Coronary heart disease risks associated with high levels of HDL cholesterol.

BackgroundThe association between high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and coronary heart disease (CHD) events is not well described in individuals with very high levels of HDL-C (>80 mg/dL).Methods and resultsUsing pooled data from 6 community-based cohorts we examined CHD and total mortality risks across a broad range of HDL-C, including values in excess of 80 mg/dL. We used Cox proportional hazards models with penalized splines to assess multivariable, adjusted, sex-stratified associations of HDL-C with the hazard for CHD events and total mortality, using HDL-C 45 mg/dL and 55 mg/dL as the referent in men and women, respectively. Analyses included 11 515 men and 12 925 women yielding 307 245 person-years of follow-up. In men, the association between HDL-C and CHD events was inverse and linear across most HDL-C values; however at HDL-C values >90 mg/dL there was a plateau effect in the pattern of association. In women, the association between HDL-C and CHD events was inverse and linear across lower values of HDL-C, however at HDL-C values >75 mg/dL there were no further reductions in the hazard ratio point estimates for CHD. In unadjusted models there were increased total mortality risks in men with very high HDL-C, however mortality risks observed in participants with very high HDL-C were attenuated after adjustment for traditional risk factors.ConclusionsWe did not observe further reductions in CHD risk with HDL-C values higher than 90 mg/dL in men and 75 mg/dL in women

A Systematic Examination of the 2013 ACC/AHA Pooled Cohort Risk Assessment Tool for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

AbstractBackgroundThe 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association updated cholesterol guidelines recommend the use of Pooled Cohort Equations to estimate 10-year absolute risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in primary prevention.ObjectivesThis study sought to systematically examine the Pooled Cohort Equations to determine risk factor levels required to exceed risk thresholds outlined in new cholesterol guidelines.MethodsWe entered continuous risk factor levels in isolation and in specified combinations with the risk tool, and we observed predicted risk output patterns. We used the 10-year ASCVD risk threshold of ≥7.5% as a clinically relevant risk threshold.ResultsWe demonstrated that a hypothetical man or woman can reach clinically relevant risk thresholds throughout the eligible age spectrum of 40 to 79 years of age, depending on the associated risk factor burden in all race-sex groups. Age continues to be a major determinant of 10-year ASCVD risk for both men and women. Compared with the previous risk assessment tool used in cholesterol guidelines, the inclusion of a stroke endpoint and use of race-specific coefficients permit identification of at-risk African Americans and non-Hispanic white women at much younger ages and lower risk factor levels.ConclusionsThese data provide context of specific risk factor levels and groups of individuals who are likely to have 10-year ASCVD risk estimates ≥7.5%. Age continues to be a major driver of risk, which highlights the importance of the clinician-patient discussion before statin therapy is initiated

Cardiovascular health behavior and health factor changes (1988-2008) and projections to 2020: results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys.

BackgroundThe American Heart Association's 2020 Strategic Impact Goals target a 20% relative improvement in overall cardiovascular health with the use of 4 health behavior (smoking, diet, physical activity, body mass) and 3 health factor (plasma glucose, cholesterol, blood pressure) metrics. We sought to define current trends and forward projections to 2020 in cardiovascular health.Methods and resultsWe included 35 059 cardiovascular disease-free adults (aged ≥20 years) from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1988-1994 and subsequent 2-year cycles during 1999-2008. We calculated population prevalence of poor, intermediate, and ideal health behaviors and factors and also computed a composite, individual-level Cardiovascular Health Score for all 7 metrics (poor=0 points; intermediate=1 point; ideal=2 points; total range, 0-14 points). Prevalence of current and former smoking, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension declined, whereas prevalence of obesity and dysglycemia increased through 2008. Physical activity levels and low diet quality scores changed minimally. Projections to 2020 suggest that obesity and impaired fasting glucose/diabetes mellitus could increase to affect 43% and 77% of US men and 42% and 53% of US women, respectively. Overall, population-level cardiovascular health is projected to improve by 6% overall by 2020 if current trends continue. Individual-level Cardiovascular Health Score projections to 2020 (men=7.4 [95% confidence interval, 5.7-9.1]; women=8.8 [95% confidence interval, 7.6-9.9]) fall well below the level needed to achieve a 20% improvement (men=9.4; women=10.1).ConclusionsThe American Heart Association 2020 target of improving cardiovascular health by 20% by 2020 will not be reached if current trends continue

Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: The current paradigm for cardiovascular disease (CVD) emphasises absolute risk assessment to guide treatment decisions in primary prevention. Although the derivation and validation of multivariable risk assessment tools, or CVD risk scores, have attracted considerable attention, their effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of evaluating and providing CVD risk scores in adults without prevalent CVD on cardiovascular outcomes, risk factor levels, preventive medication prescribing, and health behaviours. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library (2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to March week 1 2016), Embase (embase.com) (1974 to 15 March 2016), and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (1990 to 15 March 2016). We imposed no language restrictions. We searched clinical trial registers in March 2016 and handsearched reference lists of primary studies to identify additional reports. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing the systematic provision of CVD risk scores by a clinician, healthcare professional, or healthcare system compared with usual care (i.e. no systematic provision of CVD risk scores) in adults without CVD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and evaluated study quality. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess study limitations. The primary outcomes were: CVD events, change in CVD risk factor levels (total cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, and multivariable CVD risk), and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included: lipid-lowering and antihypertensive medication prescribing in higher-risk people. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous data using 95% confidence intervals. We used a fixed-effects model when heterogeneity (I²) was at least 50% and a random-effects model for substantial heterogeneity (I² > 50%). We evaluated the quality of evidence using the GRADE framework. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 41 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 194,035 participants from 6422 reports. We assessed studies as having high or unclear risk of bias across multiple domains. Low-quality evidence evidence suggests that providing CVD risk scores may have little or no effect on CVD events compared with usual care (5.4% versus 5.3%; RR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.08; I² = 25%; 3 trials, N = 99,070). Providing CVD risk scores may reduce CVD risk factor levels by a small amount compared with usual care. Providing CVD risk scores reduced total cholesterol (MD -0.10 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.00; I² = 94%; 12 trials, N = 20,437, low-quality evidence), systolic blood pressure (MD -2.77 mmHg, 95% CI -4.16 to -1.38; I² = 93%; 16 trials, N = 32,954, low-quality evidence), and multivariable CVD risk (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.02; I² = 94%; 9 trials, N = 9549, low-quality evidence). Providing CVD risk scores may reduce adverse events compared with usual care, but results were imprecise (1.9% versus 2.7%; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.04; I² = 0%; 4 trials, N = 4630, low-quality evidence). Compared with usual care, providing CVD risk scores may increase new or intensified lipid-lowering medications (15.7% versus 10.7%; RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.87; I² = 40%; 11 trials, N = 14,175, low-quality evidence) and increase new or increased antihypertensive medications (17.2% versus 11.4%; RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.11; I² = 53%; 8 trials, N = 13,255, low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is uncertainty whether current strategies for providing CVD risk scores affect CVD events. Providing CVD risk scores may slightly reduce CVD risk factor levels and may increase preventive medication prescribing in higher-risk people without evidence of harm. There were multiple study limitations in the identified studies and substantial heterogeneity in the interventions, outcomes, and analyses, so readers should interpret results with caution. New models for implementing and evaluating CVD risk scores in adequately powered studies are needed to define the role of applying CVD risk scores in primary CVD prevention

Accumulation of metabolic cardiovascular risk factors in black and white young adults over 20 years

BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional clustering of metabolic risk factors for cardiovascular disease in middle-aged adults is well described, but less is known regarding the order in which risk factors develop through young adulthood and their relation to subclinical atherosclerosis. METHOD AND RESULTS: A total of 3178 black and white women and men in the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults study were assessed to identify the order in which cardiovascular disease risk factors including diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia (low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol or high triglyceride levels), hypercholesterolemia (high total or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), and obesity develop. Observed patterns of risk factor development were compared with those expected if risk factors accumulated randomly, given their overall distribution in the population. Over the 20 years of follow-up, 80% of participants developed at least 1 risk factor. The first factor to occur was dyslipidemia in 39% of participants, obesity in 20%, hypercholesterolemia in 11%, hypertension in 7%, and diabetes in 1%. Dyslipidemia was the only risk factor both to occur first and to be followed by additional risk factors more often than expected (P \u3c 0.001 for both). Order of risk factor accrual did not affect subclinical atherosclerosis at year 20. Results were similar by sex, race, and smoking status. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple patterns of cardiovascular risk factor development were observed from young adulthood to middle age. Dyslipidemia, a potentially modifiable condition, often preceded the development of other risk factors and may be a useful target for intervention and monitoring

Lifetime Risk of Lower-Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease Defined by Ankle-Brachial Index in the United States.

Background There are no available lifetime risk estimates of lower-extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD). Methods and Results Using data from 6 US community-based cohorts and the vital statistics, we estimated the prevalence and incidence of PAD, defined as an ankle-brachial index < 0.90, at each year of age from birth to 80 years for white, black, and Hispanic men and women. Then, we used Markov Monte Carlo simulations in a simulated cohort of 100 000 individuals to estimate lifetime risk of PAD. On the basis of odds ratios of PAD for traditional atherosclerotic risk factors (eg, diabetes mellitus and smoking), we developed a calculator providing residual lifetime risk of PAD. In an 80-year horizon, lifetime risks of PAD were 30.0% in black men and 27.6% in black women, but ≈19% in white men and women and ≈22% in Hispanic men and women. From another perspective, 9% of blacks were estimated to develop PAD by 60 years of age, while the same proportion was seen at ≈70 years for whites and Hispanics. The residual lifetime risk within the same race/ethnicity varied by 3.5- to 5-fold according to risk factors (eg, residual lifetime risk in 45-year-old black men was 19.9% when current smoking, diabetes mellitus, and history of cardiovascular disease were absent versus 70.4% when all were present). Conclusions In the United States, ≈30% of blacks are estimated to develop PAD during their lifetime, whereas the corresponding estimate is ≈20% for whites and Hispanics. The residual lifetime risk within the same race/ethnicity substantially varies according to traditional risk factors