Why guideline-making requires reform Sniderman, Allan D; Furberg, Curt D
JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association,
2009-Jan-28, Letnik:
301, Številka:
4
Journal Article
Abstract Clinical decisions are increasingly driven by evidence-based recommendations of guideline groups, which aim to be based on the highest quality knowledge—randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and ...meta-analyses. Although RCTs provide the best assessment of the overall value of a therapy, high-quality evidence from RCTs is often incomplete, contradictory, or absent even in areas that have been most exhaustively studied. Moreover, the likelihood of the success or failure of a therapy is not identical in all the individuals treated in any trial because therapy is not the only determinant of outcome. Therefore, the overall results of a trial cannot be assumed to apply to any particular individual, not even someone who corresponds to all the entry criteria for the trial. In addition, the potential for bias due to financial conflicts remains in many guideline groups. Guidelines are key sources of knowledge. Nevertheless, limitations in the extent, quality, generalizability, and transferability of evidence mean that we clinicians must still reason through the best choices for an individual because even in the absence of full and secure knowledge, clinical decisions must still be made. Clinical reasoning is the pragmatic, tried-and-true process of expert clinical problem solving that does value mechanistic reasoning and clinical experience as well as RCTs and observational studies. Clinicians must continue to value clinical reasoning if our aim is the best clinical care for all the individuals we treat.
Current guidelines recommend statins in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease on the basis of predicted cardiovascular risk without directly considering the expected benefits of statin ...therapy based on the available randomized, controlled trial evidence.
We included 2134 participants representing 71.8 million American residents potentially eligible for statins in primary prevention from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey for the years 2005 to 2010. We compared statin eligibilities using 2 separate approaches: a 10-year risk-based approach (≥7.5% 10-year risk) and an individualized benefit approach (ie, based on predicted absolute risk reduction over 10 years ARR10 ≥2.3% from randomized, controlled trial data). A risk-based approach led to the eligibility of 15.0 million (95% confidence interval, 12.7-17.3 million) Americans, whereas a benefit-based approach identified 24.6 million (95% confidence interval, 21.0-28.1 million). The corresponding numbers needed to treat over 10 years were 21 (range, 9-44) and 25 (range, 9-44). The benefit-based approach identified 9.5 million lower-risk (<7.5% 10-year risk) Americans not currently eligible for statin treatment who had the same or greater expected benefit from statins (≥2.3% ARR10) compared with higher-risk individuals. This lower-risk/acceptable-benefit group includes younger individuals (mean age, 55.2 versus 62.5 years; P<0.001 for benefit based versus risk based) with higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (140 versus133 mg/dL; P=0.01). Statin treatment in this group would be expected to prevent an additional 266 508 cardiovascular events over 10 years.
An individualized statin benefit approach can identify lower-risk individuals who have equal or greater expected benefit from statins in primary prevention compared with higher-risk individuals. This approach may help develop guideline recommendations that better identify individuals who meaningfully benefit from statin therapy.
Despite growing evidence that apolipoprotein B (apoB) is the most accurate marker of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk, its adoption in clinical practice has been low. This ...investigation sought to determine whether low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides are sufficient for routine cardiovascular care.
A sample of 293 876 UK Biobank adults (age: 40-73 years, 42% men), free of cardiovascular disease, with a median follow-up for new-onset ASCVD of 11 years was included. Distribution of apoB at pre-specified levels of LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and triglycerides was examined graphically, and 10-year ASCVD event rates were compared for high vs. low apoB. Residuals of apoB were constructed after regressing apoB on LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and log-transformed triglycerides and used as predictors in a proportional hazards regression model for new-onset ASCVD adjusted for standard risk factors, including HDL-C.
ApoB was highly correlated with LDL-C and non-HDL-C (Pearson's r = .96, P < .001 for both) but less so with log triglycerides (r = .42, P < .001). However, apoB ranges necessary to capture 95% of all observations at pre-specified levels of LDL-C, non-HDL-C, or triglycerides were wide, spanning 85.8-108.8 md/dL when LDL-C 130 mg/dL, 88.3-112.4 mg/dL when non-HDL-C 160 mg/dL, and 67.8-147.4 md/dL when triglycerides 115 mg/dL. At these levels (±10 mg/dL), 10-year ASCVD rates for apoB above mean + 1 SD vs. below mean - 1 SD were 7.3 vs. 4.0 for LDL-C, 6.4 vs. 4.6 for non-HDL-C, and 7.0 vs. 4.6 for triglycerides (all P < .001). With 19 982 new-onset ASCVD events on follow-up, in the adjusted model, residual apoB remained statistically significant after accounting for LDL-C and HDL-C (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 1.0-1.07), after accounting for non-HDL-C and HDL-C (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.06), and after accounting for triglycerides and HDL-C (hazard ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.12-1.15). None of the residuals of LDL-C, non-HDL-C, or of log triglycerides remained significant when apoB was included in the model.
High variability of apoB at individual levels of LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and triglycerides coupled with meaningful differences in 10-year ASCVD rates and significant residual information contained in apoB for prediction of new-onset ASCVD events demonstrate that LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and triglycerides are not adequate proxies for apoB in clinical care.
Conventional methods, comparing the concentration of cholesterol to particle number as indices of cardiovascular risk, have not produced consistent results, in large part, because they treat these ...variables as independent and unrelated. However, although highly correlated, apolipoprotein B particles may contain a normal mass of cholesterol or may be cholesterol-depleted or cholesterol-enriched. Discordance analysis compares the predictive power of LDL-C and non-HDL-C to apolipoprotein B and LDL particle numbers in patients in whom they differ, that is, in whom they are discordant. The advantage of discordance analysis is that the results are not diluted by concordant data in which risk predictions cannot differ.
The evidence, to date, consistently demonstrates that apolipoprotein B and LDL particle numbers are more accurate indices of cardiovascular risk than LDL-C or non-HDL-C.
Discordance analysis is a methodological advance that allows the clinical value of closely correlated variables to be determined and demonstrates that cardiovascular risk is more closely related to the number of atherogenic particles than to the total mass of cholesterol within them.
The new 2014 blood pressure (BP) guideline released by the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8; 2014 BP guideline) proposed less restrictive BP targets for adults ...aged 60 years or older and for those with diabetes and chronic kidney disease.
To estimate the proportion of US adults potentially affected by recent changes in recommendations for management of hypertension.
Cross-sectional, nationally representative survey.
Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey between 2005 and 2010 (n = 16,372), we evaluated hypertension control and treatment recommendations for US adults.
Proportion of adults estimated to meet guideline-based BP targets under the 2014 BP guideline and under the previous seventh Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) guideline.
The proportion of younger adults (18-59 years) with treatment-eligible hypertension under the JNC 7 guideline was 20.3% (95% CI, 19.1%-21.4%) and decreased to 19.2% (95% CI, 18.1%-20.4%) under the 2014 BP guideline. Larger declines were observed among older adults (≥60 years), decreasing from 68.9% (95% CI, 66.9%-70.8%) under JNC 7 to 61.2% (95% CI, 59.3%-63.0%) under the 2014 BP guideline. The proportion of adults with treatment-eligible hypertension who met BP goals increased slightly for younger adults, from 41.2% (95% CI, 38.1%-44.3%) under JNC 7 to 47.5% (95% CI, 44.4%-50.6%) under the 2014 BP guideline, and more substantially for older adults, from 40.0% (95% CI, 37.8%-42.3%) under JNC 7 to 65.8% (95% CI, 63.7%-67.9%) under the 2014 BP guideline. Overall, 1.6% (95% CI, 1.3%-1.9%) of US adults aged 18-59 years and 27.6% (95% CI, 25.9%-29.3%) of adults aged 60 years or older were receiving BP-lowering medication and meeting more stringent JNC 7 targets. These patients may be eligible for less stringent or no BP therapy with the 2014 BP guideline.
Compared with the JNC 7 guideline, the 2014 BP guideline from the panel members appointed to the JNC 8 was associated with a reduction in the proportion of US adults recommended for hypertension treatment and a substantial increase in the proportion of adults considered to have achieved goal BP, primarily in older adults.
Concern continues about whether the measurement of apolipoprotein B (apoB) is adequately standardized, and therefore, whether apoB should be applied widely in clinical care. This concern is ...misplaced. Our objective is to explain why and what the term "standardization" means. To produce clinically valid results, a test must accurately, precisely, and selectively measure the marker of interest. That is, it must be standardized. Accuracy refers to how closely the result obtained with 1 method corresponds to the result obtained with the standard method, precision to how reproducible the result is on repeated testing, and selectivity to how susceptible the method is to error by inclusion of other classes of lipoprotein particles. Multiple expert groups have determined that the measurement of apoB is adequately standardized for clinical care, and that apoB can be measured inexpensively, using widely available automated methods, more accurately, precisely, and selectively than low-density lipoprotein cholesterol or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. ApoB is a standard superior to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol because it is a defined molecule, whereas the cholesterol markers are the mass of cholesterol within lipoprotein particles defined by their density, not by their molecular structure. Nevertheless, the standardization of apoB is being further improved by the application of mass spectrophotometric methods, whereas the limitations in the standardization and, therefore, the accurate, precise, and selective measurement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol are unlikely to be overcome. We submit that greater accuracy, precision, and selectivity in measurement is a decisive advantage for apoB in the modern era of intensive lipid-lowering therapies.
The study compared the distribution of serum LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B (apoB) among participants of the NATPOL 2011 survey and analysed concordance/discordance of results in the context ...of the risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
Serum levels of apoB, LDL-C, non-HDL-C and small dense LDL-C were measured/calculated in 2067–2098 survey participants. The results were compared between women and men, age groups and in relation to body mass index (BMI), fasting glucose and TG levels, and the presence of CVD. Percentile distribution of lipid levels and concordance/discordance analysis were based on medians and ESC/EAS 2019 target thresholds for ASCVD risk and on comparison of measured apoB levels and levels calculated from linear regression equations with serum LDL- C and non-HDL-C as independent variables.
Serum apoB, LDL-C and non-HDL-C were similarly related to sex, age, BMI, visceral obesity, cardiovascular disease, and fasting glucose and triglyceride levels. Serum apoB, LDL-C and non-HDL-C very high- and moderate- target thresholds were exceeded in 83%, 99% and 96.9% and in 41%, 75% and 63.7% of subjects, respectively. The incidence of the discordances between the results depended on the dividing values used and ranged from 0.2% to 45.2% of the respondents. Subjects with high apoB / low LDL-C/non-HDL-C discordance had features of metabolic syndrome.
Diagnostic discordances between apoB and LDL-C/non-HDL-C indicate limitations of serum LDL-C/non-HDL-C in ASCVD risk management. Due to the high apoB/low LDL-C/non-HDL-C discordance, obese/metabolic syndrome patients may benefit from replacing LDL-C/non-HDL-C by apoB in ASCVD risk assessment and lipid-lowering therapy.
•The serum apoB, LDL-C, and non-HDL-C targets set for the ASCVD risk are not distributed consistently across the population.•The frequency of diagnostic concordance/discordance of serum apoB / LDL-C/non-HDL-C depends on the dividing value used.•Serum apoB / LDL-C/non-HDL-C discordance is more common in patients with features of the metabolic syndrome.
PDF
