scholarly journals Impact of Lipoprotein(a)-Cholesterol on Accurate Classification of Familial Hypercholesterolemia

2020 ◽  
Vol 154 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S3-S3
Author(s):  
Erica Fatica ◽  
Jeffrey W Meeusen ◽  
Leslie J Donato
Keyword(s):  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Cholesterol Content ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
Lipid Clinic ◽  
Diagnostic Threshold ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Lipid Testing

Abstract Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a pro-atherogenic and pro-thrombotic LDL-like particle recognized as an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) that is resistant to typical lipid-lowering treatments. The cholesterol within Lp(a) (Lp(a)-C) contributes to the reported LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) concentration by nearly all available methods including beta-quantification, direct homogenous assays, and all estimating equations. Accurate LDL-C measurements are critical for identification of genetic hyperlipidemia conditions such as familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). FH risk estimators such as the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria utilize LDL-C concentration cut-offs and other clinical inputs to assess the likelihood of FH. Therefore, failure to adjust for Lp(a)-C can impact accurate FH classification, appropriate follow-up testing and treatments, and interpretation of cholesterol-lowering treatment efficacy. Lp(a)-C can be estimated from Lp(a) mass as measured by immunoassay using an average cholesterol content per particle. However, Lp(a)-C size and composition varies significantly within individuals resulting in inaccurate Lp(a)-C estimates. In this study, we use direct Lp(a)-C measurements to assess the potential misclassification of FH risk due to the contribution of Lp(a)-C to LDL-C in patient samples submitted for advanced lipoprotein profiling. A total of 28,200 samples submitted for lipoprotein profiling were included. The profiling included lipid testing in a CDC-certified laboratory on Roche cobas 501 (cholesterol and triglycerides by enzymatic method, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol by MgCl2/dextran sulfate precipitation). LDL-C was measured by beta-quantification, and Lp(a)-C by quantitative lipoprotein electrophoresis (SPIFE Vis Cholesterol, Helena Laboratories). The DLCN LDL-C cut-offs (155, 190, 250, and 330mg/dL) were applied to LDL-C results before and after accounting for Lp(a)-C contribution. Lp(a)-C was detected in 3,728 (13.2%) samples. The median (range) concentrations of Lp(a)-C and LDL-C were 11mg/dL (5-108mg/dL) and 121mg/dL (27-678mg/dL), respectively. Overall, subtracting Lp(a)-C would reclassify 6.5% of all samples into a lower LDL-C category within the DLCN algorithm. Within the LDL-C scoring categories, 7.0% (n=222) of subjects with LDL-C 155-189mg/dL, 5.6% (n=66) of subjects with LDL-C 190-249mg/dL, 5.2% (n=10) of subjects with LDL-C 250-329mg/dL, and 3.4% (n=4) of subjects with LDL-C >330mg/dL would be down-classified after adjusting for Lp(a)-C. Limiting to subjects with measurable Lp(a)-C, reclassification to a lower diagnostic threshold occurred in 47.4% of subjects with LDL-C 155-189mg/dL, 37.5% with LDL-C 190-249mg/dL, 41.6% with LDL-C 250-329mg/dL, and 33.3% with LDL-C >330mg/dL after adjustment. Current guidelines recommend screening for elevated Lp(a) in patients with family history of CVD. Our data show that a high percentage of samples evaluated for advanced lipid testing contain measurable Lp(a)-C that could cause mis-classification in FH prediction algorithms. If labeled high probability of FH, these mis-classifications could trigger inappropriate work-up for suspected FH. As clinical follow-up and therapeutic strategies differ between FH and elevated Lp(a), proper distinction between LDL-C and Lp(a)-C is needed to guide appropriate patient management.

scholarly journals Effect of Lipoprotein(a) on the Diagnosis of Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Does It Make a Difference in the Clinic?

2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (10) ◽  
pp. 1258-1266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dick C Chan ◽  
Jing Pang ◽  
Amanda J Hooper ◽  
Damon A Bell ◽  
John R Burnett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Ldl Cholesterol ◽  
Cholesterol Content ◽  
Cholesterol Concentration ◽  
Diagnostic Tools ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
Clinical Criteria ◽  
Lipid Clinic ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Before And After

Abstract BACKGROUND Diagnostic tools for familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) rely on estimation of LDL cholesterol concentration. However, routine measurement or calculation of LDL cholesterol concentration using the Friedewald equation contains a cholesterol contribution from lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]. We investigated whether Lp(a) influences the phenotypic diagnosis of FH by commonly used clinical criteria. METHODS A cohort of 907 adult index patients attending a clinic were studied. The Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) and Simon Broome (SB) diagnostic criteria were estimated before and after adjusting LDL cholesterol concentration for the cholesterol content (30%) of Lp(a). Diagnostic reclassification rates and area under the ROC (AUROC) curves in predicting an FH mutation were also compared. RESULTS Seventy-four patients defined by DLCN criteria (8.2%) and 207 patients defined by SB criteria (22.8%) were reclassified to “unlikely” FH after adjusting LDL cholesterol for Lp(a) cholesterol. The proportion of FH patients defined by DLCN (probable/definite) and SB (possible/definite) criteria decreased significantly in patients with increased Lp(a) (>0.5 g/L; n = 330) after Lp(a) cholesterol adjustment (P < 0.01). The overall reclassification rate was significantly higher in patients with Lp(a) concentration >1.0 g/L (P < 0.001). The AUROC curve for LDL cholesterol concentration ≥191 mg/dL (≥5.0 mmol/L), DLCN criteria, and SB criteria in predicting an FH mutation increased significantly after adjustment (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in AUROC curve before and after Lp(a) cholesterol adjustment at an LDL cholesterol concentration ≥251 mg/dL (≥6.5 mmol/L). CONCLUSIONS Adjusting LDL cholesterol concentration for Lp(a) cholesterol improves the diagnostic accuracy of DLCN and SB criteria, especially with Lp(a) >1.0 g/L and LDL cholesterol <251 mg/dL (<6.5 mmol/L). Lp(a) should be measured in all patients suspected of having FH.

P5365Microsomal triglyceride transfer protein inhibitor (lomitapide) efficacy in the treatment of patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia phenotype

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Fountas ◽  
O Diakoumakou ◽  
V Kolovou ◽  
S Stratakis ◽  
E Zacharis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Cholesterol ◽  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Homozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Protein Inhibitor ◽  
Liver Transaminase ◽  
Transfer Protein

Abstract Introduction The majority of patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HoFH) phenotype are treated additionally to lipid lowering (LL) drugs (statin + ezetimibe ± colesevelam) with lipoprotein apheresis (LA) sessions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of microsomal triglyceride transfer protein inhibitor (lomitapide) in HoFH patients. Patients and methods In 12 HoFH patients treated with LL drugs ± biweekly LA sessions (9 patients) the 5–40 mg daily of lomitapide was added. Lipid profile [total cholesterol (TC), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), triglycerides (TG) and high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)] before (LL drugs ± LA) and after lomitapide treatment were evaluated. Results The follow-up period of lomitapide treatment for 12 patients was 3–24 months (13.8±7.9). The median baseline LDL-C levels was 1000 mg/dL (339–1150). During LL drug therapy, patients showed a median LDL-C level of 383.5 mg/dL (Range: 214–866 mg/dL) and with LL drugs + Time-averaged levels (CAVG) the median was 288.1 mg/dL (Range: 183.69–716.65 mg/dL). The addition of lomitapide at the average dosage of 21.4 mg/day lowered LDL-C levels by 56.8% comparing to LL drugs alone therapy [mean reduction 262.12, 95% CI (105.53, 418.71), p=0.005] and by 54% [mean reduction −182.89, 95% CI (−342.35, −23.43), p=0.031] comparing to LL drugs + LA (CAVG). The CAVG of LDL-C in LL drugs + LA patients compared with LL drugs + lomitapide was 54% in favour of lomitapide (p=0.031). After lomitapide administration to LL drugs + LA treatment, 78% patients discontinued LA and 2 patients reduced their LA frequency by 50%. During follow-up, 2 patients (16.6%) reported side effects (transient diarrhea, 1 patient had liver transaminase >5× ULN and had to decrease dose of lomitapide). Two patients stopped lomitapide due to diet and alcohol restrictions. Median and ranges of lipid and lipoprotein values before any intervention, after LL drugs, LL drugs plus LA, LL drugs plus LA (CAVG) and LL drugs plus lomitapide Total Cholesterol LDL-C HDL-C Triglycerides Before any intervention 1000 (339–1150) 900 (245–1070) 34.5 (25–50) 125 (87–314) After LL drugs 434 (278–915) 383.5 (214–866) 36 (27–51) 113 (62–198) LL drugs + LA (CAVG) 336.13 (248.57–784.16) 288.07 (183.69–716.65) 42.81 (25.84–46.68) 105.09 (55.79–166.68) LL drugs + Lomitapide 228.5 (118–554) 173.5 (74–515) 37.5 (29–50) 83.5 (23–316) LDL graph Conclusions Treatment with lomitapide in HoFH patients has beneficial effect with constant decrease of LDL-C by 57% compared with classical LL therapy and by 54% compared with classical LL therapy and CAVG and seems to be with good safety profile. Although, in some cases the hybrid (all availably drug treatment and LA) therapy may be needed.

P648Screening and treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia in a French sample of ambulatory care: a retrospective longitudinal cohort study

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Ferrieres ◽  
V Banks ◽  
D Pillas ◽  
L Ricci ◽  
M Dova-Boivin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ambulatory Care ◽  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Health Improvement ◽  
Ambulatory Care Setting ◽  
Lipid Clinic ◽  
Data Division ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is largely underdiagnosed as there are typically no clinical symptoms prior to the first cardiovascular (CV) event. We conducted a study which utilised ambulatory care electronic medical record (EMRs) to alert physicians to possible cases of FH. Specifically, physicians were alerted to LDL-C levels >190 mg/dL (suggesting a risk of FH) and invited to complete the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network score (DLCN). Purpose Describe characteristics, comorbidities and clinical management of patients diagnosed with definite or probable FH in an ambulatory care setting. Methods All patients with a DLCN score of definite/probable FH (score higher or equal than 6; index event) between January 2016 and September 2018 were identified in the THIN® database (The Health Improvement Network; an anonymized EMR powered by GERSDATA, a Cegedim Health Data Division). These fully anonymized data were collected by 2000 General Practitioners (GP), 130 cardiologists and 40 endocrinologists, receiving 5.5 million patients regularly in their office. Sociodemographic, laboratory measurements, comorbidities, lipid-lowering therapies (LLT), visits to specialists, LDL-C and hospitalizations were collected and analysed at baseline, and 1, 2, 3, 6 months, and 1 year thereafter. Results From 999 anonymous patients with a DLCN score, 98 (10%) FH patients were identified (38 [39%] definite FH, 60 [61%] probable FH) while remaining fully anonymous, 9 (9%) of whom already had genetic testing. Mean (SD) age was 57.4 (14.3) years; 56 (57%) patients were female, half (51/98 [52%]) were diagnosed with pure hypercholesterolemia (ICD-10 code: E78.0) and 9 (9%) had a personal history of CV event. 93 patients (95%) had a LDL-C measurement prior to DLCN assessment (definite FH, 36/38 [95%]; probable FH, 57/60 [95%]). Among screened FH patients, 61.2% had LDL-C between 190 to 250 mg/dL and 16.3% had LDL-C higher than 250 mg/dL. At the time of DLCN assessment, one third (30/98 [31%]) of patients were not receiving any LLT, one third ([35%] 34/98) were receiving statins alone, 19% (19/98) receiving LLT combination with statin, and 15% (15) other LLTs. Moderate statin intensity was prescribed in 20% (20/98) of patients; high intensity statin, 17%, (17/98); low intensity, 10% (10/98). No improvement on LLT use (including use of high statin intensity) was observed over the 12-month follow-up. Conclusion This is the first study in France that use EMR to screen possible FH patients and support GPs in identifying patients that need to be treated. Our data highlight the need to screen, diagnosis and treat potential FH patients in ambulatory care settings. Longer follow-up is needed to evaluate the impact of FH assessment on referral to specialists, LLT and clinical outcomes. Acknowledgement/Funding Amgen

scholarly journals Treatment Inertia in Patients With Familial Hypercholesterolemia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anatoly Langer ◽  
G. B. John Mancini ◽  
Mary Tan ◽  
Shaun G. Goodman ◽  
Vineeta Ahooja ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Lipid Lowering Therapy ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Recommended Level

Background We studied care gap in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with respect to lipid‐lowering therapy. Methods and Results We enrolled patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or FH and low‐density lipoprotein‐cholesterol >2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. During follow‐up physicians received online reminders of treatment recommendations of 2009 patients (median age, 63 years, 42% women), 52.4% had CVD only, 31.7% FH only, and 15.9% both CVD and FH. Patients with FH were younger and more likely to be women and non‐White with significantly higher baseline low‐density lipoprotein‐cholesterol level (mmol/L) as compared with patients with CVD (FH 3.92±1.48 versus CVD 2.96±0.94, P <0.0001). Patients with FH received less statin (70.6% versus 79.2%, P =0.0001) at baseline but not ezetimibe (28.1% versus 20.4%, P =0.0003). Among patients with FH only, 45.3% were at low‐density lipoprotein target (≥ 50% reduction from pre‐treatment level or low‐density lipoprotein <2.5 mmol/L) at baseline and increasing to 65.8% and 73.6% by visit 2 and 3, respectively. Among patients with CVD only, none were at recommended level (≤2.0 mmol/L) at baseline and 44.3% and 53.3% were at recommended level on second and third visit, respectively. When primary end point was analyzed as a difference between baseline and last available follow‐up observation, only 22.0% of patients with FH only achieved it as compared with 45.8% with CVD only ( P <0.0001) and 55.2% with both FH+CVD ( P <0.0001). Conclusions There is significant treatment inertia in patients with FH including those with CVD. Education focused on patients with FH should continue to be undertaken.

scholarly journals Lipoprotein(a) is associated with incidence but not progression of aortic valve calcium

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Kaiser ◽  
J E Van Der Toorn ◽  
K H Zheng ◽  
M Kavousi ◽  
M W Vernooij ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Public Institution ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Rotterdam Study ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Background Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has been implicated in the etiology of aortic valve stenosis. Although Lp(a) is strongly associated with the presence of aortic valve calcium (AVC), there are no data evaluating the relationship of Lp(a) with AVC incidence and AVC progression. Purpose To assess whether high Lp(a) levels are associated with AVC incidence and progression. Methods In 922 individuals from the population-based Rotterdam Study (mean age 66.0±4.2 years, 47.7% men) for whom Lp(a) measurements were available, non-enhanced cardiac CT imaging was performed at baseline and after a median follow-up of 14.0 [13.9–14.2] years. AVC incidence was defined as an AVC score &gt;0 on the second scan, in absence of AVC on the first scan. We performed logistic regression analyses to evaluate the relationship of Lp(a) with AVC incidence and linear regression analyses to assess the relationship between Lp(a) and AVC progression. All analyses were corrected for age, sex, body mass index, smoking, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, use of lipid-lowering medication, and hypertension. Additionally, we analyzed the progression conditional on the baseline AVC-score. Results Of the 702 (76.1%) individuals without AVC at baseline, 415 (59.1%) showed incident AVC at follow-up. The 220 (23.9%) individuals with AVC on baseline had a median AVC score of 52 [15–131], with a median yearly progression of 13 [5–38]. Lp(a) concentration was independently associated with AVC incidence (OR 1.32 for each 105 nmol/L Lp(a) increase; 95% CI: 1.03–1.68), but not with AVC progression (β −4.3 AU/year for each 105 nmol/L Lp(a) increase; 95% CI: −12.3–3.7). Conclusions Lp(a) is associated with AVC incidence but not AVC progression, suggesting that Lp(a)-lowering interventions may be futile after AVC has been established. Future studies should focus on whether Lp(a) lowering interventions can prevent the development of AVC in high-risk individuals. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): The Rotterdam Study is supported by Erasmus MC and Erasmus University Rotterdam and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research

scholarly journals Cardiovascular events and effectiveness of hypolipidemic therapy in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and patients of very high cardiovascular risk: 3-year follow-up of the RENAISSANCE Registry

2020 ◽  
pp. 27-36
Author(s):  
У.В. Чубыкина ◽  
М.В. Ежов
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
High Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
History Of ◽  
Male Sex ◽  
Very High

Цель. Целью исследования явилась оценка эффективности и приверженности гиполипидемической терапии, частоты развития сердечно<со< судистых осложнений в течение 3<летнего периода наблюдения в рамках регистра РЕНЕССАНС (Регистр пациентов с СГХС и пациентов очень высокого сЕрдечно<Сосудистого риска с недоСтАточной эффективНоСтью проводимой гиполипидемической терапии). Материал и методы. РЕНЕССАНС является открытым национальным наблюдательным исследованием и включает больных с семейной ги< перхолестеринемией (СГХС), а также пациентов очень высокого сердечно<сосудистого риска (ОВССР). Учитывали наличие факторов риска атеросклероза, анамнез сердечно<сосудистых заболеваний, гиполипидемическую терапию. В каждом центре выполняли определение концен< трации: общего холестерина (ОХС), триглицеридов (ТГ), холестерина липопротеидов высокой плотности (ХС ЛВП) в сыворотке крови. Содер< жание холестерина липопротеидов низкой плотности (ХС ЛНП) рассчитывали по формуле Фридвальда. Уровень липопротеида(а) измеряли методом иммуноферментного анализа в некоторых центрах. При оценке частоты конечной точки, включавшей фатальные и нефатальные сердечно<сосудистых осложнения (ССО), проводили анализ Каплана — Майера. Результаты. В регистр включено 1570 (средний возраст 54,0±14,6 лет) пациентов с СГХС и 121 (63,5±10,9 лет) больной с ОВССР. В группе СГХС динамическое наблюдение проведено у 594 пациентов (38%) в течение 23,6±14,6 месяцев, конечная точка зарегистрирована у 9% больных. Мужской пол (относительный риск 2,1; 95% доверительный интервал 1,13–3,66; p<0,01), гипертония (2,8; 1,4–5,2; p<0,01), ишеми< ческая болезнь сердца (6,8; 3,5–13,2; p<0,0001), отягощенный анамнез по сердечно<сосудистым заболеваниям (ССЗ) (2,1; 1,1–3,9; p<0,05) и концентрация липопротеида(а) ≥ 30 мг/дл (2,8; 1,1–7,7; p<0,05) явились предикторами развития ССО. В группе СГХС отмечено снижение уровня ОХС от исходного на 19%, ХС ЛНП на 25% (р<0,001 для обоих), целевых значений ХС ЛНП достигли 2% больных. В группе ОВССР динамическое наблюдение проведено у 72 (60%) пациентов в течение 19,7±5,8 месяцев. Ни один больной не достиг целевого уровня ХС ЛНП менее 1,4 ммоль/л. Заключение. Трехлетнее наблюдение за участниками регистра РЕНЕССАНС демонстрирует усиление приверженности гиполипидемической терапии. С увеличением риска развития сердечно<сосудистых осложнений при СГХС ассоциированы мужской пол, наличие гипертонии, ише< мической болезни сердца, отягощенного анамнеза по ССЗ и высокий уровень липопротеида(а). The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and adherence to hypolipidemic therapy, the frequency of cardiovascular events (CVE) during the 3!year follow!up in the RENAISSANCE registry (Registry of patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and very high cardiovascular risk with insufficient effect of hypolipidemic therapy). Methods. The RENAISSANCE registry is an open, national, observational study and includes patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), as well as patients of very high cardiovascular risk (VHR). We took into consideration atherosclerosis risk factors and history of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), adherence to hypolipidemic therapy. Concentrations of total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL!C) were measured in blood serum in all centers. Low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL!C) level was defined according to Friedewald formula. The concentration of lipoprotein(a) was measured by enzyme!linked immunosorbent assay in serum in some centers. Kaplan!Mayer analysis was performed to assess the frequency of fatal and nonfatal CVE. Results. The Registry consisted of 1570 (mean age 54.0±14.6 years) FH patients and 121 (63.5±10.9 years) VHR patients. Data of 594 patients (38%) who had follow!up visits were obtained in FH patients, follow!up duration 23.6±14.6 months, 54 (9%) patients experienced CVE. Male sex (hazard ratio 2.1; 95% confidence interval 1.13!3.66, p<0.01), hypertension (2.8;1.4–5.2; p<0.01), ischemic heart disease (6.8;3.5!13.2; p<0.0001), family history of CVD (2.1;1.1–3.9, p<0.05) and lipoprotein(a) level ≥30 mg/dl (2.8;1.1–7.7; p<0.05) were predictors of CVE. In FH patients the level of TC decreased by 19%, LDL!C by 25% (p<0.001 for both). Data on 72 VHR patients (60%) were obtained with follow!up duration of 19.7±5.8 months. No patient achieved the target LDL!C level of less than 1.4 mmol/L. Conclusion. Three!year follow!up of participants in the RENAISSANCE registry shows an enhanced adherence to hypolipidemic therapy. In FH patients the increased risk of new CVE is associated with male sex, hypertension, CHD, family history of CVD and lipoprotein(a) level ≥30 mg/dl

scholarly journals Screening and treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia in a French sample of ambulatory care patients: A retrospective longitudinal cohort study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0255345
Author(s):  
Jean Ferrières ◽  
Victoria Banks ◽  
Demetris Pillas ◽  
Francesco Giorgianni ◽  
Laurene Gantzer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ambulatory Care ◽  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Moderate Intensity ◽  
Health Improvement ◽  
Lipid Lowering Therapy ◽  
Pcsk9 Inhibitors ◽  
Pharmacological Management

Background and aims Untreated Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH) leads to premature morbidity and mortality. In France, its epidemiology and management are understudied in ambulatory care. We described the clinical profile, pharmacological management, and clinical outcomes in a French sample of FH patients. Methods This was a retrospective longitudinal study on patients from The Health Improvement Network (THIN®) database in France, between October 2016-June 2019. Patients ≥18 years, with probable/definite FH based on the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria were included. Baseline characteristics, lipid profile, lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement; and disease management at 6-month of follow-up were analyzed. Results 116 patients with probable (n = 70)/definite (n = 46) FH were included (mean age:57.8±14.0 years; 56.0% women; 9.5% with personal history of cardiovascular events); 90 patients had data available at follow-up. At baseline, 77.6% of patients had LDL-C>190 mg/dL, 27.6% were not receiving LLTs, 37.9% received statins alone, 20.7% statins with other LLTs, and 7.7% other LLTs. High-intensity statins were prescribed to 11.2% of patients, 30.2% received moderate-intensity statins, and 8.6% low-intensity statins. Only 6.0% of patients achieved LDL-C goal. At 6-month of follow-up, statins discontinuation and switching were 22.7% and 2.3%, respectively. None of the patients received proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors at baseline nor follow-up. Conclusions Despite the existence of effective LLTs, FH patients are suboptimally-treated, do not achieve LDL-C goal, and exhibit worsened pharmacological management over time. Future studies with longer follow-up periods and assessment of factors affecting LDL-C management, including lifestyle and diet, are needed.

scholarly journals Improving Familial Hypercholesterolemia Index Case Detection: Sequential Active Screening from Centralized Analytical Data

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 749
Author(s):  
Fernando Sabatel-Pérez ◽  
Joaquín Sánchez-Prieto ◽  
Víctor Manuel Becerra-Muñoz ◽  
Juan Horacio Alonso-Briales ◽  
Pedro Mata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Analytical Data ◽  
Genetic Diagnosis ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Screening Strategy ◽  
Cascade Screening ◽  
Active Screening ◽  
Lipid Clinic

The majority of familial hypercholesterolemia index cases (FH-IC) remain underdiagnosed and undertreated because there are no well-defined strategies for the universal detection of FH. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of an active screening for FH-IC based on centralized analytical data. From 2016 to 2019, a clinical screening of FH was performed on 469 subjects with severe hypercholesterolemia (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥220 mg/dL), applying the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria. All patients with a DLCN ≥ 6 were genetically tested, as were 10 patients with a DLCN of 3–5 points to compare the diagnostic yield between the two groups. FH was genetically confirmed in 57 of the 84 patients with DLCN ≥ 6, with a genetic diagnosis rate of 67.9% and an overall prevalence of 12.2% (95% confidence interval: 9.3% to 15.5%). Before inclusion in the study, only 36.8% (n = 21) of the patients with the FH mutation had been clinically diagnosed with FH; after genetic screening, FH detection increased 2.3-fold (p < 0.001). The sequential, active screening strategy for FH-IC increases the diagnostic yield for FH with a rational use of the available resources, which may facilitate the implementation of FH universal and family-based cascade screening strategies.

scholarly journals Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Outcomes after Revascularization of Carotid and Lower Limbs Arteries

Biomolecules ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 257
Author(s):  
Marat V. Ezhov ◽  
Narek A. Tmoyan ◽  
Olga I. Afanasieva ◽  
Marina I. Afanasieva ◽  
Sergei N. Pokrovsky
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Cardiovascular Outcomes ◽  
Lower Limbs ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Lipid Lowering Therapy ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

Background: Despite high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy, there is a residual risk of cardiovascular events that could be associated with lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)). It has been shown that there is an association between elevated Lp(a) level and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease. Data about the role of Lp(a) in the development of cardiovascular events after peripheral revascularization are scarce. Purpose: To evaluate the relationship of Lp(a) level with cardiovascular outcomes after revascularization of carotid and lower limbs arteries. Methods: The study included 258 patients (209 men, mean age 67 years) with severe carotid and/or lower extremity artery disease, who underwent successful elective peripheral revascularization. The primary endpoint was the composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. The secondary endpoint was the composite of primary endpoint and repeated revascularization. Results: For 36-month follow-up, 29 (11%) primary and 128 (50%) secondary endpoints were registered. There was a greater risk of primary (21 (8%) vs. 8 (3%); hazard ratio (HR), 3.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5–6.3; p < 0.01) and secondary endpoints (83 (32%) vs. 45 (17%), HR, 2.8; 95% CI 2.0–4.0; p < 0.01) in patients with elevated Lp(a) level (≥30 mg/dL) compared to patients with Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression analysis revealed that Lp(a) was independently associated with the incidence of cardiovascular outcomes. Conclusions: Patients with peripheral artery diseases have a high risk of cardiovascular events. Lp(a) level above 30 mg/dL is significantly and independently associated with cardiovascular events during 3-year follow-up after revascularization of carotid and lower limbs arteries.

Estimated Prevalence of Familial Hypercholesterolemia Among Egyptian Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes; Analysis from The Cardiorisk Project

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_D) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashraf Reda ◽  
Ahmed Bendary ◽  
Ahmed Shawky Elserafy ◽  
Elsayed Farag ◽  
Tamer Mostafa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Familial Hypercholesterolemia ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Total Population ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Lipid Clinic ◽  
Egyptian Patients ◽  
Coronary Syndromes ◽  
Premature Cad

Abstract Aims The prevalence of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) in Egypt is largely un- known. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of FH among 3224 Egyptian patients with acute coronary syndromes enrolled from 2015 to 2018 in the nationwide cross- sectional cardioRisk project. Methods and Results We applied the Dutch Lipid Clinic criteria for the diagnosis of FH on the available data recorded for the patients enrolled in the CardioRisk project. Two main criteria were applied: the presence of premature CAD (given 2 points in the Dutch criteria), and the categorized low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lev- els (given 1, 3, 5, or 8 points in the Dutch criteria according to the level). From a total of 3224 patients, 2743 patients had available LDL-C levels. Among those patients, when applying the abovementioned 2 criteria, we estimated that 472 patients had at least ‘possible’ FH (17.2% of the total population). Specifically, 4 patients had ‘defi- nite’ FH (0.1%), 7 patients had ‘probable’ FH (0.25%), and 461 patients had ‘possi- ble’ FH (16.8%). Conclusion The estimated prevalence of at least ‘possible’ FH among Egyptian patients with ACS is 17%.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document