efficacy and harms of statins in these individuals.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (to Jan. 28, 2011), registries of health technology assessments and clinical trials, and reference lists of relevant reviews. We included trials that randomly assigned participants at low cardiovascular risk to receive a statin versus a placebo or no statin. We defined low risk as an observed 10-year risk of less than 20% for cardiovascular-related death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, but we explored other definitions in sensitivity analyses.ResultsWe identified 29 eligible trials involving a total of 80,711 participants. All-cause mortality was significantly lower among patients receiving a statin than among controls (relative risk [RR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.97) for trials with a 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease < 20% [primary analysis] and 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.94, for trials with 10-year risk < 10% [sensitivity analysis]). Patients in the statin group were also significantly less likely than controls to have nonfatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.84) and nonfatal stroke (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.96). Neither metaregression nor stratified analyses suggested statistically significant differences in efficacy between high-and low-potency statins, or larger reductions in cholesterol.InterpretationStatins were found to be efficacious in preventing death and cardiovascular morbidity in people at low cardiovascular risk. Reductions in relative risk were similar to those seen in patients with a history of coronary artery disease.
| S-EPMC3216447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose of reviewWhile people with HIV (PWH) are living longer due to advances in antiretroviral therapy, recent data have demonstrated an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among this population. This increased risk is thought to be due to both traditional (for example, smoking, diabetes) and HIV-specific (for example, inflammation, persistent immune activation) risk factors. This review focuses on the potential for statin therapy to mitigate this increased risk.Recent findingsSeveral randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that statins, a class of lipid-lowering medications, are effective as a primary CVD prevention strategy among people without HIV. Among PWH, statins have been shown to lower cholesterol, exert immunomodulatory effects, stabilize coronary atherosclerotic plaque, and even induce plaque regression.SummaryPrevention of CVD among the aging population of people with controlled, but chronic, HIV is vital. Data exploring primary prevention in this context are thus far limited. The Randomized Trial to Prevent Vascular Events in HIV (REPRIEVE) is ongoing; this trial will inform the field by investigating the effects of pitavastatin calcium as a primary prevention strategy for major adverse cardiovascular events among PWH on antiretroviral therapy (ART) at low-to-moderate traditional CVD risk.
| S-EPMC9415230 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The authors sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of statins for primary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).Patients with CKD have an elevated risk of MI and stroke. Although HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors (“statins”) may prevent cardiovascular events in patients with non–dialysis-requiring CKD, adverse drug effects and competing risks could materially influence net effects and clinical decision-making.We developed a decision-analytic model of CKD and cardiovascular disease (CVD) to determine the cost-effectiveness of low-cost generic statins for primary CVD prevention in men and women with hypertension and mild-to-moderate CKD. Outcomes included MI and stroke rates, discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and lifetime costs (2010 USD), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.For 65-year-old men with moderate hypertension and mild-to-moderate CKD, statins reduced the combined rate of MI and stroke, yielded 0.10 QALYs, and increased costs by $1,800 ($18,000 per QALY gained). For patients with lower baseline cardiovascular risks, health and economic benefits were smaller; for 65-year-old women, statins yielded 0.06 QALYs and increased costs by $1,900 ($33,400 per QALY gained). Results were sensitive to rates of rhabdomyolysis and drug costs. Statins are less cost-effective when obtained at average retail prices, particularly in patients at lower CVD risk.Although statins reduce absolute CVD risk in patients with CKD, the increased risk of rhabdomyolysis, and competing risks associated with progressive CKD, partly offset these gains. Low-cost generic statins appear cost-effective for primary prevention of CVD in patients with mild-to-moderate CKD and hypertension.
| S-EPMC3688058 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCholesterol guidelines typically prioritize primary prevention statin therapy on the basis of 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease. The advent of generic pricing may justify expansion of statin eligibility. Moreover, 10-year risk may not be the optimal approach for statin prioritization. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of expanding preventive statin eligibility and evaluated novel approaches to prioritization from a Scottish health sector perspective.MethodsA computer simulation model predicted long-term health and cost outcomes in Scottish adults ≥40 years of age. Epidemiologic analysis was completed using the Scottish Heart Health Extended Cohort, Scottish Morbidity Records, and National Records of Scotland. A simulation cohort was constructed with data from the Scottish Health Survey 2011 and contemporary population estimates. Treatment and cost inputs were derived from published literature and health service cost data. The main outcome measure was the lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, evaluated as cost (2020 GBP) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Three approaches to statin prioritization were analyzed: 10-year risk scoring using the ASSIGN score, age-stratified risk thresholds to increase treatment rates in younger individuals, and absolute risk reduction (ARR)-guided therapy to increase treatment rates in individuals with elevated cholesterol levels. For each approach, 2 policies were considered: treating the same number of individuals as those with an ASSIGN score ≥20% (age-stratified risk threshold 20, ARR 20) and treating the same number of individuals as those with an ASSIGN score ≥10% (age-stratified risk threshold 10, ARR 10).ResultsCompared with an ASSIGN score ≥20%, reducing the risk threshold for statin initiation to 10% expanded eligibility from 804 000 (32% of adults ≥40 years of age without CVD) to 1 445 500 individuals (58%). This policy would be cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, £12 300/QALY [95% CI, £7690/QALY-£26 500/QALY]). Incremental to an ASSIGN score ≥20%, ARR 20 produced ≈8800 QALYs and was cost-effective (£7050/QALY [95% CI, £4560/QALY-£10 700/QALY]). Incremental to an ASSIGN score ≥10%, ARR 10 produced ≈7950 QALYs and was cost-effective (£11 700/QALY [95% CI, £9250/QALY-£16 900/QALY]). Both age-stratified risk threshold strategies were dominated (ie, more expensive and less effective than alternative treatment strategies).ConclusionsGeneric pricing has rendered preventive statin therapy cost-effective for many adults. ARR-guided therapy is more effective than 10-year risk scoring and is cost-effective.
| S-EPMC9022692 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExpanding statin use may help to alleviate the excess burden of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in people living with HIV (PLHIV). Pravastatin and pitavastatin are preferred agents due to their lack of substantial interaction with antiretroviral therapy. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pravastatin and pitavastatin for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease among PLHIV in the United States.MethodsWe developed a microsimulation model that randomly selected (with replacement) individuals from the Data-collection on Adverse Effects of Anti-HIV Drugs study with follow-up between 2013 and 2016. Our study population was PLHIV aged 40 to 75 years, stable on antiretroviral therapy, and not currently using lipid-lowering therapy. Direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assigned in annual cycles and discounted at 3% per year. We assumed a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY gained. The interventions assessed were as follows: (1) treating no one with statins; (2) treating everyone with generic pravastatin 40 mg/day (drug cost $236/year) and (3) treating everyone with branded pitavastatin 4 mg/day (drug cost $2,828/year). The model simulated each individual's probability of experiencing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease over 20 years.ResultsPersons receiving pravastatin accrued 0.024 additional QALYs compared with those not receiving a statin, at an incremental cost of $1338, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $56,000/QALY gained. Individuals receiving pitavastatin accumulated 0.013 additional QALYs compared with those using pravastatin, at an additional cost of $18,251, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,444,000/QALY gained. These findings were most sensitive to the pill burden associated with daily statin administration, statin costs, statin efficacy and baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, no statin was optimal in 5.2% of simulations, pravastatin was optimal in 94.8% of simulations and pitavastatin was never optimal.ConclusionsPravastatin was projected to be cost-effective compared with no statin. With substantial price reduction, pitavastatin may be cost-effective compared with pravastatin. These findings bode well for the expanded use of statins among PLHIV in the United States. To gain greater confidence in our conclusions it is important to generate strong, HIV-specific estimates on the efficacy of statins and the quality-of-life burden associated with taking an additional daily pill.
| S-EPMC7982504 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The elderly population is increasing worldwide, with subjects > 65 years of age constituting the fastest-growing age group. Furthermore, the elderly face the greatest risk and burden of cardiovascular disease mortality and morbidity. Although elderly patients, particularly those older > 75, have not been well represented in randomized clinical trials evaluating lipid-lowering therapy, the available evidence supporting the use of statin therapy in primary prevention in older individuals is derived mainly from subgroup analyses and post-hoc data. On the other hand, elderly patients often have multiple co-morbidities that require a high number of concurrent medications; this may increase the risk for drug-drug interactions, thereby reducing the potential benefits of statin therapy. The aim of this review was to present the relevant literature regarding statin use in the elderly for their primary cardiovascular disease, with the associated risks and benefits of treatment.
| S-EPMC4554788 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionPeople living with HIV (PLHIV) have an elevated risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to their HIV-negative peers. Expanding statin use may help alleviate this burden. However, the choice of statin in the context of antiretroviral therapy is challenging. Pravastatin and pitavastatin improve cholesterol levels in PLHIV without interacting substantially with antiretroviral therapy. They are also more expensive than most statins. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pravastatin and pitavastatin for the primary prevention of CVD among PLHIV in Thailand who are not currently using lipid-lowering therapy.MethodsWe developed a discrete-state microsimulation model that randomly selected (with replacement) individuals from the TREAT Asia HIV Observational Database cohort who were aged 40 to 75 years, receiving antiretroviral therapy in Thailand, and not using lipid-lowering therapy. The model simulated each individual's probability of experiencing CVD. We evaluated: (1) treating no one with statins; (2) treating everyone with pravastatin 20mg/day (drug cost 7568 Thai Baht ($US243)/year) and (3) treating everyone with pitavastatin 2 mg/day (drug cost 8182 Baht ($US263)/year). Direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assigned in annual cycles over a 20-year time horizon and discounted at 3% per year. We assumed the Thai healthcare sector perspective.ResultsPravastatin was estimated to be less effective and less cost-effective than pitavastatin and was therefore dominated (extended) by pitavastatin. Patients receiving pitavastatin accumulated 0.042 additional QALYs compared with those not using a statin, at an extra cost of 96,442 Baht ($US3095), giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2,300,000 Baht ($US73,812)/QALY gained. These findings were sensitive to statin costs and statin efficacy, pill burden, and targeting of PLHIV based on CVD risk. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 160,000 Baht ($US5135)/QALY gained, we estimated that pravastatin would become cost-effective at an annual cost of 415 Baht ($US13.30)/year and pitavastatin would become cost-effective at an annual cost of 600 Baht ($US19.30)/year.ConclusionsNeither pravastatin nor pitavastatin were projected to be cost-effective for the primary prevention of CVD among PLHIV in Thailand who are not currently using lipid-lowering therapy. We do not recommend expanding current use of these drugs among PLHIV in Thailand without substantial price reduction.
| S-EPMC7305414 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo investigate the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) in subjects initiating statin therapy for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD).MethodsA nationwide cohort study using French hospital discharge and claims databases was performed, studying subjects from the general population aged 40 to 75 years in 2009, with no history of CVD and no lipid-lowering drugs during the preceding 3-year period, followed for up to 7 years. Exposure to statins (type, dose, and time since first use) and to other drugs for CVD risk was assessed. The primary outcome was hospital admission for AKI.ResultsThe cohort included 8 236 279 subjects, 818 432 of whom initiated a statin for primary prevention. During 598 487 785 person-months exposed to statins, 700 events were observed, corresponding to an incidence of AKI of 4.59 per 10 000 person-years (7.01 in men, 3.01 in women). AKI mainly occurred in the context of organ failure, sepsis, and genitourinary disease. A 19% increased rate of AKI (hazard ratio = 1.19, 95%CI: 1.08-1.31) was observed in men exposed to statins, whereas no increase in the overall risk of AKI was observed in women. However, exposure to high-potency statins was associated with a 72% to 116% increased risk in both genders and a dose-effect relationship observed for rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. No temporal pattern of occurrence nor interaction with drugs for CVD risk was observed.ConclusionsAlthough the overall risk of AKI appears moderately increased, more attention should be paid to renal function in subjects taking statins for primary prevention both in clinical practice and from a research viewpoint.
| S-EPMC6916201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background There is little evidence on the relationship between statin use and the risk of hospitalization attributable to COVID-19. Methods and Results The French National Healthcare Data System database was used to conduct a matched-cohort study. For each adult aged ≥40 years receiving statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases, one nonuser was randomly selected and matched for year of birth, sex, residence area, and comorbidities. The association between statin use and hospitalization for COVID-19 was examined using conditional Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for baseline characteristics, comorbidities, and long-term medications. Its association with in-hospital death from COVID-19 was also explored. All participants were followed up from February 15, 2020, to June 15, 2020. The matching procedure generated 2 058 249 adults in the statin group and 2 058 249 in the control group, composed of 46.6% of men with a mean age of 68.7 years. Statin users had a 16% lower risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 than nonusers (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.88). All types of statins were significantly associated with a lower risk of hospitalization, with the adjusted HR ranging from 0.75 for fluvastatin to 0.89 for atorvastatin. Low- and moderate-intensity statins also showed a lower risk compared with nonusers (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.71-0.86] and HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.80-0.89], respectively), whereas high-intensity statins did not (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.86-1.18). We found similar results with in-hospital death from COVID-19. Conclusions Our findings support that the use of statins for primary prevention is associated with lower risks of hospitalization for COVID-19 and of in-hospital death from COVID-19.
| S-EPMC9238639 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background We examined whether primary prevention with statins and high adherence to statins reduce the associated risk of cardiovascular events or death in a low-risk population with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). Methods and Results Using Danish nationwide registers, we included patients with new-onset T2D, aged 40 to 89 years, between 2005 and 2011, who were alive 18 months following the T2D diagnosis (index date). In patients who purchased statins within 6 months following T2D diagnosis, we calculated the proportion of days covered (PDC) within 1 year after the initial 6-month period. We studied the combined end point of myocardial infarction, stroke, or all-cause mortality, whichever came first, with Cox regression. Reported were standardized 5-year risk differences for fixed comorbidity distribution according to statin treatment history, stratified by sex and age. Among 77 170 patients, 42 975 (56%) were treated with statins, of whom 31 061 (72%) had a PDC ≥80%. In men aged 70 to 79 years who were treated with statins, the standardized 5-year risk was 22.9% (95% CI, 21.5%-24.3%), whereas the risk was 29.1% (95% CI, 27.4%-30.7%) in men not treated, resulting in a significant risk reduction of 6.2% (95% CI, 4.0%-8.4%), P<0.0001. The risk reduction associated with statins increased with advancing age group (women: age 40-49 years, 0.0% [95% CI, -1.0% to 1.0%]; age 80-89 years, 10.8% [95% CI, 7.2%-14.4%]). Standardizing to all patients treated with statins, PDC <80% was associated with increased risk difference (reference PDC ≥80%; PDC <20%, 4.2% [95% CI, 2.9%-5.6%]). Conclusions This study supports the use of statins as primary prevention against cardiovascular diseases or death in 18-month surviving low-risk patients with T2D, with the highest effect in the elderly and adherent patients.
| S-EPMC8403278 | biostudies-literature