Which lipid measurement should we monitor? An analysis of the LIPID study

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the optimal lipid to measure in monitoring patients, we assessed three factors that influence the choice of monitoring tests: (1) clinical validity; (2) responsiveness to therapy changes and (3) the size of the long-term ‘signal-to-noise’ ratio. DESIGN: Longitudinal analyses of repeated lipid measurement over 5 years. SETTING: Subsidiary analysis of a Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) study—a clinical trial in Australia, New Zealand and Finland. PARTICIPANTS: 9014 patients aged 31–75 years with previous acute coronary syndromes. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to 40 mg daily pravastatin or placebo. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We used data on serial lipid measurements—at randomisation, 6 months and 12 months, and then annually to 5 years—of total cholesterol; low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and their ratios; triglycerides; and apolipoproteins A and B and their ratio and their ability to predict coronary events. RESULTS: All the lipid measures were statistically significantly associated with future coronary events, but the associations between each of the three ratio measures (total or LDL cholesterol to HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B to apolipoprotein A1) and the time to a coronary event were better than those for any of the single lipid measures. The two cholesterol ratios also ranked highly for the long-term signal-to-noise ratios. However, LDL cholesterol and non-HDL cholesterol showed the most responsiveness to treatment change. CONCLUSIONS: Lipid monitoring is increasingly common, but current guidelines vary. No single measure was best on all three criteria. Total cholesterol did not rank highly on any single criterion. However, measurements based on cholesterol subfractions—non-HDL cholesterol (total cholesterol minus HDL cholesterol) and the two ratios—appeared superior to total cholesterol or any of the apolipoprotein options. Guidelines should consider using non-HDL cholesterol or a ratio measure for initial treatment decisions and subsequent monitoring

Patients' perspectives of long-term follow-up for localised cutaneous melanoma

Background Little is known about the value of long-term follow-up for localised cutaneous melanoma from the patients' perspective. This study aimed to explore the benefits and potential downsides of follow-up; feelings about changes to frequency of follow-up, and patient-centred recommendations for improving follow-up care. Methods Qualitative analysis of 29 in-depth interviews conducted with Australian patients undergoing long-term follow-up after surgical treatment of stage I/II melanoma. Results Patient-perceived benefits of follow-up included reassurance, early detection of new melanomas and non-melanoma skin cancers, education about skin self-examination, the opportunity to ask questions, and reinforcement of ‘sunsafe’ behaviours. Downsides included anxiety leading up to and during follow-up visits; inconvenience of travel to attend visits; and lost work time. Patients varied in their engagement with skin self-examination, and their views on multiple skin excisions, but highly valued access to specialists for unscheduled visits. Most patients felt their follow-up intervals could be extended to 12 months if recommended by their clinician. Conclusion The benefits and potential downsides of follow-up should be discussed with patients when deciding on a melanoma follow-up plan to achieve a balance between inducing additional patient anxiety and providing reassurance. Follow-up intervals of 12 months appear to be acceptable to patients

Long term monitoring in patients receiving treatment to lower blood pressure: analysis of data from placebo controlled randomised controlled trial

Objective To determine the value of monitoring blood pressure by quantifying the probability that observed changes in blood pressure reflect true changes

Early CRT monitoring using time-domain optical coherence tomography does not add to visual acuity for predicting visual loss in patients with central retinal vein occlusion treated with intravitreal ranibizumab:A secondary analysis of trial data

Our primary purpose was to assess the clinical (predictive) validity of central retinal thickness (CRT) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 1 week and 1 month after starting treatment with ranibizumab for central retinal vein occlusion. The authors also assessed detectability of response to treatment

Follow-up of early stage melanoma: specialist clinician perspectives on the functions of follow-up and implications for extending follow-up intervals

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on the relative effectiveness of different follow-up schedules for patients with AJCC stage I or II melanoma, but less frequent follow-up than is currently recommended has been proposed. OBJECTIVES: To describe melanoma clinicians' perspectives on the functions of follow-up, factors that influence follow-up intervals, and important considerations for extending intervals. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with 16 clinicians (surgical oncologists, dermatologists, melanoma unit physicians) who conduct follow-up at two of Australia's largest specialist centers. RESULTS: Follow-up is conducted for early detection of recurrences or new primary melanomas, to manage patient anxiety, support patient self-care, and as part of shared care. Recommended intervals are based on guidelines but account for each patient's clinical risk profile, level of anxiety, patient education requirements, capacity to engage in skin self-examination, and how the clinician prefers to manage any suspicious lesions. CONCLUSIONS: To revise guidelines and implement change it is important to understand the rationale underpinning existing practice. Extended follow-up intervals for early stage melanoma are more likely to be adopted after the first year when patients are less anxious and sufficiently prepared to conduct self-examination. Clinicians may retain existing schedules for highly anxious patients or those unable to examine themselves

Communicating cardiovascular disease risk: an interview study of General Practitioners’ use of absolute risk within tailored communication strategies

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines encourage assessment of absolute CVD risk - the probability of a CVD event within a fixed time period, based on the most predictive risk factors. However, few General Practitioners (GPs) use absolute CVD risk consistently, and communication difficulties have been identified as a barrier to changing practice. This study aimed to explore GPs’ descriptions of their CVD risk communication strategies, including the role of absolute risk. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 25 GPs in New South Wales, Australia. Transcribed audio-recordings were thematically coded, using the Framework Analysis method to ensure rigour. Results: GPs used absolute CVD risk within three different communication strategies: ‘positive’, ‘scare tactic’, and ‘indirect’. A ‘positive’ strategy, which aimed to reassure and motivate, was used for patients with low risk, determination to change lifestyle, and some concern about CVD risk. Absolute risk was used to show how they could reduce risk. A ‘scare tactic’ strategy was used for patients with high risk, lack of motivation, and a dismissive attitude. Absolute risk was used to ‘scare’ them into taking action. An ‘indirect’ strategy, where CVD risk was not the main focus, was used for patients with low risk but some lifestyle risk factors, high anxiety, high resistance to change, or difficulty understanding probabilities. Non-quantitative absolute risk formats were found to be helpful in these situations. Conclusions: This study demonstrated how GPs use three different communication strategies to address the issue of CVD risk, depending on their perception of patient risk, motivation and anxiety. Absolute risk played a different role within each strategy. Providing GPs with alternative ways of explaining absolute risk, in order to achieve different communication aims, may improve their use of absolute CVD risk assessment in practice.NHMR

How different terminology for ductal carcinoma in situ impacts women's concern and treatment preferences: A randomised comparison within a national community survey

OBJECTIVE: There have been calls to remove ‘carcinoma’ from terminology for in situ cancers such as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We investigated the effect of describing DCIS as ‘abnormal cells’ versus ‘pre-invasive breast cancer cells’ on women's concern and treatment preferences. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Community sample of Australian women (n=269) who spoke English as their main language at home. DESIGN: Randomised comparison within a community survey. Women considered a hypothetical scenario involving a diagnosis of DCIS described as either ‘abnormal cells’ (arm A) or ‘pre-invasive breast cancer cells’ (arm B). Within each arm, the initial description was followed by the alternative term and outcomes reassessed. RESULTS: Women in both arms indicated high concern, but still indicated strong initial preferences for watchful waiting (64%). There were no differences in initial concern or preferences by trial arm. However, more women in arm A (‘abnormal cells’ first term) indicated they would feel more concerned if given the alternative term (‘pre-invasive breast cancer cells’) compared to women in arm B who received the terms in the opposite order (67% arm A vs 52% arm B would feel more concerned, p=0.001). More women in arm A also changed their preference towards treatment when the terminology was switched from ‘abnormal cells’ to ‘pre-invasive breast cancer cells’ compared to arm B. In arm A, 18% of women changed their preference to treatment while only 6% changed to watchful waiting (p=0.008). In contrast, there were no significant changes in treatment preference in arm B when the terminology was switched (9% vs 8% changed their stated preference). CONCLUSIONS: In a hypothetical scenario, interest in watchful waiting for DCIS was high, and changing terminology impacted women's concern and treatment preferences. Removal of the cancer term from DCIS may assist in efforts towards reducing overtreatment

I need an exact margin measurement for this basal cell carcinoma!

Pathology laboratories are required to determine or estimate the measurement uncertainty for all quantitative results, but there is no literature on the uncertainty in margin measurements for skin cancer excisions. Six pathologists measured 4–14 histological margins in each of 10 basal cell carcinoma

I don't believe it, but I'd better do something about it: patient experiences of online 'heart age' risk calculators

Background: Health risk calculators are widely available on the internet, including cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk calculators that estimate the probability of a heart attack, stroke or death over a 5 or 10 year period. Some calculators convert this probability to 'heart age', where older heart age than current age indicates modifiable risk factors. These calculators may impact patient decision making about CVD risk management with or without clinician involvement, but little is known about how patients use them. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate patient experiences and understanding of online heart age calculators based on the Framingham Risk Equation used in clinical guidelines around the world. Methods: General Practitioners in New South Wales, Australia recruited 26 patients with CVD/lifestyle risk factors who were not taking cholesterol or blood pressure-lowering medication in 2012. Participants were asked to ‘think aloud’ while using two heart age calculators in random order, with semi-structured interviews before and after. Transcribed audio-recordings were coded and a Framework Analysis method was used. Results: Risk factor questions were often misinterpreted, reducing the accuracy of the calculators. Participants perceived older heart age as confronting, and younger heart age as positive but unrealistic. Unexpected or contradictory results (e.g. low percentage risk but older heart age) led participants to question the credibility of the calculators. Reasons to discredit the results included the absence of relevant lifestyle questions and impact of corporate sponsorship. However, the calculators prompted participants to consider lifestyle changes irrespective of whether they received younger, same or older heart age results. Conclusions: Online heart age calculators can be misunderstood and disregarded if they produce unexpected or contradictory results, but they may motivate lifestyle change anyway. Future research should investigate both the benefits and harms of communicating risk in this way, and how to increase the reliability and credibility of online health risk calculators.NHMR