Abstract An Expert Panel convened by the National Lipid Association previously developed a consensus set of recommendations for the patient-centered management of dyslipidemia in clinical medicine ...(part 1). These were guided by the principle that reducing elevated levels of atherogenic cholesterol (non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) reduces the risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This document represents a continuation of the National Lipid Association recommendations developed by a diverse panel of experts who examined the evidence base and provided recommendations regarding the following topics: (1) lifestyle therapies; (2) groups with special considerations, including children and adolescents, women, older patients, certain ethnic and racial groups, patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus, patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and patients with residual risk despite statin and lifestyle therapies; and (3) strategies to improve patient outcomes by increasing adherence and using team-based collaborative care.
In 2016, the American College of Cardiology published the first expert consensus decision pathway (ECDP) on the role of non-statin therapies for low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol lowering in ...the management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Since the publication of that document, additional evidence and perspectives have emerged from randomized clinical trials and other sources, particularly considering the longer-term efficacy and safety of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors in secondary prevention of ASCVD. Most notably, the FOURIER (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects with Elevated Risk) trial and SPIRE-1 and -2 (Studies of PCSK9 Inhibition and the Reduction of Vascular Events), assessing evolocumab and bococizumab, respectively, have published final results of cardiovascular outcomes trials in patients with clinical ASCVD and in a smaller number of high-risk primary prevention patients. In addition, further evidence on the types of patients most likely to benefit from the use of ezetimibe in addition to statin therapy after acute coronary syndrome has been published. Based on results from these important analyses, the ECDP writing committee judged that it would be desirable to provide a focused update to help guide clinicians more clearly on decision making regarding the use of ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with clinical ASCVD with or without comorbidities. In the following summary table, changes from the 2016 ECDP to the 2017 ECDP Focused Update are highlighted, and a brief rationale is provided. The content of the full document has been changed accordingly, with more extensive and detailed guidance regarding decision making provided both in the text and in the updated algorithms. Revised recommendations are provided for patients with clinical ASCVD with or without comorbidities on statin therapy for secondary prevention. The ECDP writing committee judged that these new data did not warrant changes to the decision pathways and algorithms regarding the use of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors in primary prevention patients with LDL-C <190 mg/dL with or without diabetes mellitus or patients without ASCVD and LDL-C ≥190 mg/dL not due to secondary causes. Based on feedback and further deliberation, the ECDP writing committee down-graded recommendations regarding bile acid sequestrant use, recommending bile acid sequestrants only as optional secondary agents for consideration in patients intolerant to ezetimibe. For clarification, the writing committee has also included new information on diagnostic categories of heterozygous and homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, based on clinical criteria with and without genetic testing. Other changes to the original document were kept to a minimum to provide consistent guidance to clinicians, unless there was a compelling reason or new evidence, in which case justification is provided.
Subsequent independent guideline groups, including the 2014 Joint British Societies Consensus Recommendations for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease (JBS3) (3), the 2014 Veterans' ...Administration/Department of Defense Guidelines on Management of Dyslipidemia (4), and the recent U.S. Preventive Services Task Force draft recommendations (5), have used similar, rigorous approaches to reviewing and synthesizing evidence, resulting in similar treatment recommendations.\n Joseph Butterfield Chair in Pediatrics Sanofi-Aventis None None None None None Scott M. Grundy Content Reviewer--Chair, Update to ACC/AHA Cholesterol Guideline University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas--Professor of Internal Medicine None None None None None None James L. Januzzi Content Reviewer--Chair, ACC Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents Massachusetts General Hospital--Director, Dennis and Marilyn Barry Fellowship in Cardiology Research Cardiology Division; Harvard Medical School--Hutter Family Professor of Medicine Novartislow * Rochelow * None None Amgen (DSMB) None None Joseph J. Saseen Content Reviewer--Cardiovascular Team Council University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus --Professor and Vice Chair, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Professor, Department of Family Medicine None None None None None None Michael D. Shapiro Content Reviewer--Prevention Council Oregon Health & Science University--Associate Professor of Medicine and RadiologyDirector, Cardiac MR CT ProgramCenter for Preventive CardiologyKnight Cardiovascular Institute None None None Amarindagger Amgendagger Isisdagger Sanofidagger Synagevadagger None None Barbara S. Wiggins Content Reviewer--ACC Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents Medical University of South Carolina--Clinical Pharmacy Specialist Cardiology, Department of Pharmacy Services None None None None None None black square This table represents the relationships of reviewers with industry and other entities that were disclosed at the time of peer review and determined to be relevant to this document.
Trending Cardiovascular Nutrition Controversies Freeman, Andrew M., MD; Morris, Pamela B., MD; Barnard, Neal, MD ...
Journal of the American College of Cardiology,
03/2017, Volume:
69, Issue:
9
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Abstract The potential cardiovascular benefits of several trending foods and dietary patterns are still incompletely understood, and nutritional science continues to evolve. However, in the meantime, ...a number of controversial dietary patterns, foods, and nutrients have received significant media exposure and are mired by hype. This review addresses some of the more popular foods and dietary patterns that are promoted for cardiovascular health to provide clinicians with accurate information for patient discussions in the clinical setting.
During the interactive table discussions, ACC consistently heard the following from participants: 1) there is a need for a paradigm shift from focusing on glycemic control alone to focusing more ...comprehensively on reducing CV risk and preventing CV death; and 2) there is a need to acknowledge that some of these emerging medical therapies have been proven to reduce CV death in patients with established or who are at high risk for CV disease, and that CV clinicians therefore have a role in prescribing them. ...the ACC saw an opportunity to provide guidance to fill the current gap between CV clinicians and diabetes care providers who jointly manage patients with T2D and ASCVD. ...given a diuretic and antihypertensive effect, SGLT2 inhibitors may increase the risk of volume depletion and hypotension; in large randomized control trials, this risk was slightly higher with canagliflozin than with placebo but was not increased with empagliflozin. Cost should also be considered, as insurance coverage for these agents can vary significantly. ...data from ongoing clinical trials become available, patients at high risk for HF (and possibly those with established HF) may derive more benefit from an SGLT2 inhibitor with demonstrated CV benefit, whereas those with osteoporosis, prior amputations, severe peripheral artery disease, peripheral neuropathy, or active lower extremity soft tissue ulcers or infections may have a more favorable benefit/risk balance if initially treated with a GLP-1RA with demonstrated CV benefit rather than canagliflozin. Combination therapy with both an SGLT2 inhibitor and a GLP-1RA for glycemic management also accords with current T2D management guidelines (3). ...it appears reasonable to use both an SGLT2 inhibitor and a GLP-1RA with demonstrated CV benefit concomitantly if clinically indicated, even though such combination therapy has not been studied for CVD risk reduction.5.4 What to Monitor When Prescribing an SGLT2 Inhibitor Patients starting an SGLT2 inhibitor should be informed about the higher risk of genital mycotic infections, and that this risk could be lowered with meticulous attention to personal hygiene.
PDF
