Dataset Information

Physicians' misperceived cardiovascular risk and therapeutic inertia as determinants of low LDL-cholesterol targets achievement in diabetes.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Greater efforts are needed to overcome the worldwide reported low achievement of LDL-c targets. This survey aimed to dissect whether and how the physician-based evaluation of patients with diabetes is associated with the achievement of LDL-c targets.

Methods

This cross-sectional self-reported survey interviewed physicians working in 67 outpatient services in Italy, collecting records on 2844 patients with diabetes. Each physician reported a median of 47 records (IQR 42-49) and, for each of them, the physician specified its perceived cardiovascular risk, LDL-c targets, and the suggested refinement in lipid-lowering-treatment (LLT). These physician-based evaluations were then compared to recommendations from EAS/EASD guidelines.

Results

Collected records were mostly from patients with type 2 diabetes (94%), at very-high (72%) or high-cardiovascular risk (27%). Physician-based assessments of cardiovascular risk and of LDL-c targets, as compared to guidelines recommendation, were misclassified in 34.7% of the records. The misperceived assessment was significantly higher among females and those on primary prevention and was associated with 67% lower odds of achieving guidelines-recommended LDL-c targets (OR 0.33, p < 0.0001). Peripheral artery disease, target organ damage and LLT-initiated by primary-care-physicians were all factors associated with therapeutic-inertia (i.e., lower than expected probability of receiving high-intensity LLT). Physician-suggested LLT refinement was inadequate in 24% of overall records and increased to 38% among subjects on primary prevention and with misclassified cardiovascular risk.

Conclusions

This survey highlights the need to improve the physicians' misperceived cardiovascular risk and therapeutic inertia in patients with diabetes to successfully implement guidelines recommendations into everyday clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Morieri ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9044595 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundElevated triglyceride-rich lipoprotein (TRL) and small-dense low-density lipoprotein (sdLDL) particles are hallmarks of atherogenic dyslipidemia, and their cholesterol content is hypothesized to drive atherosclerotic risk. Prospective epidemiological data pertaining to cholesterol content of TRLs and sdLDL in primary prevention populations are mostly limited to coronary heart disease.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate whether triglyceride-rich lipoprotein cholesterol (TRL-C) and small-dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (sdLDL-C) concentrations associate with composite and individual incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes including myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic stroke (IS), and peripheral artery disease (PAD).MethodsIn a prospective case-cohort study within the Women's Health Study, TRL-C and sdLDL-C (mg/dl) were directly measured in baseline blood specimens of case subjects (n = 480) and the reference subcohort (n = 496). Risk associations were evaluated for total CVD (MI, IS, PAD, and CVD death), coronary and cerebrovascular disease (MI, IS, CVD death), and individual outcomes (MI, IS, and PAD). Models were adjusted for traditional risk factors, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein.ResultsThe risk of both composite outcomes significantly increased across quartiles of TRL-C and sdLDL-C. TRL-C was significantly associated with MI and PAD (MI hazard ratio [HR]Q4: 3.05 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.46 to 6.39]; ptrend = 0.002; PAD HRQ4: 2.58 [95% CI: 1.18 to 5.63]; ptrend = 0.019), whereas sdLDL-C was significantly associated with MI alone (HRQ4: 3.71 [95% CI: 1.59 to 8.63]; ptrend < 0.001). Both markers weakly associated with IS. Association patterns were similar for continuous exposures and, for TRL-C, among subjects with low atherogenic particle concentrations (apolipoprotein B <100 mg/dl).ConclusionsTRL-C strongly associates with future MI and PAD events, whereas sdLDL-C strongly associates with MI alone. These findings signal that the cholesterol content of TRLs and sdLDL influence atherogenesis independently of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high sensitivity C-reactive protein, with potentially different potency across vascular beds. (Women's Health Study; NCT00000479).

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.

Project description:ContextIndividuals with diabetes are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), but more aggressive targets for risk factor control have not been tested.ObjectiveTo compare progression of subclinical atherosclerosis in adults with type 2 diabetes treated to reach aggressive targets of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of 70 mg/dL or lower and systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 115 mm Hg or lower vs standard targets of LDL-C of 100 mg/dL or lower and SBP of 130 mm Hg or lower.Design, setting, and participantsA randomized, open-label, blinded-to-end point, 3-year trial from April 2003-July 2007 at 4 clinical centers in Oklahoma, Arizona, and South Dakota. Participants were 499 American Indian men and women aged 40 years or older with type 2 diabetes and no prior CVD events.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to aggressive (n=252) vs standard (n=247) treatment groups with stepped treatment algorithms defined for both.Main outcome measuresPrimary end point was progression of atherosclerosis measured by common carotid artery intimal medial thickness (IMT). Secondary end points were other carotid and cardiac ultrasonographic measures and clinical events.ResultsMean target LDL-C and SBP levels for both groups were reached and maintained. Mean (95% confidence interval) levels for LDL-C in the last 12 months were 72 (69-75) and 104 (101-106) mg/dL and SBP levels were 117 (115-118) and 129 (128-130) mm Hg in the aggressive vs standard groups, respectively. Compared with baseline, IMT regressed in the aggressive group and progressed in the standard group (-0.012 mm vs 0.038 mm; P < .001); carotid arterial cross-sectional area also regressed (-0.02 mm(2) vs 1.05 mm(2); P < .001); and there was greater decrease in left ventricular mass index (-2.4 g/m(2.7) vs -1.2 g/m(2.7); P = .03) in the aggressive group. Rates of adverse events (38.5% and 26.7%; P = .005) and serious adverse events (n = 4 vs 1; P = .18) related to blood pressure medications were higher in the aggressive group. Clinical CVD events (1.6/100 and 1.5/100 person-years; P = .87) did not differ significantly between groups.ConclusionsReducing LDL-C and SBP to lower targets resulted in regression of carotid IMT and greater decrease in left ventricular mass in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Clinical events were lower than expected and did not differ significantly between groups. Further follow-up is needed to determine whether these improvements will result in lower long-term CVD event rates and costs and favorable risk-benefit outcomes.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00047424.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The well-established benefit of Low-Dense-Lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-c) lowering treatments (LLTs) has led clinical guidelines to lower the cardiovascular prevention targets. Despite this, there is a surprising scarcity of real-world studies (RWS) evaluating whether recommendations are applied in the routine clinical management of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We therefore evaluated, in a large RWS, the pattern of LLTs use and the achievement of LDL-c targets in patients with T2D in Italian diabetes specialist clinics. METHODS:We collected data from 46 diabetes outpatient clinics (following 281,381 subjects), including 104,726 T2D patients, for whom use of LLTs between 2015 and 2016 was ascertained. We used the 2016 and 2019 European Atherosclerosis Society and European Society of Cardiology (EAS-ESC) guidelines to define cardiovascular risk categories, LDL-c targets, and the expected LDL-c reduction and cardiovascular benefit achievable with LLT intensification. RESULTS:63,861 patients (61.0%) were on statin therapy, 9.2% of whom were also on ezetimibe. Almost all subjects were at high (29.3%) or very high (70.4%) cardiovascular risk, including 17% being in secondary prevention. Among very high-risk patients, 35% were not on statin despite half of them had LDL-c?>?2.6 mmol/l, and only 15% of those on statins had LDL-c?<?1.4 mmol/l. 83% of subjects in secondary prevention were on a statin, but half of them had LDL-c?>?1.8 mmol/l. Overall, 35% and 14% of subjects achieved the LDL-c targets as suggested by 2016 and 2019 EAS-ESC Guidelines, respectively. Based on anticipated response to treatment, we estimated that 38% of the entire population would require high-intensity-statin (HI-statin), 27% a combination of HI-statin plus ezetimibe, and 27% the addition of proprotein-convertase-subtilisin/kexin-9 (PCSK9) inhibitors. These LLT intensifications would reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events by 32%, from 23.511 to 16.022 events per 100.000 patients/10-years (incidence-rate-ratio 0.68; 95% C.I 0.67-0.70, p?<?0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Despite the increase in use of LLT in T2D over the last decades, a large proportion of subjects with T2D did not achieve their LDL-c targets. Given the very high cardiovascular risk of these patients, improving LLT is expected to have a dramatic impact on cardiovascular event prevention.