Cited by 53Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsAcute Myocardial Infarction Research

Variation in Lipid-Lowering Therapy Use in Patients With Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ≥190 mg/dL: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry–Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry

Open access
Virani, Salim S., Kennedy, Kevin F., Akeroyd, Julia M., Morris, Pamela B., Bittner, Vera A., Masoudi, Frederick A., Stone, Neil J., Petersen, Laura A. +1 more·2018·Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes

Abstract

Background: Patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥190 mg/dL are at high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events. Treatment guidelines recommend intensive treatment in these patients. Variation in the use of lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) in these patients in a national sample of cardiology practices is not known. Methods and Results: Using data from the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry–Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence registry, we assessed the proportion of patients with LDL-C ≥190 mg/dL (n=49 447) receiving statin, high-intensity statin, LLT associated with ≥50% LDL-C lowering, ezetimibe, or a PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) inhibitor between January 2013 and December 2016. We assessed practice-level rates and variation in LLT use using median rate ratio (MRR) adjusted for patient and practice characteristics. MRRs represent the likelihood that 2 random practices would differ in treatment of identical patients with LDL-C ≥190 mg/dL. The proportion of patients receiving a statin, high-intensity statin, LLT associated with ≥50% LDL-C reduction, ezetimibe, or PCSK9 inhibitor were 58.5%, 31.9%, 34.6%, 8.5%, and 1.5%, respectively. Median practice-level rates and adjusted MRR for statin (56% [interquartile range, 47.3%–64.8%]; MRR, 1.20 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17–1.23]), high-intensity statin (30.2% [interquartile range, 12.1%–41.1%]; MRR, 2.31 [95% CI, 2.12–2.51]), LLT with ≥50% LDL-C lowering (31.8% [interquartile range, 15.3%–45.5%]; MRR, 2.12 [95% CI, 1.95–2.28]), ezetimibe (5.8% [interquartile range, 2.8%–9.8%]; MRR, 2.42 [95% CI, 2.21–2.63]), and PCSK9 inhibitors (0.16% [interquartile range, 0%–1.9%]; MRR, 2.38 [95% CI, 2.04–2.72]) indicated significant gaps and >200% variation in receipt of several of these medications for patients across practices. Among those without concomitant atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, even larger treatment gaps were noted (proportion of patients on a statin, high-intensity statin, LLT with ≥50% LDL-C reduction, ezetimibe, or PCSK9 inhibitor were 50.8%, 25.25%, 26.8%, 4.9%, and 0.74%, respectively). Conclusions: Evidence-based LLT use remains low among patients with elevated LDL-C with significant variation in care. System-level interventions are needed to address these gaps and reduce variation in care of these high-risk patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circoutcomes.118.004652

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a registry of nearly 50,000 US patients with LDL-C levels greater than 190 mg/dL but without cardiovascular disease, only 58.5% were taking a statin.

    “In a registry of nearly 50 000 US patients with LDL-C levels greater than 190 mg/dL but without cardiovascular disease, only 58.5% were taking a statin.15”

    From Bempedoic Acid for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Statin-Intolerant Patients (2023) · cites this paper as [15]

    The Results (page unavailable) report 49,447 patients with LDL-C ≥190 mg/dL and a 58.5% statin-therapy rate for the full cohort. The Abstract’s Methods and Results give a different rate, 50.8%, for patients without concomitant ASCVD. The Discussion also clarifies that the registry recorded prescriptions, not whether patients took the medication. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [5]Vallejo-Vaz AJ Robertson M Catapano AL Watts GF Kastelein JJ Packard CJ Ford I Ray KK LDL-Cholesterol Lowering for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Among Men with Primary Elevations of LDL-Cholesterol Levels of 190 mg/dL or Above: Analyses from the WOSCOPS 5-year Randomised Trial and 20-year Observational Follow-Up Circulation 2017 136 1878 1891 28877913

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Virani, S. S., Kennedy, K. F., Akeroyd, J. M., Morris, P. B., Bittner, V. A., Masoudi, F. A., Stone, N. J., Petersen, L. A., & Ballantyne, C. M.
Affiliations
  • Houston Methodist (US)
  • Saint Luke's Health System (US)
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US)
  • Medical University of South Carolina (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Venue
Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
Published
2018-05
Volume
11
Issue
5
Pages
e004652-e004652
ISSN
  • 1941-7705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-7713
OpenAlex
W2802080707
Cited by
53
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1
FWCI
5.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eCommons - AKU (Aga Khan University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • American Diabetes Association
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
  • American Heart Association
  • American College of Cardiology Foundation
  • Health Services Research and Development
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HH-SN-268201100006C)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
Keywords
lipid-lowering therapy, hypercholesterolemia, statins, high-intensity statin therapy, ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, treatment variation, practice-level variation, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, guideline adherence, LDL cholesterol lowering
MeSH terms
Ezetimibe, Proprotein Convertase 9, Professional Practice Gaps, PCSK9 Inhibitors, Cardiology, Humans, Cholesterol, LDL, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Drug Prescriptions, Registries, Time Factors, United States, Biomarkers, Down-Regulation, Serine Proteinase Inhibitors, Treatment Outcome, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors, Guideline Adherence, Quality Indicators, Health Care, Dyslipidemias, Healthcare Disparities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review