ABSTRACT
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. 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.
Subject(s)
Atherosclerosis , Cardiovascular Diseases , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors , United States/epidemiology , Humans , Cholesterol, LDL , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Atherosclerosis/diagnosis , Atherosclerosis/drug therapy , Atherosclerosis/epidemiology , Risk Reduction Behavior , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of dabigatran dual therapy (110 or 150 mg twice daily, plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor) versus warfarin triple therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and STEMI. METHODS: In the RE-DUAL PCI trial, 305 patients with STEMI were randomised to dabigatran 110 mg (n=113 versus 106 warfarin) or 150 mg (n=86 versus 84 warfarin). The primary endpoint was the time to first major/clinically relevant non-major bleeding event (MBE/CRNMBE). The thrombotic endpoint was a composite of death, thromboembolic events, or unplanned revascularisation. RESULTS: In STEMI patients, dabigatran 110 mg (HR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.20-0.74) and 150 mg (0.43, 0.21-0.89) dual therapy reduced the risk of MBE/CRNMBE versus warfarin triple therapy (p for interaction vs all other patients=0.31 and 0.16). The risk of thrombotic events for dabigatran 110 mg (HR 1.61, 95% CI: 0.85-3.08) and 150 mg (0.56, 0.20-1.51) had p interactions of 0.20 and 0.33, respectively. For net clinical benefit, the HRs were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.46-1.17) and 0.49 (0.27-0.91) for dabigatran 110 and 150 mg (p for interaction=0.80 and 0.12), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After PCI for STEMI, patients on dabigatran dual therapy had lower risks of bleeding events versus warfarin triple therapy with similar risks of thromboembolic events, supporting dabigatran dual therapy even in patients with high thrombotic risk.
