Implications of ACC/AHA versus ESC/EAS LDL-C recommendations for residual risk reduction in ASCVD:: a simulation study from DA VINCI

Vallejo-Vaz, A.J.; Bray, S.; Villa, G.; Brandts, J.; Kiru, G.; Murphy, J.; Banach, M.; Servi, S. de; Gaita, D.; Gouni-Berthold, I.; Hovingh, G.K.; Jozwiak, J.J.; Jukema, J.W.; Kiss, R.G.; Kownator, S.; Iversen, H.K.; Maher, V.; Masana, L.; Parkhomenko, A.; Peeters, A.; Clifford, P.; Raslova, K.; Siostrzonek, P.; Romeo, S.; Tousoulis, D.; Vlachopoulos, C.; Vrablik, M.; Catapano, A.L.; Poulter, N.R.; Ray, K.K.

doi:doi:10.1007/s10557-022-07343-x

Purpose: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recommendations differ between the 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) (<70 vs. < 55 mg/dl, respectively). In the DA VINCI study, residual cardiovascular risk was predicted in ASCVD patients. The extent to which relative and absolute risk might be lowered by achieving ACC/AHA versus ESC/EAS LDL-C recommended approaches was simulated. Methods: DA VINCI was a cross-sectional observational study of patients prescribed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) across 18 European countries. Ten-year cardiovascular risk (CVR) was predicted among ASCVD patients receiving stabilized LLT. For patients with LDL-C >= 70 mg/dl, the absolute LDL-C reduction required to achieve an LDL-C of < 70 or <55 mg/dl (LDL-C of 69 or 54 mg/dl, respectively) was calculated....Show morePurpose: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recommendations differ between the 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) (<70 vs. < 55 mg/dl, respectively). In the DA VINCI study, residual cardiovascular risk was predicted in ASCVD patients. The extent to which relative and absolute risk might be lowered by achieving ACC/AHA versus ESC/EAS LDL-C recommended approaches was simulated. Methods: DA VINCI was a cross-sectional observational study of patients prescribed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) across 18 European countries. Ten-year cardiovascular risk (CVR) was predicted among ASCVD patients receiving stabilized LLT. For patients with LDL-C >= 70 mg/dl, the absolute LDL-C reduction required to achieve an LDL-C of < 70 or <55 mg/dl (LDL-C of 69 or 54 mg/dl, respectively) was calculated. Relative and absolute risk reductions (RRRs and ARRs) were simulated. Results: Of the 2039 patients, 61% did not achieve LDL-C <70 mg/dl. For patients with LDL-C >= 70 mg/dl, median (interquartile range) baseline LDL-C and 10-year CVR were 93 (81-115) mg/dl and 32% (25-43%), respectively. Median LDL-C reductions of 24 (12-46) and 39 (27-91) mg/dl were needed to achieve an LDL-C of 69 and 54 mg/dl, respectively. Attaining ACC/AHA or ESC/EAS goals resulted in simulated RRRs of 14% (7-25%) and 22% (15-32%), respectively, and ARRs of 4% (2-7%) and 6% (4-9%), respectively. Conclusion: In ASCVD patients, achieving ESC/EAS LDL-C goals could result in a 2% additional ARR over 10 years versus the ACC/AHA approach.Show less

Leiden University Scholarly Publications

View statistics

Documents

In Collections

Implications of ACC/AHA versus ESC/EAS LDL-C recommendations for residual risk reduction in ASCVD: a simulation study from DA VINCI