Association between Increased Risk of Pneumonia with ICS in COPD: A Continuous Variable Analysis of Patient Factors from the IMPACT Study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the proven benefits of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), clinicians limit patient exposure to ICS due to the risk of pneumonia. However, there are multiple factors associated with the risk of pneumonia in patients with COPD. This post hoc analysis of IMPACT trial data aims to set the risks associated with ICS into a context of specific patient-related factors that contribute to the risk of pneumonia. METHODS: The 52-week, double-blind IMPACT trial randomized patients with symptomatic COPD and ≥1 exacerbation in the prior year 2:2:1 to once-daily fluticasone furoate (FF)/umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI), FF/VI or UMEC/VI. Annual rate of on-treatment pneumonias in the intent-to-treat population associated with age, body mass index (BMI), percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and blood eosinophil count (BEC) was evaluated. RESULTS: This analysis revealed that the annual rate of pneumonia showed the lowest risk at the age of 50 years. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) between ICS-containing and non-ICS containing treatments diverged in ages > 63 years, suggesting a significantly increased ICS-related risk in older patients. In contrast, the annual rate of pneumonia rose in both groups below BMI of 22.5 kg/m2, but above that, there was no relationship to pneumonia rate and no differential effect between the two groups. The relationship between BEC and pneumonia was flat up to > 300/µL cells with ICS-containing treatment and then rose. In contrast, the rate of pneumonia with non-ICS containing treatment appeared to increase at a lower level of BEC (~ 200/µL). CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence of a differential effect of older age, lower BMI, lower FEV1 and BEC on the pneumonia rate between ICS-containing and non-ICS containing treatments. This analysis points to the need for a balanced approach to risk versus benefit in the use of ICS-containing treatments in COPD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: IMPACT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02164513.

Antithrombotic Prophylaxis with Rivaroxaban in Patients with Prehospital COVID-19: A Meta-analysis of Two Placebo-Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a prespecified meta-analysis of two randomized, placebo-controlled trials of rivaroxaban 10 mg daily in prehospital patients with acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Individually, the trials had limited power to detect a treatment effect due to recruitment stopping ahead of plan. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The statistical analysis plan for the meta-analysis was finalized before unblinding of PREVENT-HD, the larger of the two trials. Pooled risk ratios and pooled risk differences along with the two-sided 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random-effect models. RESULTS: Rivaroxaban did not reduce the occurrence of either the primary prespecified endpoint, a composite of symptomatic arterial and venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality (risk difference: 0.0044; 95% confidence interval: -0.0263, 0.0175; p = 0.69 for pooled risk difference) or the secondary endpoint of all-cause hospitalization (p = 0.76). Although thrombotic events were infrequent, pooled analysis did reveal that rivaroxaban reduced arterial and venous thrombotic events (placebo 6 events, rivaroxaban 0 events; pooled risk difference: -0.0068; 95% confidence interval: -0.0132, -0.0006; p = 0.03). In the pooled studies, only one major bleeding event was observed in a rivaroxaban-allocated patient with no critical site or fatal bleeding events. CONCLUSION: Although this meta-analysis does not support antithrombotic prophylaxis with rivaroxaban in a broad prehospital population with acute COVID-19, the prevention of arterial and venous thrombotic events among rivaroxaban-allocated patients is consistent with the known thromboprophylactic effect of the drug in medically ill patients.

Alternative cascade-testing protocols for identifying and managing patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia: systematic reviews, qualitative study and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Background: Cascade testing the relatives of people with familial hypercholesterolaemia is an efficient approach to identifying familial hypercholesterolaemia. The cascade-testing protocol starts with identifying an index patient with familial hypercholesterolaemia, followed by one of three approaches to contact other relatives: indirect approach, whereby index patients contact their relatives; direct approach, whereby the specialist contacts the relatives; or a combination of both direct and indirect approaches. However, it is unclear which protocol may be most effective. Objectives: The objectives were to determine the yield of cases from different cascade-testing protocols, treatment patterns, and short- and long-term outcomes for people with familial hypercholesterolaemia; to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternative protocols for familial hypercholesterolaemia cascade testing; and to qualitatively assess the acceptability of different cascade-testing protocols to individuals and families with familial hypercholesterolaemia, and to health-care providers. Design and methods: This study comprised systematic reviews and analysis of three data sets: PASS (PASS Software, Rijswijk, the Netherlands) hospital familial hypercholesterolaemia databases, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)-Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) linked primary-secondary care data set, and a specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register. Cost-effectiveness modelling, incorporating preceding analyses, was undertaken. Acceptability was examined in interviews with patients, relatives and health-care professionals. Result: Systematic review of protocols: based on data from 4 of the 24 studies, the combined approach led to a slightly higher yield of relatives tested [40%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 37% to 42%] than the direct (33%, 95% CI 28% to 39%) or indirect approaches alone (34%, 95% CI 30% to 37%). The PASS databases identified that those contacted directly were more likely to complete cascade testing (p < 0.01); the CPRD-HES data set indicated that 70% did not achieve target treatment levels, and demonstrated increased cardiovascular disease risk among these individuals, compared with controls (hazard ratio 9.14, 95% CI 8.55 to 9.76). The specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register confirmed excessive cardiovascular morbidity (standardised morbidity ratio 7.17, 95% CI 6.79 to 7.56). Cost-effectiveness modelling found a net health gain from diagnosis of -0.27 to 2.51 quality-adjusted life-years at the willingness-to-pay threshold of £15,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The cost-effective protocols cascaded from genetically confirmed index cases by contacting first- and second-degree relatives simultaneously and directly. Interviews found a service-led direct-contact approach was more reliable, but combining direct and indirect approaches, guided by index patients and family relationships, may be more acceptable. Limitations: Systematic reviews were not used in the economic analysis, as relevant studies were lacking or of poor quality. As only a proportion of those with primary care-coded familial hypercholesterolaemia are likely to actually have familial hypercholesterolaemia, CPRD analyses are likely to underestimate the true effect. The cost-effectiveness analysis required assumptions related to the long-term cardiovascular disease risk, the effect of treatment on cholesterol and the generalisability of estimates from the data sets. Interview recruitment was limited to white English-speaking participants. Conclusions: Based on limited evidence, most cost-effective cascade-testing protocols, diagnosing most relatives, select index cases by genetic testing, with services directly contacting relatives, and contacting second-degree relatives even if first-degree relatives have not been tested. Combined approaches to contact relatives may be more suitable for some families. Future work: Establish a long-term familial hypercholesterolaemia cohort, measuring cholesterol levels, treatment and cardiovascular outcomes. Conduct a randomised study comparing different approaches to contact relatives. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018117445 and CRD42019125775. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Familial hypercholesterolaemia is an inherited condition that causes raised cholesterol levels from birth and increases risk of heart disease if left untreated. After someone in a family is found to have familial hypercholesterolaemia (called an index case), their close relatives need to be contacted and checked to see if they have familial hypercholesterolaemia, using genetic or cholesterol testing. This is called 'cascade testing'. We planned to find the most cost-effective and acceptable way to do this. The relatives could be contacted for testing by the index case (indirect approach), by a health-care professional (direct approach) or by a combination of both approaches. We found, based on looking at hospital records, that more relatives were tested if health-care professionals directly contacted relatives. In previous studies, slightly more relatives were tested for familial hypercholesterolaemia with a combination approach. Interviews with patients also suggested that the direct approach was the most effective, but the most acceptable and successful approach depends on family relationships: using one approach for some families and using both for other families. Furthermore, by looking at the health-care records of large numbers of patients, we confirmed that people with a recorded diagnosis of familial hypercholesterolaemia in general practice records have a much higher risk of heart disease than the general population, and this was especially so for those with previous heart disease and/or raised cholesterols levels when diagnosed. However, one-quarter of new patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia recorded in their records were not treated within 2 years, with less than one-third reaching recommended cholesterol levels. We used what we had learned to help us estimate the most cost-effective way to do cascade testing. This showed that if the health service directly contact all relatives simultaneously for further assessment, rather than the current approach whereby close (first-degree) relatives are contacted first, this was cost-effective and good value for money.

Comorbidity clusters and in-hospital outcomes in patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction in the USA: A national population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of multimorbidity in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is increasing. It is unclear whether comorbidities cluster into distinct phenogroups and whether are associated with clinical trajectories. METHODS: Survey-weighted analysis of the United States Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of AMI in 2018. In-hospital outcomes included mortality, stroke, bleeding, and coronary revascularisation. Latent class analysis of 21 chronic conditions was used to identify comorbidity classes. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were fitted for associations between comorbidity classes and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 416,655 AMI admissions included in the analysis, mean (±SD) age was 67 (±13) years, 38% were females, and 76% White ethnicity. Overall, hypertension, coronary heart disease (CHD), dyslipidaemia, and diabetes were common comorbidities, but each of the identified five classes (C) included ≥1 predominant comorbidities defining distinct phenogroups: cancer/coagulopathy/liver disease class (C1); least burdened (C2); CHD/dyslipidaemia (largest/referent group, (C3)); pulmonary/valvular/peripheral vascular disease (C4); diabetes/kidney disease/heart failure class (C5). Odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) for mortality ranged between 2.11 (1.89-2.37) in C2 to 5.57 (4.99-6.21) in C1. For major bleeding, OR for C1 was 4.48 (3.78; 5.31); for acute stroke, ORs ranged between 0.75 (0.60; 0.94) in C2 to 2.76 (2.27; 3.35) in C1; for coronary revascularization, ORs ranged between 0.34 (0.32; 0.36) in C1 to 1.41 (1.30; 1.53) in C4. CONCLUSIONS: We identified distinct comorbidity phenogroups that predicted in-hospital outcomes in patients admitted with AMI. Some conditions overlapped across classes, driven by the high comorbidity burden. Our findings demonstrate the predictive value and potential clinical utility of identifying patients with AMI with specific comorbidity clustering.

A population-based study exploring phenotypic clusters and clinical outcomes in stroke using unsupervised machine learning approach.

Individuals developing stroke have varying clinical characteristics, demographic, and biochemical profiles. This heterogeneity in phenotypic characteristics can impact on cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality outcomes. This study uses a novel clustering approach to stratify individuals with incident stroke into phenotypic clusters and evaluates the differential burden of recurrent stroke and other cardiovascular outcomes. We used linked clinical data from primary care, hospitalisations, and death records in the UK. A data-driven clustering analysis (kamila algorithm) was used in 48,114 patients aged ≥ 18 years with incident stroke, from 1-Jan-1998 to 31-Dec-2017 and no prior history of serious vascular events. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for subsequent adverse outcomes, for each of the generated clusters. Adverse outcomes included coronary heart disease (CHD), recurrent stroke, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), heart failure, CVD-related and all-cause mortality. Four distinct phenotypes with varying underlying clinical characteristics were identified in patients with incident stroke. Compared with cluster 1 (n = 5,201, 10.8%), the risk of composite recurrent stroke and CVD-related mortality was higher in the other 3 clusters (cluster 2 [n = 18,655, 38.8%]: hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12; cluster 3 [n = 10,244, 21.3%]: HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.14-1.26; and cluster 4 [n = 14,014, 29.1%]: HR, 1.44; 95% CI: 1.37-1.50). Similar trends in risk were observed for composite recurrent stroke and all-cause mortality outcome, and subsequent recurrent stroke outcome. However, results were not consistent for subsequent risk in CHD, PVD, heart failure, CVD-related mortality, and all-cause mortality. In this proof of principle study, we demonstrated how a heterogenous population of patients with incident stroke can be stratified into four relatively homogenous phenotypes with differential risk of recurrent and major cardiovascular outcomes. This offers an opportunity to revisit the stratification of care for patients with incident stroke to improve patient outcomes.

Rivaroxaban for Prevention of Thrombotic Events, Hospitalization, and Death in Outpatients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) is associated with heightened risks of venous and arterial thrombosis and hospitalization due to respiratory failure. To assess whether prophylactic anticoagulation can safely reduce the frequency of venous and arterial thrombosis, hospitalization, and death in nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 and at least one thrombosis risk factor, we conducted the PREVENT-HD double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial (A Study of Rivaroxaban to Reduce the Risk of Major Venous and Arterial Thrombotic Events, Hospitalization and Death in Medically Ill Outpatients With Acute, Symptomatic COVID-19] Infection). METHODS: PREVENT-HD was conducted between August 2020 and April 2022 at 14 US integrated health care delivery networks. A virtual trial design used remote informed consent and clinical monitoring and facilitated data collection through electronic health record integration with a cloud-based research platform. Nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 and at least one thrombosis risk factor were enrolled and randomly assigned to either 10 mg of oral rivaroxaban or placebo daily for 35 days. The primary efficacy outcome was time to first occurrence of a composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, non-central nervous system systemic arterial embolism, hospitalization, or death through day 35. The principal safety end point was International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis critical-site or fatal bleeding. The last study visit was on day 49. RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely because of enrollment challenges and a lower-than-expected blinded pooled event rate. A total of 1284 patients underwent randomization with complete accrual of primary events through May 2022. No patients were lost to follow-up. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 22 of 641 in the rivaroxaban group and 19 of 643 in the placebo group (3.4% versus 3.0%; hazard ratio, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.63-2.15]; P=0.63). No patient in either group experienced critical-site or fatal bleeding. One patient receiving rivaroxaban had a major bleed. CONCLUSIONS: The study was terminated prematurely after enrollment of 32% of planned accrual because of recruitment challenges and lower-than-expected event rate. Rivaroxaban prescribed for 35 days in nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 at risk for thrombosis did not appear to reduce a composite end point of venous and arterial thrombotic events, hospitalization, and death. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04508023.

How does cholesterol burden change the case for investing in familial hypercholesterolaemia? A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to ascertain how the long-term benefits and costs of diagnosis and treatment of familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) vary by prognostic factors and 'cholesterol burden', which is the effect of long-term exposure to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. METHODS: A new cost-effectiveness model was developed from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS), informed by routine data from individuals with FH. The primary outcome was net health gain (i.e., health benefits net of the losses due to costs), expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at the £15,000/QALY threshold. Prognostic factors included pre-treatment LDL-C, age, gender, and CVD history. RESULTS: If cholesterol burden is considered, diagnosis resulted in positive net health gain (i.e., it is cost-effective) in all individuals with pre-treatment LDL-C ≥ 4 mmol/L, and in those with pre-treatment LDL-C ≥ 2 mmol/L aged ≥50 years or who have CVD history. If cholesterol burden is not considered, diagnosis resulted in lower net health gain, but still positive in children aged 10 years with pre-treatment LDL-C ≥ 6 mmol/L and adults aged 30 years with pre-treatment LDL-C ≥ 4 mmol/L. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis and treatment of most people with FH results in large net health gains, particularly in those with higher pre-treatment LDL-C. Economic evaluations of FH interventions should consider the sensitivity of the study conclusions to cholesterol burden, particularly where interventions target younger patients, and explicitly consider prognostic factors such as pre-treatment LDL-C, age, and CVD history.

Identifying Patients with Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease in UK Primary Care: A Case-Control Study and Prediction Model.

Bicuspid aortic valve disease (BAV) is the most common congenital heart condition, and early detection can improve outcomes for patients. In this case−control study, patients with a diagnosis of BAV were identified from their electronic primary-care records in the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Each case was propensity-score matched to up to five controls. The clinical features recorded before diagnosis were compared. The proposed clinical features shown to be associated with BAV (p < 0.05) were incorporated into a multivariable regression model. We identified 2898 cases. The prevalence of BAV in the CPRD was 1 in 5181, significantly lower than expected, suggesting that diagnosis and/or recording could be improved. The following biologically plausible clinical features were associated with a subsequent diagnosis of BAV: palpitations (OR: 2.86 (95% CI: 1.60, 3.16)), atrial fibrillation (AF) (OR: 2.25 (95% CI: 1.60, 3.16)) and hypertension (OR: 1.72 (1.48, 2.00)). The best model had an AUC of 0.669 (95% CI: 0.658 to 0.680), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 5.9% (95% CI: 4.0% to 8.7%) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99% (95% CI: 99% to 99%) at a population prevalence of 1%. This study indicates that palpitations, hypertension and AF should trigger a clinical suspicion of BAV and assessment via echocardiography. It also demonstrates the potential to develop a prediction model for BAV to stratify patients for echocardiography screening.

Introducing genetic testing with case finding for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care: qualitative study of patient and health professional experience.

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common inherited condition causing elevated cholesterol, premature heart disease, and early death. Although FH can be effectively treated, over 80% of people with FH remain undetected. AIM: To explore patient and health professional experiences of introducing genetic testing with case finding for FH in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study in UK general practice. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of 41 participants (24 patients and 17 health professionals) from eight practices, using an electronic case-finding tool (FAMCAT) to identify patients with higher likelihood of having FH and who were then offered diagnostic genetic testing in primary care. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: While prior awareness of FH was low, patients were unsurprised to be identified as being at risk, and positive about being offered genetic testing by their practice. Patients not found to have FH were relieved, although some felt frustrated that their high cholesterol lacked a clear cause. Those confirmed to have FH largely expected and accepted this outcome. Practitioners saw detection of FH as an important new opportunity for preventive care. They found the case-finding tool easy to apply and noted patients' high uptake of genetic testing. While they were comfortable referring appropriate patients for further specialist management, GPs sought clearer definition about responsibility for identification and long- term care of FH in future care pathways. CONCLUSION: Introducing genetic testing with electronic case finding for FH in primary care was positively experienced by patients and practitioners. Further development of this approach could help improve detection of FH in the general population.

Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Algorithms for Familial Hypercholesterolaemia in Primary Care.

Although familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) screening within primary care is considered cost-effective, which screening approach is cost-effective has not been established. This study determines the cost-effectiveness of six case-finding strategies for screening of electronic health records to identify index patients who have genetically confirmed monogenic FH in English primary care. A decision tree was constructed to represent pathways of care for each approach (FH Case Identification Tool (FAMCAT) versions 1 and 2, cholesterol screening, Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN), Simon Broome criteria, no active screening). Clinical effectiveness was measured as the number of monogenic FH cases identified. Healthcare costs for each algorithm were evaluated from an NHS England perspective over a 12 week time horizon. The primary outcome was the incremental cost per additional monogenic FH case identified (ICER). FAMCAT2 was found to dominate (cheaper and more effective) cholesterol and FAMCAT1 algorithms, and extendedly dominate DLCN. The ICER for FAMCAT2 vs. no active screening was 8111 GBP (95% CI: 4088 to 14,865), and for Simon Broome vs. FAMCAT2 was 74,059 GBP (95% CI: -1,113,172 to 1,697,142). Simon Broome found the largest number of FH cases yet required 102 genetic tests to identify one FH patient. FAMCAT2 identified fewer, but only required 23 genetic tests.

Sex disparity in subsequent outcomes in survivors of coronary heart disease.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence on sex differences in outcomes after developing coronary heart disease (CHD) has focused on recurrent CHD, all-cause mortality or revascularisation. We assessed sex disparities in subsequent major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in adults surviving their first-time CHD. METHODS: Using a population-based cohort obtained from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) linked to hospitalisation and death records in the UK, we identified 143 702 adults (aged ≥18 years) between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2017 with no prior history of MACE. MACE outcome was a composite of recurrent CHD, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, heart failure and cardiovascular-related mortality. Multivariable models (Cox and competing risks regressions) were used to assess differences between sexes. RESULTS: There were 143 702 adults with any incident CHD (either angina, myocardial infarction or coronary revascularisation). Women (n=63 078, 43.9%) were older than men (median age, 73 vs 66 years). First subsequent MACE outcome was observed in 91 706 (63.8%). Women had a significantly lower risk of MACE (hazard ratio (HR), 0.68 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.69); sub-hazard ratio (HRsd), 0.71 (0.70 to 0.72), respectively) and recurrent CHD (n=66 543, 46.3%) (HR, 0.60 (0.59 to 0.61); HRsd, 0.62 (0.61 to 0.63)) when compared with men after incident CHD. However, women had a significantly higher risk of stroke (n=5740, 4.0%) (HR, 1.26 (1.19 to 1.33); HRsd, 1.32 (1.25 to 1.39)), heart failure (n=7905, 5.5%) (HR, 1.09 (1.04 to 1.15); HRsd, 1.13 (1.07 to 1.18)) and all-cause mortality (n=29 503, 20.5%) (HR, 1.05 (1.02 to 1.07); HRsd, 1.11 (1.08 to 1.13)). CONCLUSIONS: After incident CHD, women have lower risk of composite MACE and recurrent CHD outcomes but higher risk of stroke, heart failure, and all-cause mortality compared with men.

Determining propensity for sub-optimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol response to statins and future risk of cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Variability in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) response to statins is underappreciated. We characterised patients by their statin response (SR), baseline risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and 10-year CVD outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: A multivariable model was developed using 183,213 United Kingdom (UK) patients without CVD to predict probability of sub-optimal SR, defined by guidelines as <40% reduction in LDL-C. We externally validated the model in a Hong Kong (HK) cohort (n = 170,904). Patients were stratified into four groups by predicted SR and 10-year CVD risk score: [SR1] optimal SR & low risk; [SR2] sub-optimal SR & low risk; [SR3] optimal SR & high risk; [SR4] sub-optimal SR & high risk; and 10-year hazard ratios (HR) determined for first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Our SR model included 12 characteristics, with an area under the curve of 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.71; UK) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.67-0.68; HK). HRs for MACE in predicted sub-optimal SR with low CVD risk groups (SR2 to SR1) were 1.39 (95% CI 1.35-1.43, p<0.001; UK) and 1.14 (95% CI 1.11-1.17, p<0.001; HK). In both cohorts, patients with predicted sub-optimal SR with high CVD risk (SR4 to SR3) had elevated risk of MACE (UK HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.32-1.40, p<0.001: HK HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.21-1.28, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sub-optimal response to statins experienced significantly more MACE, regardless of baseline CVD risk. To enhance cholesterol management for primary prevention, statin response should be considered alongside risk assessment.

Comparing the performance of the novel FAMCAT algorithms and established case-finding criteria for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common inherited disorder causing premature coronary heart disease (CHD) and death. We have developed the novel Familial Hypercholesterolaemia Case Ascertainment Tool (FAMCAT 1) case-finding algorithm for application in primary care, to improve detection of FH. The performance of this algorithm was further improved by including personal history of premature CHD (FAMCAT 2 algorithm). This study has evaluated their performance, at 95% specificity, to detect genetically confirmed FH in the general population. We also compared these algorithms to established clinical case-finding criteria. METHODS: Prospective validation study, in 14 general practices, recruiting participants from the general adult population with cholesterol documented. For 260 participants with available health records, we determined possible FH cases based on FAMCAT thresholds, Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) score, Simon-Broome criteria and recommended cholesterol thresholds (total cholesterol >9.0 mmol/L if ≥30 years or >7.5 mmol/L if <30 years), using clinical data from electronic and manual extraction of patient records and family history questionnaires. The reference standard was genetic testing. We examined detection rate (DR), sensitivity and specificity for each case-finding criteria. RESULTS: At 95% specificity, FAMCAT 1 had a DR of 27.8% (95% CI 12.5% to 50.9%) with sensitivity of 31.2% (95% CI 11.0% to 58.7%); while FAMCAT 2 had a DR of 45.8% (95% CI 27.9% to 64.9%) with sensitivity of 68.8% (95% CI 41.3% to 89.0%). DLCN score ≥6 points yielded a DR of 35.3% (95% CI 17.3% to 58.7%) and sensitivity of 37.5% (95% CI 15.2% to 64.6%). Using recommended cholesterol thresholds resulted in DR of 28.0% (95% CI 14.3% to 47.6%) with sensitivity of 43.8% (95% CI 19.8% to 70.1%). Simon-Broome criteria had lower DR 11.3% (95% CI 6.0% to 20.0%) and specificity 70.9% (95% CI 64.8% to 76.5%) but higher sensitivity of 56.3% (95% CI 29.9% to 80.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In primary care, in patients with cholesterol documented, FAMCAT 2 performs better than other case-finding criteria for detecting genetically confirmed FH, with no prior clinical review required for case finding. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03934320.

Statin treatment and LDL-cholesterol treatment goal attainment among individuals with familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: Guidance recommends statin treatment in familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) to achieve at least a 50% reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). We assessed statin prescribing rates and LDL-C treatment goal attainment among individuals with FH in primary care. METHODS: Using primary care electronic health records from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we identified adults with recorded diagnosis of FH, statin treatment and measures of LDL-C prior to (baseline) and 12 months after initiating statin treatment. The percentage change in LDL-C was determined, and then baseline and treatment characteristics were assessed by LDL-C treatment goal attainment. RESULTS: Of 3064 adults (mean age 50.8 years) with recorded diagnosis of FH and repeat LDL-C measures, 50% reduction in LDL-C from baseline was attained in 895 individuals (29.2%) in 12 months. Compared with those who did not attain this goal, these people were predominantly women; they were older at time of FH diagnosis (53.4 years vs 49.7 years) and first statin treatment (53.2 years vs 49.2 years) and had higher pretreatment total cholesterol (8.20 (SD 1.38) mmol/L vs 7.57 (SD 1.39) mmol/L) and pretreatment LDL-C (5.83 (SD 1.36) mmol/L vs 5.25 (SD 1.40) mmol/L). A higher proportion of individuals who attained the treatment goal was prescribed high-potency and medium-potency statins (24.3% and 71.7% vs 20.2% and 69.3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Less than a third of individuals on statin treatment for FH in the community achieve recommended reductions in LDL-C. Greater awareness and optimisation of treatment for FH using higher-potency statins are needed.

Strategies for screening for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care and other community settings.

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolaemia is a common inherited condition that is associated with premature cardiovascular disease. The increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, resulting from high levels of cholesterol since birth, can be prevented by starting lipid-lowering therapy. However, the majority of patients in the UK and worldwide remain undiagnosed. Established diagnostic criteria in current clinical practice are the Simon-Broome and Dutch Lipid Clinical network criteria and patients are classified as having probable, possible or definite familial hypercholesterolaemia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of healthcare interventions strategies to systematically improve identification of familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care and other community settings compared to usual care (incidental approaches to identify familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care and other community settings). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Inborn Errors of Metabolism Trials Register. Date of last search: 13 September 2021. We also searched databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and SCOPUS) as well as handsearching relevant conference proceedings, reference lists of included articles, and the grey literature. Date of last searches: 05 March 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: As per the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group guidelines, we planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSI). Eligible NRSI were non-randomised controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, controlled before-and-after studies, and interrupted-time-series studies. We planned to selected studies with healthcare interventions strategies that aimed to systematically identify people with possible or definite clinical familial hypercholesterolaemia, in primary care and other community settings. These strategies would be compared with usual care or no intervention. We considered participants of any age from the general population who access primary care and other community settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors planned to independently select studies according to the inclusion criteria, to extract data and assess for risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence (according to the GRADE criteria). We contacted corresponding study authors in order to obtain further information for all the studies considered in the review. MAIN RESULTS: No eligible RCTs or NRSIs were identified for inclusion, however, we excluded 28 studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there are no RCTs or controlled NRSI evidence to determine the most appropriate healthcare strategy to systematically identify possible or definite clinical familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care or other community settings. Uncontrolled before-and-after studies were identified, but were not eligible for inclusion. Further studies assessing healthcare strategies of systematic identification of familial hypercholesterolaemia need to be conducted with diagnosis confirmed by genetic testing or validated through clinical phenotype (or both).

Obesity and long-term outcomes after incident stroke: a prospective population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The association between obesity, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and mortality in patients with incident stroke is not well established. We assessed the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and MACE in patients with incident stroke. METHODS: The population-based cohort study identified 30 702 individuals from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) databases from the United Kingdom. Individuals were aged ≥18 years with incident stroke between 1-1-1998 and 31-12-2017, a BMI recorded within 24 months before incident stroke, and no prior history of MACE. BMI was categorized as underweight (<18.5 kg/m2 ), normal (18.5-24.9 kg/m2 ), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2 ), obesity class I (30.0-34.9 kg/m2 ), class II (35.0-39.9 kg/m2 ) and class III (≥40 kg/m2). MACE was defined as a composite of incident coronary heart disease, recurrent stroke, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), heart failure, and cardiovascular-related mortality. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess differences in MACE risk between BMI categories. RESULTS: At baseline, 1217 (4.0%) were underweight, 10 783 (35.1%) had a normal BMI, 10 979 (35.8%) had overweight, 5206 (17.0%) had obesity Class I, 1749 (5.7%) Class II, and 768 (2.5%) Class III. In multivariable analysis, higher BMI were associated with lower risk of subsequent MACE [overweight: HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99)]; PVD [overweight: 0.65 (0.49-0.85); obesity Class III: 0.19 (0.50-0.77)]; cardiovascular-related death [overweight: 0.80 (0.74-0.86); obesity Class I: 0.79 (0.71-0.88); Class II: 0.80 (0.67-0.96)]; and all-cause mortality [overweight: 0.75 (0.71-0.79); obesity Class I: 0.75 (0.70-0.81); Class II: 0.77 (0.68-0.86)] when compared to those with normal BMI. The results were similar irrespective of sex, diabetes mellitus, smoking or cancer at time of incident stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with incident stroke, overweight or obesity were associated with a more favourable prognosis for subsequent MACE, PVD, and mortality, irrespective of sex, diabetes mellitus, smoking, or cancer at baseline. As with other cohort studies, our study demonstrates an association. Randomized control trials should be considered to robustly evaluate the impact of weight management recommendations on subsequent cardiovascular outcomes in stroke survivors.

Case-finding and genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common inherited disorder that remains mostly undetected in the general population. Through FH case-finding and direct access to genetic testing in primary care, this intervention study described the genetic and lipid profile of patients found at increased risk of FH and the outcomes in those with positive genetic test results. METHODS: In 14 Central England general practices, a novel case-finding tool (Familial Hypercholetserolaemia Case Ascertainment Tool, FAMCAT1) was applied to the electronic health records of 86 219 patients with cholesterol readings (44.5% of total practices' population), identifying 3375 at increased risk of FH. Of these, a cohort of 336 consenting to completing Family History Questionnaire and detailed review of their clinical data, were offered FH genetic testing in primary care. RESULTS: Genetic testing was completed by 283 patients, newly identifying 16 with genetically confirmed FH and 10 with variants of unknown significance. All 26 (9%) were recommended for referral and 19 attended specialist assessment. In a further 153 (54%) patients, the test suggested polygenic hypercholesterolaemia who were managed in primary care. Total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels were higher in those patients with FH-causing variants than those with other genetic test results (p=0.010 and p=0.002). CONCLUSION: Electronic case-finding and genetic testing in primary care could improve identification of FH; and the better targeting of patients for specialist assessment. A significant proportion of patients identified at risk of FH are likely to have polygenic hypercholesterolaemia. There needs to be a clearer management plan for these individuals in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03934320.

Long-term body mass index changes in overweight and obese adults and the risk of heart failure, cardiovascular disease and mortality: a cohort study of over 260,000 adults in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Although obesity is a well-recognised risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), the impact of long-term body mass index (BMI) changes in overweight or obese adults, on the risk of heart failure, CVD and mortality has not been quantified. METHODS: This population-based cohort study used routine UK primary care electronic health data linked to secondary care and death-registry records. We identified adults who were overweight or obese, free from CVD and who had repeated BMI measures. Using group-based trajectory modelling, we examined the BMI trajectories of these individuals and then determined incidence rates of CVD, heart failure and mortality associated with the different trajectories. Cox-proportional hazards regression determined hazards ratios for incident outcomes. RESULTS: 264,230 individuals (mean age 49.5 years (SD 12.7) and mean BMI 33.8 kg/m2 (SD 6.1)) were followed-up for a median duration of 10.9 years. Four BMI trajectories were identified, corresponding at baseline, with World Health Organisation BMI classifications for overweight, class-1, class-2 and class-3 obesity respectively. In all four groups, there was a small, stable upwards trajectory in BMI (mean BMI increase of 1.06 kg/m2 (± 3.8)). Compared with overweight individuals, class-3 obese individuals had hazards ratios (HR) of 3.26 (95% CI 2.98-3.57) for heart failure, HR of 2.72 (2.58-2.87) for all-cause mortality and HR of 3.31 (2.84-3.86) for CVD-related mortality, after adjusting for baseline demographic and cardiovascular risk factors. CONCLUSION: The majority of adults who are overweight or obese retain their degree of overweight or obesity over the long term. Individuals with stable severe obesity experience the worst heart failure, CVD and mortality outcomes. These findings highlight the high cardiovascular toll exacted by continuing failure to tackle obesity.

Systematic Identification of Familial Hypercholesterolaemia in Primary Care-A Systematic Review.

Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a common inherited cause of premature cardiovascular disease, but the majority of patients remain undiagnosed. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of interventions to systematically identify FH in primary care. No randomised, controlled studies were identified; however, three non-randomised intervention studies were eligible for inclusion. All three studies systematically identified FH using reminders (on-screen prompts) in electronic health records. There was insufficient evidence that providing comments on laboratory test results increased the identification of FH using the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria. Similarly, using prompts combined with postal invitation demonstrated no significant increase in definite FH identification using Simon-Broome (SB) criteria; however, the identification of possible FH increased by 25.4% (CI 17.75 to 33.97%). Using on-screen prompts alone demonstrated a small increase of 0.05% (95% CI 0.03 to 0.07%) in identifying definite FH using SB criteria; however, when the intervention was combined with an outreach FH nurse assessment, the result was no significant increase in FH identification using a combination of SB and DLCN criteria. None of the included studies reported adverse effects associated with the interventions. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to determine which is the most effective method of systematically identifying FH in non-specialist settings.