Dyslipidaemia. Is there any new information? Dr. A.R.M. Saifuddin Ekram

Similar documents
Review of guidelines for management of dyslipidemia in diabetic patients

How would you manage Ms. Gold

The Metabolic Syndrome

JUPITER NEJM Poll. Panel Discussion: Literature that Should Have an Impact on our Practice: The JUPITER Study

The JUPITER trial: What does it tell us? Alice Y.Y. Cheng, MD, FRCPC January 24, 2009

How to Reduce Residual Risk in Primary Prevention

Case Presentation. Rafael Bitzur The Bert W Strassburger Lipid Center Sheba Medical Center Tel Hashomer

ATP IV: Predicting Guideline Updates

CVD Risk Assessment. Michal Vrablík Charles University, Prague Czech Republic

1. Which one of the following patients does not need to be screened for hyperlipidemia:

Diabetes Mellitus: A Cardiovascular Disease

Optimizing risk assessment of total cardiovascular risk What are the tools? Lars Rydén Professor Karolinska Institutet Stockholm, Sweden

MOLINA HEALTHCARE OF CALIFORNIA

Accelerated atherosclerosis begins years prior to the diagnosis of diabetes

Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials EXPLAINING THE DECREASE IN DEATHS FROM CHD! PREVENTION OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE IN WOMEN EXPLAINING THE DECREASE IN

Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials

Ischemic Heart and Cerebrovascular Disease. Harold E. Lebovitz, MD, FACE Kathmandu November 2010

PIEDMONT ACCESS TO HEALTH SERVICES, INC. Guidelines for Screening and Management of Dyslipidemia

PREVENTION OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE IN WOMEN

Lessons from Recent Atherosclerosis Trials

Cardiovascular Complications of Diabetes

Beyond Framingham: Risk Assessment & Treatment for Primary Prevention

Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials MANAGEMENT OF HIGH BLOOD CHOLESTEROL MANAGEMENT OF HIGH BLOOD CHOLESTEROL: IMPLICATIONS OF THE NEW GUIDELINES

Hyperlipidemia: Lowering the Bar on the Lipid Limbo. Community Faculty Development Symposium March 13, 2004 Hugh Huizenga MD, MPH

4/7/ The stats on heart disease. + Deaths & Age-Adjusted Death Rates for

Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials Prevention Of CVD in Women"

Andrew Cohen, MD and Neil S. Skolnik, MD INTRODUCTION

The Clinical Unmet need in the patient with Diabetes and ACS

Complications of Diabetes mellitus. Dr Bill Young 16 March 2015

Landmark Clinical Trials.

Treating Lipids for Prevention of CAD in Women: Matching Therapy to Risk

Inflammation and and Heart Heart Disease in Women Inflammation and Heart Disease

The 10 th International & 15 th National Congress on Quality Improvement in Clinical Laboratories

surtout qui n est PAS à risque?

Disclosure. No relevant financial relationships. Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials

The Diabetes Link to Heart Disease

Assessing Cardiovascular Risk to Optimally Stratify Low- and Moderate- Risk Patients. Copyright. Not for Sale or Commercial Distribution

No relevant financial relationships

Preclinical Detection of CAD: Is it worth the effort? Michael H. Crawford, MD

How to Reduce CVD Complications in Diabetes?

CLINICAL OUTCOME Vs SURROGATE MARKER

Environmental. Vascular / Tissue. Metabolics

Macrovascular Residual Risk. What risk remains after LDL-C management and intensive therapy?

Pharmaceutical Help to Control Cholesterol

Preventing Cardiovascular Disease With Lipid Management: Matching Therapy to Risk

Dyslipidemia in the light of Current Guidelines - Do we change our Practice?

Janet B. Long, MSN, ACNP, CLS, FAHA, FNLA Rhode Island Cardiology Center

Changing lipid-lowering guidelines: whom to treat and how low to go

CVD Prevention, Who to Consider

CVD risk assessment using risk scores in primary and secondary prevention

PREVENTION OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE IN WOMEN

The Clinical Debates

No relevant financial relationships

Is there a mechanism of interaction between hypertension and dyslipidaemia?

Total risk management of Cardiovascular diseases Nobuhiro Yamada

The TNT Trial Is It Time to Shift Our Goals in Clinical

Update On Diabetic Dyslipidemia: Who Should Be Treated With A Fibrate After ACCORD-LIPID?

LDL cholesterol and cardiovascular outcomes?

The Metabolic Syndrome: Is It A Valid Concept? YES

Inflammation: Novel Target for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction

9/29/2015. Primary Prevention of Heart Disease: Objectives. Objectives. What works? What doesn t?

Imaging Biomarkers: utilisation for the purposes of registration. EMEA-EFPIA Workshop on Biomarkers 15 December 2006

Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Calculating the CVD Risk Score: Which Tool for Which Patient?

Disclosure. No relevant financial relationships. Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials

Which CVS risk reduction strategy fits better to carotid US findings?

Hyperlipidemia and Cardiovascular Disease. Kathmandu November 2010 Harold E. Lebovitz, MD, FACE

New Guidelines in Dyslipidemia Management

The Atherogenic Dyslipidemia of Diabetes Mellitus- Not just a question of LDL-C

Tailored Statin Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes. Han, Ki Hoon Asan Medical Center University of Ulsan

ROLE OF INFLAMMATION IN HYPERTENSION. Dr Barasa FA Physician Cardiologist Eldoret

John J.P. Kastelein MD PhD Professor of Medicine Dept. of Vascular Medicine Academic Medial Center / University of Amsterdam

There are many ways to lower triglycerides in humans: Which are the most relevant for pancreatitis and for CV risk?

Lifetime clinical and economic benefits of statin-based LDL lowering in the 20-year Followup of the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study

Serum levels of galectin-1, galectin-3, and galectin-9 are associated with large artery atherosclerotic

Diabetes and Cardiovascular Risk Management Denise M. Kolanczyk, PharmD, BCPS-AQ Cardiology

Cardiovascular Complications in Diabetes

PCSK9 Inhibitors and Modulators

Tuesday, October 18 3:30 p.m. 5:30 p.m. Convention Center: Rooms 315 & 316

Disclosures. Overview 9/30/ ACC/AHA Guidelines on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults

ASSeSSing the risk of fatal cardiovascular disease

Treatment of Cardiovascular Risk Factors. Kevin M Hayes D.O. F.A.C.C. First Coast Heart and Vascular Center

Lipid Management: A Case-Based Approach. Overview. Simple Lipid Therapy Approach. Patients have lipid disorders of:

Introduction. Objective. Critical Questions Addressed

Update on Cholesterol Management: The 2013 ACC/AHA Guidelines

Metabolic Syndrome: An overview. Kevin Niswender MD, PhD Vanderbilt University School of Medicine

Biomarkers in Vascular Inflammation (hscrp, Lp-PLA 2 )

Learning Objectives. Patient Case

Lipid Management 2013 Statin Benefit Groups

The Burden of the Diabetic Heart

Traitements associés chez l hypertendu: Statines, Aspirine

Clinical Recommendations: Patients with Periodontitis

The Latest Generation of Clinical

Calculating RR, ARR, NNT

Copyright 2017 by Sea Courses Inc.

New Guidelines in Dyslipidemia Management

Lipid Management: Beyond LDL

Prof. John Chapman, MD, PhD, DSc

Know Your Number Aggregate Report Single Analysis Compared to National Averages

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Causes of death in Diabetes

Transcription:

Dyslipidaemia Is there any new information? Dr. A.R.M. Saifuddin Ekram PhD,FACP,FCPS(Medicine) Professor(c.c.) & Head Department of Medicine Rajshahi Medical College Rajshahi-6000

New features of ATP III Focus on multiple risk factors Modifications of lipid & lipoprotein classification Support for implementation

Focus on multiple risk factors 1. Raises persons with DM without CHD (most of whom display multiple risk factors) to the risk level of CHD risk equivalent

2. Uses Framingham projections of 10-year absolute CHD risk to identify certain patients with multiple(2+) risk factors for more intensive treatment.

3. Identifies persons with multiple metabolic risk factors (metabolic syndrome) as candidate for intensified therapeutic lifestyle changes

Modifications of lipid & lipoprotein classification 1. Identifies LDL cholesterol <100 mg/dl as optimal

2. Raises categorical low HDL cholesterol from <35 mg/dl to <40 mg/dl because the latter is a better measure of a depressed HDL

3. Lowers the triglyceride classification cut-points to give more attention to moderate elevations

Support for implementation 1. Recommends lipoprotein analysis (TC,LDL-C,HDL-C & TG ) as preferred initial test, rather than screening for total cholesterol and HDL alone

2. Encourages use of plant stanols /sterols and viscous (soluble) fiber as the preferred initial test, rather than screening for total cholesterol and HDL alone

3. Presents strategies for promoting adherence to therapeutic lifestyle changes and drug therapies

4. Recommends treatment beyond LDL lowering for persons with TG > 200 mg/dl.

Target lipid values by level of risk Target values Level of risk LDL-C level, TC:HDL Triglyceride (definition) mmol/l ratio level, mmol/l Very high * (10-year risk of CAD >30%, or history of CV disease or diabetes) <2.5 <4 <2.0 High * (10-year risk 20%-30%) <3.0 <5 <2.0 Moderate (10-year risk 10%-20%) <4.0 <6 <2.0 Low (10-year risk <10%) <5.0 <7 <3.0 *Start medication and lifestyle changes concomitantly if values are above target values. Start medication if target values are not achieved after 3 months of lifestyle modification. Start medication if target values are not achieved after 6 months of lifestyle modification.

New Challenges Aging Obesity (> 27 kg/m 2 ) Type 2 DM is at epidemic proportions

Focal points Focus on 3 CHD, hard end-point risk levels as used in ATP III Treat to LDL and TC/HDL ratio (and apo B) targets A focus on TC/HDL and apo B ensures that TG problems associated with increased CHD risk will be adequately addressed.

Risk Categories Risk category 10-year risk estimate of CVD LDL-C TC:HDL-C ratio apo B High 20% Diabetes Any atherosclerotic disease <2.5 <4.0 0.90 Moderate 10% - <20% <3.5 <5.0 1.05 Low < 10% <4.5 <6.0 1.20

Estimate of 10-Year Risk for Men Age determines first assignment of points Total Cholesterol Age 20-39 Age 40-49 Age 50-59 Age 60-60 Age 70-79 <4.14 0 0 0 0 0 4.15-5.19 4 3 2 1 0 5.2-6.19 7 5 3 1 0 6.2-7.2 9 6 4 2 1 >7.21 11 8 5 3 1 Nonsmoker 0 0 0 0 0 Smoker 8 5 3 1 1 Systolic BP If Untreated If Treated (mmhg) <120 0 0 120-129 0 1 130-139 1 2 140-159 1 2 160 2 3 HDL points are the same for males and females and are not stratified by age

Percent with CAD events / 5y The Greater the LDL-C Reduction, the Better the Effect on Coronary Artery Disease Risk 25 4S-P Secondary Prevention 20 15 10 5 0 4S GREACE UC Lipid-P CARE-P CARE HPS-P HPS Lipid WOS-P GREACE WOS AFCAPS AFCAPS-P Primary Prevention 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 mg/dl 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.84 3.36 3.87 4.39 4.91 5.43 mmol/l LDL-cholesterol

Evidence in 1º Prevention ASCOT: Patient Population Lipid Lowering Arm (LLA) Eligibility criteria SBP 160 mm Hg and/or DBP 100 mm Hg (untreated) or SBP 140 mm Hg and/or BP 90 mm Hg (treated) TC 6.5 mmol/l (250 mg/dl) and TGs 4.5 mmol/l (400 mg/dl) 40-79 years of age 3+ CVD risk factors: Male >55 years of age LVH or ECG abnormality Type 2 DM PAD or CVD (CVA or TIA) or family Hx of premature CHD Microalbuminuria/proteinuria Smoking TC/HDL >6 No history of CHD Sever et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Lancet. 2003;361:1149-58

ASCOT LLA: Patient Population Risk Factor Profile All patients in ASCOT have hypertension plus 3 risk factors for CHD Hypertension Age 55 years Male Microalbumin/proteinuria Smoker Family history of early coronary disease Plasma TC:HDL-C 6 Type 2 diabetes Certain ECG abnormalities LVH Previous cerebrovascular events Peripheral vascular disease 14 14 14 10 5 24 26 33 62 3.7 risk factors on 84 81 average required for inclusion 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Patients with risk factor (%) Sever et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Lancet. 2003;361:1149-58

DBP (mm Hg) SBP (mm Hg) Blood Pressure Changes 170 Baseline 164/95 Treated 138/80 160 150 140 Atorvastatin 10 mg Placebo 130 0 1 2 3 100 95 90 85 80 75 0 1 2 3 Years Sever et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Lancet. 2003;361:1149-58

LDL cholesterol (mmol/l) (mg/dl) Total cholesterol (mmol/l) (mg/dl) Reductions in Total and LDL Cholesterol 6 4 1.3 mmol/l 1.0 mmol/l 200 150 24% reduction Atorvastatin 10 mg Placebo 100 2 0 1 2 3 4 150 3 2 35% reduction 1.2 mmol/l 1.0 mmol/l 125 100 75 1 0 1 2 3 Years Sever et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Lancet. 2003;361:1149-58

Cumulative Incidence (%) Primary End Point: Nonfatal MI and Fatal CHD 4 Atorvastatin 10 mg Number of events 100 Placebo Number of events 154 3 36% reduction 2 1 HR = 0.64 (0.50-0.83) p=0.0005 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Years Sever et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Lancet. 2003;361:1149-58

Cumulative Incidence (%) 3 2 Secondary End Point: Fatal and Nonfatal Stroke Atorvastatin 10 mg Number of events 89 Placebo Number of events 121 27% reduction 1 HR = 0.73 (0.56-0.96) p=0.0236 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Years Sever et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Lancet. 2003;361:1149-58

Percentage with CHD event Landmark Statin Trials in 1º Prevention: LDL-C Levels vs Events 10 9 S = statin treated; P = placebo treated 8 7 6 WOSCOPS-S WOSCOPS-P 5 4 3 2 1 AFCAPS-S ASCOT-S AFCAPS-P ASCOT-P Primary prevention Pravastatin Lovastatin Atorvastatin 0 2.3 (90) 2.8 (110) 3.4 (130) 3.9 (150) 4.4 (170) 4.9 (190) 5.4 (210) LDL-C, mmol/l (mg/dl) 35% LDL = 36% in Death + MI in 3.3 yrs 25% LDL = 40% in Death + MI in 5.2 yrs 26% LDL = 31% in Death + MI in 4.9 yrs Sever et al, for the ASCOT Investigators. Lancet. 2003;361:1149-58

Clinical trials that showed significant correlation between HDL and outcomes AFCAPS/TEXCAPS (AI and B/AI ratio, pooled data) 4S (pooled data) HHS VA-HIT DAIS HATS (FER HDL )

HDL and Triglycerides: Fibrate Trials N Drug Follow-up LDL TG HDL Results HHS 4081 Gemfibrozil 5.4 y -10% -43% +>10% 34% fatal/nonfatal CHD (P<0.02) BIP 3090 Bezafibrate 6.2 y -6.5% -21% +18% 9.4% nonfatal events, P=0.26 VA-HIT 2531 Gemfibrozil 5.1 y 0% -31% +6% 22% fatal/ nonfatal CHD P=0.006 DAIS 418 Fenofibrate 2 y -6% -29% +6% 23% CHD* (P=NS) *Not powered for clinical events. DAIS Investigators. Lancet. 2001;357:905-910; Haffner. Circulation. 2000;102:2-4; Frick. N Engl J Med. 1987;317:1237-1245.

Apo B and LDL-cholesterol Sample a Sample b LDL LDL LDL apo B LDL LDL LDL apo B LDL-C 3.0 mmol/l apo B 0.8 g/l LDL LDL LDL LDL-C 3.0 mmol/l apo B 1.6 g/l NOTE: apo B level does not correlate with serum TG level

apo B: Utility Not affected by fasting Not invalidated in cases of high TG Helps separate higher and lower risk patients with moderate TG increases Useful for monitoring therapy (decrease in # atherogenic particles, target < 0.9 g/l) May be extremely useful in stratifying patients with METABOLIC SYNDROME

Obesity* Trends Among US Adults BRFSS, 1991, 1995, and 2000 1991 1995 2000 *BMI 30 or ~30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person. Mokdad et al. JAMA. 1999;282:16, 2001;286:10. No Data <10% 10%-14% 15%-19% 20%

Metabolic Syndrome

Metabolic Syndrome ( Death by a 1000 Lashes to Your Arteries ) 3 of the following abnormalities: waist circumferences 102 cm (men) 88 cm (women) serum triglycerides 1.7 mmol/l serum HDL-cholesterol 1.05 mmol/l (men) 1.30 mmol/l (women) blood pressure 130 / 85 mm Hg serum glucose 6.1 mmol/l

Is Diabetes a CVD Equivalent? There is a trade-off between low short-term risk vs high long term risk and the value of early vs delayed risk management Focus on glucose control has yielded suboptimal impact on macro-vascular complications

CV Mortality (%) Diabetes Is a CHD Equivalent 50 40 30 No prior MI Prior MI 42 20 15.9 15.4 10 0 N 2.1 69 1304 169 890 Nondiabetic Diabetic Haffner et al. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:229-234.

% Reduction Effect of Tight Glucose Control vs Tight BP Control on Events: UKPDS 0-10 Stroke Any Diabetic Endpoint Diabetes- Related Death Microvascular Complications -20-30 -40-50 * * * Tight glucose control Tight BP control (<150/85 mm Hg) * *P<0.05 compared with tight glucose control. Sudden death, death from hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, fatal or nonfatal MI, angina, heart failure, stroke, renal failure, amputation of 1 digit, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal photocoagulation, blindness in one eye, or cataract extraction. Death due to MI, sudden death, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, renal disease, hyperglycemia, or hypoglycemia. Bakris et al. Am J Kidney Dis. 2000;36:646-661.

High Lp(a) If well over 400-500 I.U./L (>1,000?) treat LDL-C to <2.0-2.5 mmol/l particularly if other risk factors (BP) present or if TC/HDL >5 JAMA 1995;274:1771-4

A Plethora of Non-Lipid Markers of Risk 1. Vasodilatory Endothelial Dysfunction: Brachial Ultrasound Flow-Mediated Dilation. 2. Atherosclerosis Burden/End-organ Damage: Carotid IMT, # plaques (based on carotid US), IVUS, EBCT, advanced CT, MRI 3. General Inflammatory Marker: hs-c Reactive Protein 4. Markers of Inflamed Endothelium: ICAM, VCAM, e-selectin, vwf 5. Other: Homocysteine

Atherosclerosis Is an Inflammatory Disease LDL E-Selectin, P-Selectin L-Selectin, Integrins VCAM-1, ICAM-1 Monocyte OxLDL M-CSF MCP-1 Intima Other inflammatory triggers Libby et al. Circulation 2002;105:1135-1143. Macrophage Activation & Division Media Smooth Muscle Cell Migration

The Acute-Phase Response Pathway Proinflammatory Risk Factors Primary Pro-inflamatory Cytokines (eg, IL-1, TNF-a) ICAM-1 Selectins, HSPs, etc. Endothelium and other cells Circulation CRP SAA HSPs=heat shock proteins; SAA=serum amyloid-a. Adapted from Libby and Ridker. Circulation. 1999;100:1148-1150. IL-6 Messenger Cytokine Liver

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Statins and Inflammation: CRP Additive With Lipids Ridker. Circulation. 2001;103:1813-1818. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Relative Risk 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 Data From NHANES Men Women 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

CRP and Metabolic Syndrome Ridker PM et al: Circulation 2003;107:391-397

Recommendations for Clinical and Public Health Practice for CRP: Statement from AHA/CDC Class I : express CRP as mg/l Class II: CRP is an independent marker of risk which may help direct further evaluation and therapy in the primary prevention of CVD in patients at intermediate global risk (10-20%/10yr) unexplained and persistent values >10 mg/l should be evaluated for non-cv causes in patients with stable/acute CAD, CRP may be useful as an independent marker of prognosis for death, MI, restenosis measure CRP twice, two weeks apart (<1 = low RR, >3 = High RR)

B-Mode Ultrasound Skin External Internal Bifurcation Ultrasound pulse Near wall Far wall Kanters et al. Stroke. 1997;28:665-671.

Risk of MI (OR) Risk of Stroke (OR) 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Association of Carotid IMT With MI and Stroke <0.75 0.75-0.821 0.822-0.907 0.908 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 <0.75 0.75-0.821 0.822-0.908 0.907 N 34 17 18 29 IMT (mm) N 13 19 29 34 IMT (mm) Cutpoints used were the 40th, 60th, and 80th percentiles of the IMT distribution. Adjusted for age, sex, previous MI or stroke, body mass index, smoking, systolic BP, hypertension, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and diabetes mellitus. 44 Bots et al. Circulation. 1997;96:1432-1437.

Peripheral Artery Endothelial Function Brachial Vasoreactivity Baseline Hyperemia Nitroglycerine (Ntg) 3.94 mm 4.56 mm 4.64 mm Vasodilation = 15.7% 17.8%

Left anterior oblique projection with cranial angulation by MSCT coronary angiography (A) and conventional coronary angiography (B) Nieman, Koen et al, The Lancet 2001; 357:599-603

Whole-body 3D MRA in a 66-year old man Nieman, Koen et al, The Lancet 2001; 357:1086-1091

New Focus Focus on 3 CHD, hard end-point risk levels as used in ATP III Treat to LDL and TC/HDL ratio (and apo B) targets A focus on TC/HDL and apo B ensures that TG problems associated with increased CHD risk should be adequately addressed

Thank you all.