Non-achievement of the Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goal in Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and a Very High Cardiovascular Disease Risk: A Multicenter Study in Vietnam.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Lowering the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) level is important for reducing cardiovascular (CV) events. However, little is known about the management of LDL-c in older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study investigated the prevalence and factors associated with the non-achievement of LDL-c goals in older T2DM patients with a very high risk of CV diseases.Methods
This multicenter cross-sectional study measured the LDL-c levels of 733 T2DM outpatients from December 2019 to July 2020. The patients were aged ≥60 years, had very high risks of CV disease, and had been on LDL-c-lowering therapy for 6 months or more. The goal of lipid concentrations were assessed based on the recent guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology. We applied logistic regression analysis to identify the factors associated with the non-achievement of the LDL-c goal.Results
The mean age of the patients was 68.6±7.2 years. In total, 654 patients (89.2%) did not achieve the aggressive LDL-c goal of <1.4 mmol/L. In the adjusted model, the factors associated with the non-achievement of the LDL-c goal were obesity defined by body mass index (odds ratio [OR]=2.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-4.81; p=0.022) and high-intensity statin therapy (OR=0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.05; p<0.001), while age, sex, education level, smoking habit, and comorbidities were not associated.Conclusion
Older patients with T2DM who are at a very high CV disease risk are often unable to achieve their LDL-c goal. Obesity can increase the probability of not achieving the LDL-c goal, whereas high-intensity statin therapy can decrease this probability.
SUBMITTER: Nguyen HT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8749037 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:It is important to achieve the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal recommended by clinical guidelines in managing the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, however, the current management of LDL-C in actual clinical settings is suboptimal. We examined the LDL-C level among patients with dyslipidemia against the 2015 Korean guidelines, the crude rates of CV events based on LDL-C goal achievement, and the factors associated with LDL-C goal achievement. METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study using the National Health Insurance Service-National Health Screening Cohort (NHIS-HEALS) database from 2006 to 2013. Patients who had a health examination with LDL-C measurement between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2011 were identified. Patients were required to have at least one diagnosis of dyslipidemia during the 1 year before the index date, defined as the first date of LDL-C measurement. The 2015 Korean guidelines were used to measure LDL-C goal achievement based on the CV risk level. Crude CV event rates were calculated for total and individual CV events as the number of events divided by person-years (PYs) during the follow-up period. CV events included acute coronary syndrome, ischemic stroke, peripheral artery disease, CV death, and all-cause death. Factors associated with LDL-C goal achievement were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS:In the NHIS-HEALS database, 69,942 patients met the eligibility criteria: 36.7%, 22.5%, 20.1%, and 20.6% were among the very high-, high-, moderate-, and low-risk groups for the CV events, respectively, as defined by the 2015 Korean guidelines. Approximately half of the patients with dyslipidemia (47.6%) achieved their recommended LDL-C goal, but the achievement rates were substantially different across CV risk levels (17.6%, 47.2%, 66.9%, and 82.4% for very high-, high-, moderate-, and low-risk groups, respectively; P<0.0001). The crude event rate of total CV events during the follow-up period in the LDL-C goal non-achievers was higher than that in the LDL-C goal achievers (24.35/100 PYs vs. 11.93/100 PYs; P<0.0001). LDL-C goal achievement was significantly associated with patient characteristics, including age, sex, body mass index, lipid-modifying therapy, and CV risk level. CONCLUSIONS:In South Korea, LDL-C goal achievement among patients with very high or high CV risk was suboptimal. Patients who did not achieve the goal showed a higher rate of CV events during the follow-up period than patients who achieved the goal. LDL-C management strategies should be highlighted in dyslipidemia patients who are less likely to achieve the goal, such as female, overweight or obese patients, patients not adherent to statin, or patients with very high or high CV risk.
| S-EPMC6992159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWe describe the characteristics of patients with moderate/advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) according to receipt of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), and whether they achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets for high- and very high-risk patients.MethodsCKD-REIN (NCT03381950), a prospective cohort study conducted in 40 nephrology clinics in France, enrolled 3033 patients with moderate (stage G3) or advanced (stage G4/G5) CKD (2013-2016) who had not been on chronic dialysis or undergone kidney transplantation. Data were collected from patients' interviews and medical records. Patients were followed up at 1 year.ResultsAmong 2542 patients (mean [SD] age 67 [13] years, 34% women) with LDL-C measurements at baseline (mean [SD] LDL-C 2.7 [1.1] mmol/l; cholesterol 4.8 [1.3] mmol/l), 63% were on LLT; 24% were at high (CKD stage G3, no cardiovascular disease [CVD] or diabetes) and 74% at very high (CKD stage G3 with diabetes or CVD, or CKD stage G4/5) cardiovascular risk. Among high-risk patients, 45% of those on statin and/or ezetimibe achieved the LDL-C treatment target (<2.6 mmol/l). Among very high-risk patients, the percentage at goal (<1.8 mmol/l) was 38% for CKD stage G3 and 29% for stage G4/5. There was a trend toward higher achievement of LDL-C targets with increasing LLT intensity (adjusted odds ratios for moderate vs. low intensity 1.20; 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.56; high vs. low intensity 1.46; 1.02-2.09; P trend = 0.036).ConclusionMany patients with CKD stage G3-G5 who are eligible for LLT are not treated, and those on LLT rarely achieve LDL-C targets.
| S-EPMC6933478 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Conventional "low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)" assays measure cholesterol content in both low-density lipoprotein and lipoprotein(a) particles. To clarify the consequences of this methodological limitation for clinical care, our study aimed to compare associations of "LDL-C" and corrected LDL-C with risk of cardiovascular disease and to assess the impact of this correction on the classification of patients into guideline-recommended LDL-C categories. Methods and Results Lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was estimated as 30% of lipoprotein(a) mass and subtracted from "LDL-C" to obtain corrected LDL-C values (LDL-Ccorr30). Hazard ratios for cardiovascular disease (defined as coronary heart disease, stroke, or coronary revascularization) were quantified by individual-patient-data meta-analysis of 5 statin landmark trials from the Lipoprotein(a) Studies Collaboration (18 043 patients; 5390 events; 4.7 years median follow-up). When comparing top versus bottom quartiles, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio for cardiovascular disease was significant for "LDL-C" (1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.31; P=0.005) but not for LDL-Ccorr30 (1.07; 95% CI, 0.93-1.22; P=0.362). In a routine laboratory database involving 531 144 patients, reclassification of patients across guideline-recommended LDL-C categories when using LDL-Ccorr30 was assessed. In "LDL-C" categories of 70 to <100, 100 to <130, 130 to <190, and ≥190 mg/dL, significant proportions (95% CI) of participants were reassigned to lower LDL-C categories when LDL-Ccorr30 was used: 30.2% (30.0%-30.4%), 35.1% (34.9%-35.4%), 32.9% (32.6%-33.1%), and 41.1% (40.0%-42.2%), respectively. Conclusions "LDL-C" was associated with incident cardiovascular disease only when lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was included in its measurement. Refinement in techniques to accurately measure LDL-C, particularly in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, is warranted to assign risk to the responsible lipoproteins.
| S-EPMC7763787 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe importance of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk is strongly emphasized. If the LDL-C goals are not achieved with statin therapy, combination with ezetimibe is recommended. Studies revealed a substantial gap between obtained LDL-C levels and LDL-C target in ASCVD patients. However, little is known about the achievement of LDL-lowering treatment targets in ASCVD patients receiving ezetimibe in addition to statins.Materials and methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study based on EHR data from the regional health information system of Yinzhou, an eastern coastal area of China. ASCVD Patients stratified as very high risk, taking both statin and ezetimibe for lipid control, and had at least one lipid test after ezetimibe initiation were included between January 2013 and July 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the LDL-C values and target value (1.8 mmol/L according to the Chinese guideline, 1.4 mmol/L according to the European guideline) achievements. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore the influencing factors of target achievement rate.ResultsA total of 1,727 patients were included. The median follow-up time was 15.0 months. Taking 1.8 mmol/L as the target value, the achievement rates of LDL-C over the first 3 follow up years were 50.6, 31.3, and 30.3%, respectively. Taking 1.4 mmol/L as the target value, the achievement rates were 25.6, 15.5, and 16.5%, respectively. Multivariable analysis suggested that male patients (OR = 1.78, 95%CI: 1.27-2.49), combined use of atorvastatin or rosuvastatin with ezetimibe (vs other statins, OR = 4.64, 95% CI: 1.83-11.76), better medication adherence (OR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.04) and smoking cessation (vs smoking, OR = 2.26, 95% CI: 1.27-4.02) were associated with a higher achievement rate, while baseline LDL-C level (OR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.41-0.56) and treatment course of statin before ezetimibe (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.89-0.98) were negatively associated with achievement rate.ConclusionLong-term follow-up data based on a Chinese regional database shows that in very high-risk ASCVD patients taking ezetimibe in addition to statins, achievement rate of LDL-lowering treatment targets is still low and far from satisfactory in real-world setting. More efforts are needed to achieve optimal LDL-C levels.
| S-EPMC9614052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs the approach to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering becomes increasingly intensive, accurate assessment of LDL-C at very low levels warrants closer attention in individualized clinical efficacy and safety evaluation. We aimed to assess the accuracy of LDL-C estimation at very low levels by the Friedewald equation, the de facto clinical standard, and compare its accuracy with a novel, big data-derived LDL-C estimate.MethodsIn 191,333 individuals with Friedewald LDL-C < 70 mg/dL, we compared the accuracy of Friedewald and novel LDL-C values in relation to direct measurements by Vertical Auto Profile ultracentrifugation. We examined differences (estimate minus ultracentrifugation) and classification according to levels initiating additional safety precautions per clinical practice guidelines.ResultsFriedewald values were less than ultracentrifugation measurement, with a median difference (25th to 75th percentile) of -2.4 (-7.4 to 0.6) at 50-69 mg/dL, -7.0 (-16.2 to -1.2) at 25-39 mg/dL, and -29.0 (-37.4 to -19.6) at < 15 mg/dL. The respective values by novel estimation were -0.1 (-1.5 to 1.3), -1.1 (-2.5 to 0.3), and -2.7 (-4.9 to 0.0) mg/dL. Among those with Friedewald LDL-C < 15, 15 to < 25, and 25 to < 40 mg/dL, the classification was discordantly low in 94.9%, 82.6%, and 59.9% of individuals as compared with 48.3%, 42.4%, and 22.4% by novel estimation.ConclusionsEstimation of even lower LDL-C values (by Friedewald and novel methods) is even more inaccurate. More often than not, a Friedewald value < 40 mg/dL is underestimated, which translates into unnecessary safety alarms that could be reduced in half by estimation using our novel method.
| S-EPMC5399386 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrevious research has linked elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and remnant cholesterol (RC) with diabetes mellitus (DM). The present study aims to estimate the RC-related DM risk beyond LDL-C, and to investigate the extent to which the association of RC and DM is mediated via insulin resistance and inflammation.MethodsWe enrolled 7308 individuals without previous history of DM into the present study from the China Health and Nutrition Survey. Fasting RC was calculated as total cholesterol minus LDL-C and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Subjects were divided into four groups according to their LDL-C (100 mg/dL) and RC (24 mg/dL) levels to evaluate the role of LDL-C vs. RC on DM. A logistic regression analysis was then employed to evaluate the relationships between the discordant/concordant LDL-C and RC and DM. A mediation analysis was undertaken to identify potential mediators.ResultsOf all the participants, a total of 625 (8.55%) patients were newly diagnosed with DM. Compared to the high LDL-C/low RC group, the low LDL-C/high RC group was more common in DM patients. After a multivariate adjustment, elevated LDL-C and RC were associated with DM. Moreover, the low LDL-C/high RC group and the high LDL-C/low RC group manifested a 4.04-fold (95% CI 2.93-5.56) and 1.61-fold (95% CI 1.21-2.15) higher risk of DM, relative to those with low LDL-C/low RC. The subgroup analysis indicated that low LDL-C/high RC was more likely to be related to DM in females. Similar results were also shown when the sensitivity analyses were performed with different clinical cut-points of LDL-C. Insulin resistance and inflammation partially mediated the association between RC and DM.ConclusionsOur findings provided evidence for RC beyond the LDL-C associations with DM that may be mediated via insulin resistance and the pro-inflammatory state. In addition, women are more susceptible to RC exposure-related DM.
| S-EPMC9238255 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe evaluated the achievement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) according to up-to-date Korean Diabetes Association (KDA), European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS), and American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study collected electronic medical record data from patients with T2DM (≥20 years) managed by endocrinologists from 15 hospitals in Korea (January to December 2019). Patients were categorized according to guidelines to assess LDL-C target achievement. KDA (2019): Very High-I (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease [ASCVD]) <70 mg/dL; Very High-II (target organ damage [TOD], or cardiovascular risk factors [CVRFs]) <70 mg/dL; high (others) <100 mg/dL. ESC/EAS (2019): Very High-I (ASCVD): <55 mg/dL; Very High-II (TOD or ≥3-CVRF) <55 mg/dL; high (diabetes ≥10 years without TOD plus any CVRF) <70 mg/dL; moderate (diabetes <10 years without CVRF) <100 mg/dL. ADA (2019): Very High-I (ASCVD); Very High-II (age ≥40+ TOD, or any CVRF), for high intensity statin or statin combined with ezetimibe.ResultsAmong 2,000 T2DM patients (mean age 62.6 years; male 55.9%; mean glycosylated hemoglobin 7.2%) ASCVD prevalence was 24.7%. Of 1,455 (72.8%) patients treated with statins, 73.9% received monotherapy. According to KDA guidelines, LDL-C target achievement rates were 55.2% in Very High-I and 34.9% in Very High-II patients. With ESC/EAS guidelines, target attainment rates were 26.6% in Very High-I, 15.7% in Very High-II, and 25.9% in high risk patients. Based on ADA guidelines, most patients (78.9%) were very-high risk; however, only 15.5% received high-intensity statin or combination therapy.ConclusionAccording to current dyslipidemia management guidelines, LDL-C goal achievement remains suboptimal in Korean patients with T2DM.
| S-EPMC9171162 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are no clear data to support the cardiovascular (CV) risk categories and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment goals in Korean people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We evaluated the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) according to comorbidities and suggested LDL-C treatment goals in Korean people with T2DM in nationwide cohort data.MethodsUsing the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, 248,002 people aged 30 to 90 years with T2DM who underwent routine health check-ups during 2009 were included. Subjects with previous CVD were excluded from the study. The primary outcome was incident CVD, defined as a composite of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke during the follow-up period from 2009 to 2018.ResultsThe mean age of the study participants was 59.6±10.9 years, and median follow-up period was 9.3 years. CVD incidence increased in the order of DM duration of 5 years or more (12.04/1,000 person-years), hypertension (HT) (12.27/1,000 personyears), three or more CV risk factors (14.10/1,000 person-years), and chronic kidney disease (18.28/1,000 person-years). The risk of incident CVD increased linearly from an LDL-C level of ≥70 mg/dL in most patients with T2DM. In T2DM patients without HT or with a DM duration of less than 5 years, the CVD incidence increased from LDL-C level of ≥100 mg/dL.ConclusionFor primary prevention of CVD in Korean adults with T2DM, it can be helpful to lower LDL-C targets when there are chronic kidney disease, HT, a long duration of diabetes mellitus, or three or more CV risk factors.
| S-EPMC9925148 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aims Cardiovascular mortality is high in Germany. For patients with high or very high cardiovascular risk, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines recommend intensive lipid lowering therapy (LLT). This study aimed to assess dyslipidaemia management and achievement of the ESC/EAS guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals. Methods This European 18-country, cross-sectional, observational DA VINCI study (EUPAS22075) collected data during a single visit between June 2017 and November 2018 and included LLT in the preceding 12 months and the patients' most recent LDL-C measurement. Achievement of the risk-based 2016 and 2019 ESC/EAS LDL-C goals while receiving stabilized LLT was assessed. Data from the German cohort are presented here. Results Seven German sites enrolled a total of 421 primary and secondary prevention patients, 327 were receiving stabilized LLT at the time of LDL-C measurement, i.e. statin monotherapy of high (16%; n = 53), moderate (49%; n = 160) or low (7%; n = 24) intensity, ezetimibe combination (18%; n = 58), proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 antibody combination (3%; n = 9), and other LLT (7%; n = 23). The 2016 and 2019 risk-based LDL-C goals were attained by 46% (n = 149) and 28% (n = 92) of patients, respectively. Conclusions There is a large gap between ESC/EAS recommendations and LDL-C goal achievement in routine clinical practice in high and very high-risk patients in Germany. Low-to-moderate-intensity statin monotherapy was the most frequently used LLT; use of high-intensity statins and combination therapy was limited. In addition to optimizing statin intensity, combination with non-statin LLT may be needed in most of these patients. Graphical abstract Image 1 Highlights • This study evaluated lipid-lowering therapy use and dyslipidemia burden in Germany.• Attainment of LDL-C goals set by the 2016 and 2019 EAS/ESC guidelines was evaluated.• In Germany, more than half of patients did not achieve their 2016 LDL-C goals.• Attainment of the more stringent 2019 LDL-C goals was <30%.• Intense combination therapy in Germany could lead to better LDL-C goal attainment.
| S-EPMC9833225 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (TC/HDL-C) ratio, estimated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and non-HDL-C are routinely available from the standard lipid profile. We aimed to assess the extent of patient-level discordance of TC/HDL-C with LDL-C and non-HDL-C, because discordance suggests the possibility of additional information.Methods and resultsWe compared population percentiles of TC/HDL-C, Friedewald-estimated LDL-C, and non-HDL-C in 1 310 432 US adults from the Very Large Database of Lipids. Lipid testing was performed by ultracentrifugation (Vertical Auto Profile, Atherotech, AL). One in 3 patients had ≥25 percentile units discordance between TC/HDL-C and LDL-C, whereas 1 in 4 had ≥25 percentile units discordance between TC/HDL-C and non-HDL-C. The proportion of patients with TC/HDL-C > LDL-C by ≥25 percentile units increased from 3% at triglycerides <100 mg/dL to 51% at triglycerides 200 to 399 mg/dL. On a smaller scale, TC/HDL-C > non-HDL-C discordance by ≥25 percentile units increased from 6% to 21%. In those with <15th percentile levels of LDL-C (<70 mg/dL) or non-HDL-C (<93 mg/dL), a respective 58% and 46% were above the percentile-equivalent TC/HDL-C of 2.6. Age, sex, and directly measured components of the standard lipid profile explained >86% of the variance in percentile discordance between TC/HDL-C versus LDL-C and non-HDL-C.ConclusionsIn this contemporary, cross-sectional, big data analysis of US adults who underwent advanced lipid testing, the extent of patient-level discordance suggests that TC/HDL-C may offer potential additional information to LDL-C and non-HDL-C. Future studies are required to determine the clinical implications of this observation.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01698489.
| S-EPMC4550508 | biostudies-literature