Long-term effect of 2 intensive statin regimens on treatment and incidence of cardiovascular events in familial hypercholesterolemia : The SAFEHEART study

Funding: This study was supported by Fundación Hipercolesterolemia Familiar; Grant G03/181 Grant 08-2008 Centro Nacional de Investigaci?n Cardiovascular (CNIC).Background: Maximal doses of potent statins are the basement of treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Little is known about the use of different statin regimens in FH. Objectives: The objectives of the study were to describe the treatment changes and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement with atorvastatin (ATV) and rosuvastatin (RV) in the SAFEHEART cohort, as well as to analyze the incidence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events (ACVEs) and changes in the cardiovascular risk. Methods: SAFEHEART is a prospective follow-up nationwide cohort study in a molecularly defined FH population. The patients were contacted on a yearly basis to obtain relevant changes in life habits, medication, and ACVEs. Results: A total of 1939 patients were analyzed. Median follow-up was 6.6 years (5-10). The estimated 10-year risk according the SAFEHEART risk equation was 1.61 (0.67-3.39) and 1.22 (0.54-2.93) at enrollment for ATV and RV, respectively (P <.001). There were no significant differences at the follow-up: 1.29 (0.54-2.82) and 1.22 (0.54-2.76) in the ATV and RV groups, respectively (P =.51). Sixteen percent of patients in primary prevention with ATV and 18% with RV achieved an LDL-C <100 mg/dL and 4% in secondary prevention with ATV and 5% with RV achieved an LDL-C <70 mg/dL. The use of ezetimibe was marginally greater in the RV group. One hundred sixty ACVEs occurred during follow-up, being its incidence rate 1.1 events/100 patient-years in the ATV group and 1.2 in the RV group (P =.58). Conclusion: ATV and RV are 2 high-potency statins widely used in FH. Although the reduction in LDL-C levels was greater with RV than with ATV, the superiority of RV for reducing ACVEs was not demonstrated

The management of acute venous thromboembolism in clinical practice. Results from the European PREFER in VTE Registry

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in Europe. Data from real-world registries are necessary, as clinical trials do not represent the full spectrum of VTE patients seen in clinical practice. We aimed to document the epidemiology, management and outcomes of VTE using data from a large, observational database. PREFER in VTE was an international, non-interventional disease registry conducted between January 2013 and July 2015 in primary and secondary care across seven European countries. Consecutive patients with acute VTE were documented and followed up over 12 months. PREFER in VTE included 3,455 patients with a mean age of 60.8 ± 17.0 years. Overall, 53.0 % were male. The majority of patients were assessed in the hospital setting as inpatients or outpatients (78.5 %). The diagnosis was deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) in 59.5 % and pulmonary embolism (PE) in 40.5 %. The most common comorbidities were the various types of cardiovascular disease (excluding hypertension; 45.5 %), hypertension (42.3 %) and dyslipidaemia (21.1 %). Following the index VTE, a large proportion of patients received initial therapy with heparin (73.2 %), almost half received a vitamin K antagonist (48.7 %) and nearly a quarter received a DOAC (24.5 %). Almost a quarter of all presentations were for recurrent VTE, with &gt;80 % of previous episodes having occurred more than 12 months prior to baseline. In conclusion, PREFER in VTE has provided contemporary insights into VTE patients and their real-world management, including their baseline characteristics, risk factors, disease history, symptoms and signs, initial therapy and outcomes

Long-term effect of 2 intensive statin regimens on treatment and incidence of cardiovascular events in familial hypercholesterolemia: The SAFEHEART study

[Background] Maximal doses of potent statins are the basement of treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Little is known about the use of different statin regimens in FH.[Objectives] The objectives of the study were to describe the treatment changes and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement with atorvastatin (ATV) and rosuvastatin (RV) in the SAFEHEART cohort, as well as to analyze the incidence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events (ACVEs) and changes in the cardiovascular risk.[Methods] SAFEHEART is a prospective follow-up nationwide cohort study in a molecularly defined FH population. The patients were contacted on a yearly basis to obtain relevant changes in life habits, medication, and ACVEs.[Results] A total of 1939 patients were analyzed. Median follow-up was 6.6 years (5–10). The estimated 10-year risk according the SAFEHEART risk equation was 1.61 (0.67–3.39) and 1.22 (0.54–2.93) at enrollment for ATV and RV, respectively (P < .001). There were no significant differences at the follow-up: 1.29 (0.54–2.82) and 1.22 (0.54–2.76) in the ATV and RV groups, respectively (P = .51). Sixteen percent of patients in primary prevention with ATV and 18% with RV achieved an LDL-C <100 mg/dL and 4% in secondary prevention with ATV and 5% with RV achieved an LDL-C <70 mg/dL. The use of ezetimibe was marginally greater in the RV group. One hundred sixty ACVEs occurred during follow-up, being its incidence rate 1.1 events/100 patient-years in the ATV group and 1.2 in the RV group (P = .58).[Conclusion] ATV and RV are 2 high-potency statins widely used in FH. Although the reduction in LDL-C levels was greater with RV than with ATV, the superiority of RV for reducing ACVEs was not demonstrated.This study was supported by Fundación Hipercolesterolemia Familiar; Grant G03/181 and FIS PI12/01289 from Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Grant 08-2008 Centro Nacional de Investigación Cardiovascular (CNIC)

Long-term effect of 2 intensive statin regimens on treatment and incidence of cardiovascular events in familial hypercholesterolemia : The SAFEHEART study

Funding: This study was supported by Fundación Hipercolesterolemia Familiar; Grant G03/181 Grant 08-2008 Centro Nacional de Investigaci?n Cardiovascular (CNIC).Background: Maximal doses of potent statins are the basement of treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Little is known about the use of different statin regimens in FH. Objectives: The objectives of the study were to describe the treatment changes and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement with atorvastatin (ATV) and rosuvastatin (RV) in the SAFEHEART cohort, as well as to analyze the incidence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events (ACVEs) and changes in the cardiovascular risk. Methods: SAFEHEART is a prospective follow-up nationwide cohort study in a molecularly defined FH population. The patients were contacted on a yearly basis to obtain relevant changes in life habits, medication, and ACVEs. Results: A total of 1939 patients were analyzed. Median follow-up was 6.6 years (5-10). The estimated 10-year risk according the SAFEHEART risk equation was 1.61 (0.67-3.39) and 1.22 (0.54-2.93) at enrollment for ATV and RV, respectively (P <.001). There were no significant differences at the follow-up: 1.29 (0.54-2.82) and 1.22 (0.54-2.76) in the ATV and RV groups, respectively (P =.51). Sixteen percent of patients in primary prevention with ATV and 18% with RV achieved an LDL-C <100 mg/dL and 4% in secondary prevention with ATV and 5% with RV achieved an LDL-C <70 mg/dL. The use of ezetimibe was marginally greater in the RV group. One hundred sixty ACVEs occurred during follow-up, being its incidence rate 1.1 events/100 patient-years in the ATV group and 1.2 in the RV group (P =.58). Conclusion: ATV and RV are 2 high-potency statins widely used in FH. Although the reduction in LDL-C levels was greater with RV than with ATV, the superiority of RV for reducing ACVEs was not demonstrated

Low-molecular-weight or Unfractionated Heparin in Venous Thromboembolism: The Influence of Renal Function

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute venous thromboembolism and renal insufficiency, initial therapy with unfractionated heparin may have some advantages over low-molecular-weight heparin. METHODS: We used the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) Registry data to evaluate the 15-day outcome in 38,531 recruited patients. We used propensity score matching to compare patients treated with unfractionated heparin with those treated with low-molecular-weight heparin in 3 groups stratified by creatinine clearance levels at baseline: >60 mL/min, 30 to 60 mL/min, or <30 mL/min. RESULTS: Patients initially receiving unfractionated heparin therapy (n = 2167) more likely had underlying diseases than those receiving low-molecular-weight heparin (n = 34,665). Propensity score-matched groups of patients with creatinine clearance levels >60 mL/min (n = 1598 matched pairs), 30 to 60 mL/min (n = 277 matched pairs), and <30 mL/min (n = 210 matched pairs) showed an increased 15-day mortality for unfractionated heparin compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (4.5% vs 2.4% [P = .001], 5.4% vs 5.8% [P = not significant], and 15% vs 8.1% [P = .02], respectively), an increased rate of fatal pulmonary embolism (2.8% vs 1.2% [P = .001], 3.2% vs 2.5% [P = not significant], and 5.7% vs 2.4% [P = .02], respectively), and a similar rate of fatal bleeding (0.3% vs 0.3%, 0.7% vs 0.7%, and 0.5% vs 0.0%, respectively). Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients treated with unfractionated heparin were at increased risk for all-cause death (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.4) and fatal pulmonary embolism (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.6). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with low-molecular-weight heparin, initial therapy with unfractionated heparin was associated with a higher mortality and higher rate of fatal pulmonary embolism in patients with creatinine clearance levels >60 mL/min or <30 mL/min, but not in those with levels between 30 and 60 mL/min