S-EPMC7449387 - Projections of incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and incident type 2 diabetes across evolving statin treatment guidelines and recommendations: A modelling study. - OmicsDI

Unknown

Dataset Information

Projections of incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and incident type 2 diabetes across evolving statin treatment guidelines and recommendations: A modelling study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Experimental and observational research has suggested the potential for increased type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk among populations taking statins for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, few studies have directly compared statin-associated benefits and harms or examined heterogeneity by population subgroups or assumed treatment effect. Thus, we compared ASCVD risk reduction and T2D incidence increases across 3 statin treatment guidelines or recommendations among adults without a history of ASCVD or T2D who were eligible for statin treatment initiation. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Simulations were conducted using Markov models that integrated data from contemporary population-based studies of non-Hispanic African American and white adults aged 40-75 years with published meta-analyses. Statin treatment eligibility was determined by predicted 10-year ASCVD risk (5%, 7.5%, or 10%). We calculated the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one ASCVD event and the number needed to harm (NNH) to incur one incident case of T2D. The likelihood to be helped or harmed (LHH) was calculated as ratio of NNH to NNT. Heterogeneity in statin-associated benefit was examined by sex, age, and statin-associated T2D relative risk (RR) (range: 1.11-1.55). A total of 61,125,042 U.S. adults (58.5% female; 89.4% white; mean age = 54.7 years) composed our primary prevention population, among whom 13-28 million adults were eligible for statin initiation. Overall, the number of ASCVD events prevented was at least twice as large as the number of incident cases of T2D incurred (LHH range: 2.26-2.90). However, the number of T2D cases incurred surpassed the number of ASCVD events prevented when higher statin-associated T2D RRs were assumed (LHH range: 0.72-0.94). In addition, females (LHH range: 1.74-2.40) and adults aged 40-50 years (LHH range: 1.00-1.14) received lower absolute benefits of statin treatment compared with males (LHH range: 2.55-3.00) and adults aged 70-75 years (LHH range: 3.95-3.96). Projected differences in LHH by age and sex became more pronounced as statin-associated T2D RR increased, with a majority of scenarios projecting LHHs < 1 for females and adults aged 40-50 years. This study's primary limitation was uncertainty in estimates of statin-associated T2D risk, highlighting areas in which additional clinical and public health research is needed. CONCLUSIONS:Our projections suggest that females and younger adult populations shoulder the highest relative burden of statin-associated T2D risk.

SUBMITTER: Engeda JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7449387 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Projections of incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and incident type 2 diabetes across evolving statin treatment guidelines and recommendations: A modelling study.

Engeda Joseph C JC Lhachimi Stefan K SK Rosamond Wayne D WD Lund Jennifer L JL Keyserling Thomas C TC Safford Monika M MM Colantonio Lisandro D LD Muntner Paul P Avery Christy L CL

PLoS medicine 20200826 8

<h4>Background</h4>Experimental and observational research has suggested the potential for increased type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk among populations taking statins for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, few studies have directly compared statin-associated benefits and harms or examined heterogeneity by population subgroups or assumed treatment effect. Thus, we compared ASCVD risk reduction and T2D incidence increases across 3 statin treatment guidelin ...[more]

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Worldwide clinical practice guidelines for dyslipidemia emphasize allocating statin therapy to those at the highest absolute atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. METHODS AND RESULTS:We examined 5534 Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) participants who were not on baseline medications for dyslipidemia. Participants were classified by baseline coronary artery calcium (CAC) score (>0, ? 100) and the common clinical scheme of counting lipid abnormalities (LA), including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ? 3.36 mmol/L (130 mg/dL), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol <1.03 mmol/L (40 mg/dL) for men or <1.29 mmol/L (50 mg/dL) for women, and triglycerides ? 1.69 mmol/L (150 mg/dL). Our main outcome measure was incident CVD (myocardial infarction, angina resulting in revascularization, resuscitated cardiac arrest, stroke, cardiovascular death). Over a median follow-up of 7.6 years, more than half of events (55%) occurred in the 21% of participants with CAC ? 100. Conversely, 65% of events occurred in participants with 0 or 1 LA. In those with CAC ? 100, CVD rates ranged from 22.7 to 29.5 per 1000 person-years across LA categories. In contrast, with CAC=0, CVD rates ranged from 2.7 to 5.9 per 1000 person-years across LA categories. Individuals with 0 LA and CAC ? 100 had a higher event rate compared with individuals with 3 LA but CAC=0 (22.7 versus 5.9 per 1000 person-years). Similar results were obtained when we classified LA using data set quartiles of total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or low-density lipoprotein particle concentration and guideline categories of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS:CAC may have the potential to help match statin therapy to absolute CVD risk. Across the spectrum of dyslipidemia, event rates similar to secondary prevention populations were observed for patients with CAC ? 100.

Project description:ObjectivesAs a person's age increases and his/her health status declines, new challenges arise that may lead physicians to consider deprescribing statins. We aimed to provide insight into recommendations available in international cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines regarding discontinuation of statin treatment applicable to older adults.DesignWe systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, EMCARE, and the websites of guideline development organizations and online guideline repositories for cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines aimed at the general population. We selected all guidelines with recommendations (instructions and suggestions) on discontinuation of statin treatment applicable to older adults, published between January 2009 and April 2019. In addition, we performed a synthesis of information from all other recommendations for older adults regarding statin treatment. Methodological quality of the included guidelines was appraised using the appraisal of guidelines for research & evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.ResultsEighteen international guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in the general adult population provided recommendations for statin discontinuation that were applicable to older adults. We identified three groups of instructions for statin discontinuation related to statin intolerance, and none was specifically aimed at older adults. Three guidelines also included suggestions to consider statin discontinuation in patients with poor health status. Of the 18 guidelines included, 16 made recommendations regarding statin treatment in older adults, although details on how to implement these recommendations in practice were not provided.ConclusionCurrent international cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines provide little specific guidance for physicians who are considering statin discontinuation in older adults in the context of declining health status and short life expectancy. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:417-425, 2020.

Project description:Importance:Five major guidelines on statin use for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) have been published since 2014: the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE; 2014), US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF; 2016), Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS; 2016), European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS; 2016), and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA; 2018). Objective:To compare the sensitivity, specificity, and estimated number needed to treat (NNT10) to prevent 1 ASCVD event in 10 years according to statin criteria from the 5 guidelines. Design, Setting, and Participants:Population-based contemporary cohort study. Analyses were performed in the Copenhagen General Population Study, with a mean follow-up time of 10.9 years. We included 45?750 individuals aged 40 to 75 years. The participants were enrolled between 2003 and 2009 and were all free of ASCVD at baseline. Data were analyzed between January 1, 2019, and August 4, 2019. Exposures:Statin treatment according to guideline criteria. We assumed a 25% relative reduction of ASCVD events per 38 mg/dL (to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0259) reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Main Outcomes and Measures:Sensitivity and specificity for ASCVD events and the NNT10 to prevent 1 ASCVD event according to guideline criteria. Results:Median age at baseline examination was 56 years, and 43% of participants were men (n?=?19?870 of 45?750). During follow-up, we observed 4156 ASCVD events. Overall, 44% of individuals in Copenhagen General Population Study were statin eligible with CCS (n?=?19?953 of 45?750), 42% with ACC/AHA (n?=?19?400 of 45?750), 40% with NICE (n?=?19?400 of 45?750), 31% with USPSTF (n?=?13?966 of 45?750), and 15% with ESC/EAS (n?=?6870 of 45?750). Sensitivity and specificity for ASCVD events were 68% (n?=?2815 of 4156) and 59% (n?=?24?456 of 41?594) for CCS, 70% (n?=?2889 of 4156) and 60% (n?=?25?083 of 41?594) for ACC/AHA, 68% (n?=?2815 of 4156) and 63% (n?=?26?213 of 41?594) for NICE, 57% (n?=?2377 of 4156) and 72% (n?=?30?005 of 41?594) for USPSTF, and 24% (n?=?1001 of 4156) and 86% (n?=?35?725 of 41?594) for ESC/EAS. The NNT10 to prevent 1 ASCVD using moderate-intensity and high-intensity statin therapy, respectively, was 32 and 21 for CCS criteria, 30 and 20 for ACC/AHA criteria, 30 and 20 for NICE criteria, 27 and 18 for USPSTF criteria, and 29 and 20 for ESC/EAS criteria. Conclusions and Relevance:With similar NNT10 to prevent 1 event, the CCS, ACC/AHA, and NICE guidelines correctly assign statin therapy to many more of the individuals who later develop ASCVD compared with the USPSTF and ESC/EAS guidelines. Our results therefore suggest that the CCS, ACC/AHA, or NICE guidelines may be preferred for primary prevention.