New approaches in detection and treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder that clinically leads to increased low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. As a consequence, FH patients are at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Mutations are found in genes coding for the LDLR, apoB, and PCSK9, although FH cannot be ruled out in the absence of a mutation in one of these genes. It is pivotal to diagnose FH at an early age, since lipid lowering results in a decreased risk of cardiovascular complications especially if initiated early, but unfortunately FH is largely underdiagnosed. While a number of clinical criteria are available, identification of a pathogenic mutation in any of the three aforementioned genes is seen by many as a way to establish a definitive diagnosis of FH. It should be remembered that clinical treatment is based on LDL-C levels and not solely on presence or absence of genetic mutations as LDL-C is what drives risk. Traditionally, mutation detection has been done by means of dideoxy sequencing. However, novel molecular testing methods are gradually being introduced. These next generation sequencing-based methods are likely to be applied on broader scale once their efficacy and effect on cost are being established. Statins are the first-line therapy of choice for FH patients as they have been proven to reduce CVD risk across a range of conditions including hypercholesterolemia (though not specifically tested in FH). However, in a significant proportion of FH patients LDL-C goals are not met, despite the use of maximal statin doses and additional lipid-lowering therapies. This underlines the need for additional therapies, and inhibition of PCSK9 and CETP is among the most promising new therapeutic options. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the latest information about the definition, diagnosis, screening, and current and novel therapies for F

Estimating the economic burden of cardiovascular events in patients receiving lipid-modifying therapy in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the costs to the UK National Health Service of cardiovascular (CV) events among individuals receiving lipid-modifying therapy. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink records from 2006 to 2012 to identify individuals with their first and second CV-related hospitalisations (first event and second event cohorts). Within-person differences were used to estimate CV-related outcomes. SETTING: Patients in the UK who had their first CV event between January 2006 and March 2012. PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥18 years who had a CV event and received at least 2 lipid-modifying therapy prescriptions within 180 days beforehand. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Direct medical costs (2014 £) were estimated in 3 periods: baseline (pre-event), acute (6 months afterwards) and long-term (subsequent 30 months). Primary outcomes included incremental costs, resource usage and total costs per period. RESULTS: There were 24 093 patients in the first event cohort of whom 5274 were included in the second event cohort. The mean incremental acute CV event costs for the first event and second event cohorts were: coronary artery bypass graft/percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (CABG/PTCA) £5635 and £5823, myocardial infarction £4275 and £4301, ischaemic stroke £3512 and £4572, heart failure £2444 and £3461, unstable angina £2179 and £2489 and transient ischaemic attack £1537 and £1814. The mean incremental long-term costs were: heart failure £848 and £2829, myocardial infarction £922 and £1385, ischaemic stroke £973 and £682, transient ischaemic attack £705 and £1692, unstable angina £328 and £677, and CABG/PTCA £-368 and £599. Hospitalisation accounted for 95% of acute and 61% of long-term incremental costs. Higher comorbidity was associated with higher long-term costs. CONCLUSIONS: Revascularisation and myocardial infarction were associated with the highest incremental costs following a CV event. On the basis of real-world data, the economic burden of CV events in the UK is substantial, particularly among those with greater comorbidity burden

Transatlantic lipid guideline divergence: same data but different interpretations

Despite consensus that excessive circulating concentrations of apoB-lipoproteins is a key driver for the atherosclerotic process and that treatments that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering by up-regulation of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol receptor expression reduces that risk, divergent viewpoints on interpretation of study data have resulted in substantial differences in European and American lipid guideline recommendations. This article explores those differences and highlights the importance of understanding guideline-based lipid management to improve patient care and reduce the risk of clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

Is the SMART risk prediction model ready for real-world implementation? A validation study in a routine care setting of approximately 380 000 individuals

AIMS: Reliably quantifying event rates in secondary prevention could aid clinical decision-making, including quantifying potential risk reductions of novel, and sometimes expensive, add-on therapies. We aimed to assess whether the SMART risk prediction model performs well in a real-world setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a historical open cohort study using UK primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2000-2017) diagnosed with coronary, cerebrovascular, peripheral, and/or aortic atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Analyses were undertaken separately for cohorts with established (≥6 months) vs. newly diagnosed ASCVD. The outcome was first post-cohort entry occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. Among the cohort with established ASCVD [n = 244 578, 62.1% male, median age 67.3 years, interquartile range (IQR) 59.2-74.0], the calibration and discrimination achieved by the SMART model was not dissimilar to performance at internal validation [Harrell's c-statistic = 0.639, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.636-0.642, compared with 0.675, 0.642-0.708]. Decision curve analysis indicated that the model outperformed treat all and treat none strategies in the clinically relevant 20-60% predicted risk range. Consistent findings were observed in sensitivity analyses, including complete case analysis (n = 182 482; c = 0.624, 95% CI 0.620-0.627). Among the cohort with newly diagnosed ASCVD (n = 136 445; 61.0% male; median age 66.0 years, IQR 57.7-73.2), model performance was weaker with more exaggerated risk under-prediction and a c-statistic of 0.559, 95% CI 0.556-0.562. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the SMART model in this validation cohort demonstrates its potential utility in routine healthcare settings in guiding both population and individual-level decision-making for secondary prevention patients

Lipoprotein(a), Interleukin-6 inhibitors, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: Is there an association?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and interleuking-6 (IL-6), an inflammation biomarker, have been established as distinct targets of the residual atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. We aimed to investigate the association between them, and the potential clinical implications in ASCVD prevention. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed until December 31st, 2022, using relevant keywords. RESULTS: Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels constitute the most common inherited lipid disorder associated with ASCVD. Although Lp(a) levels are mostly determined genetically by the LPA gene locus, they may be altered by acute conditions of stress and chronic inflammatory diseases. Considering its resemblance with low-density lipoproteins, Lp(a) is involved in atherosclerosis, but it also exerts oxidative, thrombotic, antifibrinolytic and inflammatory properties. The cardiovascular efficacy of therapies lowering Lp(a) by >90% is currently investigated. On the other hand, interleukin (IL)-1b/IL-6 pathway also plays a pivotal role in atherosclerosis and residual ASCVD risk. IL-6 receptor inhibitors [IL-6(R)i] lower Lp(a) by 16-41%, whereas ongoing trials are investigating their potential anti-atherosclerotic effect. The Lp(a)-lowering effect of IL-6(R)i might be attributed to the inhibition of the IL-6 response elements in the promoter region of the LPA gene. CONCLUSIONS: Although the effect of IL-6(R)i on Lp(a) levels is inferior to that of available Lp(a)-lowering therapies, the dual effect of the former on both inflammation and apolipoprotein (a) synthesis may prove of equal or even greater significance when it comes ASCVD outcomes. More trials are required to establish IL-6(R)i in ASCVD prevention and elucidate their interplay with Lp(a) as well as its clinical significance

Long-term persistence with evolocumab treatment and sustained reductions in LDL-cholesterol levels over 30 months: final results from the European observational HEYMANS study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Variability in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) level control at a population level is associated with poor cardiovascular outcomes. Limited data exist on LDL-C level variability or long-term persistence with the monoclonal antibody evolocumab in routine clinical practice. Using data from the HEYMANS registry, this analysis aimed to assess evolocumab persistence and discontinuation over 30 months of evolocumab treatment and to evaluate at a population level the variability in LDL-C level reductions during the study period. METHODS: HEYMANS was a prospective registry of adults initiating evolocumab in routine clinical practice in 12 European countries. Data were collected for up to and including 6 months before evolocumab initiation and up to 30 months after. Evolocumab discontinuation was analysed for two time periods: 0-12 months and 12-30 months. RESULTS: In total, 1951 patients were included in the study. The median reduction in LDL-C levels was 58% within 3 months after evolocumab initiation; this reduction was maintained over 30 months. More than 90% of patients continued receiving evolocumab at 12 months and 30 months of follow-up. Of patients with an LDL-C level measurement during follow-up, approximately 85% achieved a ≥30% reduction from baseline at each follow-up visit and approximately 60% achieved a ≥50% reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Evolocumab therapy was associated with sustained LDL-C level reductions up to 30 months, and persistence with evolocumab remained high, both at 12 and 30 months. Expanding the use of monoclonal antibodies such as evolocumab could provide improvements in LDL-C level control at a population level in European clinical practice

Cardiac rehabilitation versus standard care after aortic aneurysm repair (Aneurysm CaRe): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysms (A/TAA) are an important cause of mortality amongst the older population. Although A/TAA repair can be performed with low peri-operative risk, overall life expectancy remains poor in the years that follow surgery. The majority of deaths are caused by heart attack or stroke, which can both be prevented by cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in patients with clinically-manifest coronary artery disease. A Cochrane review has urged researchers to widen the use of CR to other populations with severe cardiovascular risk, and patients surviving A/TAA repair appear ideal candidates. However, it is unknown whether CR is feasible or acceptable to A/TAA patients, who are a decade older than those currently enrolling in CR. Aneurysm-CaRe is a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) that will address these issues. METHODS AND DESIGN: Aneurysm-CaRe is a pilot RCT of CR versus standard care after A/TAA repair, with the primary objectives of estimating enrolment to a trial of CR after A/TAA repair and estimating compliance with CR amongst patients with A/TAA. Aneurysm-CaRe will randomise 84 patients at two sites. Patients discharged from hospital after elective A/TAA repair will be randomised to standard care or enrolment in their local CR programme with a protocolised approach to medical cardiovascular risk reduction. The primary outcome measures are enrolment in the RCT and compliance with CR. Secondary outcomes will include phenotypic markers of cardiovascular risk and smoking cessation, alongside disease-specific and generic quality-of-life measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 65746249 5 June 2014

Estimated individual lifetime benefit from PCSK9 inhibition in statin-treated patients with coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE: In statin-treated patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), residual risk of cardiovascular events is partly explained by plasma levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). This study aimed to estimate individual benefit of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibition in CAD patients already treated with high-dose statin. METHODS: Individual lifetime benefit was estimated in months gain free of stroke or myocardial infarction (MI) until age 80 years. Predictions were based on two competing risk models developed in data from 4853 patients with CAD originating from the atorvastatin 80 mg arm of the Treating to New Targets (TNT) trial. The relative effect of PCSK9 inhibition was added to the models and was assumed based on average estimates from large clinical trials. We accounted for individual LDL-C levels, assuming 50% LDL-C reduction by PCSK9 inhibition and 21% cardiovascular risk reduction per mmol/L (39 mg/dL) LDL-C lowering. RESULTS: Estimated individual gain was 1.8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL). Estimated benefit was lowest (≤5 months) in older patients (≥70 years), in particular if LDL-C and other risk factors levels were low. CONCLUSION: The individual estimated lifetime benefit from PCSK9 inhibition in patients with stable CAD on high-dose statin varied from <6 to ≥12 months free of stroke or MI. Highest benefit is expected in younger patients (age 40-60 years) with high risk factor burden and relatively high LDL-C levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00327691; Post-results

Lipid-lowering treatment and LDL-C goal attainment in high and very high cardiovascular risk patients: Evidence from the SANTORINI study-The Italian experience

The SANTORINI study is an observational study that enrolled 9602 adult individuals at high or very high cardiovascular (CV) risk across Europe, aimed at providing information on the current status of the management of dyslipidaemias, in light of the most recent 2019 EAS/ESC guidelines. Italy participated in the study with 1977 patients, 1531 (77.4%) of whom were classified at very high CV risk and 446 (22.6%) at high CV risk. Overall, in the Italian population, 79.31% of the patients had a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). At enrolment, the mean level of LDL-C in the total population was 98.4 mg/dL. LDL-C levels were lower in the very high-risk group (94.6 mg/dL) than in the high-risk group (111.4 mg/dL). Considering the therapeutic goals recommended by the most recent 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines (LDL-C <55 mg/dL or <70 mg/dL respectively in very high or high-risk patients, respectively), only 20.3% of the overall study population achieved such goals (19.9% of very high-risk patients and 21.8% of high-risk patients). About one-third of the patients included in the study (32.6%) were not prescribed any therapy, one-third received statin monotherapy (34.4%), and only one-third (33%) were taking combination therapy; these percentages were comparable in the two risk subgroups. Based on the most recent 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines, the use of cholesterol-lowering therapies is not always optimal to achieve the therapeutic goals even in patients with very high CV risk. This means that about 80% of patients are far from the recommended therapeutic goals for their risk category