Divergent impact of lipid guidelines of concern in Canada

1999 ◽  
Vol 216 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-7
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Guidelines

Lipid Guidelines

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 40-45
Author(s):  
Evan M. Sisson
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Guidelines

New worldwide lipid guidelines

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 447-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Smriti Saraf ◽  
Kausik K. Ray
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Guidelines

Lipid guidelines – are we heading in the right direction?

Climacteric ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-108
Author(s):  
Anna Fenton ◽  
Nick Panay
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Guidelines ◽  
The Right

scholarly journals Cardiovascular prevention: Frontiers in lipid guidelines

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eun Ji Kim ◽  
Anthony S Wierzbicki
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Prevention ◽  
Lipid Guidelines

scholarly journals Which One to Endorse Among the Multitude of Lipid Guidelines?

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Alper Sonmez ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Cardiovascular Diseases ◽  
Major Risk Factor ◽  
Treatment Target ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Lipid Guidelines ◽  
Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases

Dyslipidemia is the major risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. A multitude of lipid guidelines exist, with several controversies, and the best approach in dyslipidemia management is not clear. The tools and lipoproteins used for risk assessment, whether to use a treatment target and implementing drugs other than statins are all controversial points. Until the time for the publication of an agreeable lipid guideline, physicians should choose their way by considering the advantages and disadvantages of the existing guidelines.

The 2018 ACC/AHA Lipid Guidelines: A Little More or Less Canadian?

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 558-563
Author(s):  
George Thanassoulis ◽  
Jean Gregoire ◽  
Glen J. Pearson
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Guidelines

Utility of Genetically Predicted Lp(a) (Lipoprotein [a]) and ApoB Levels for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haoyu Wu ◽  
Jian’an Luan ◽  
Vincenzo Forgetta ◽  
James C. Engert ◽  
George Thanassoulis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Disease Risk ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease Risk ◽  
Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Uk Biobank ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
Lipid Guidelines ◽  
Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk ◽  
Prospective Investigation

Background: Current lipid guidelines suggest measurement of Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) and ApoB (apolipoprotein B) for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk assessment. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for Lp(a) and ApoB may identify individuals unlikely to have elevated Lp(a) or ApoB and thus reduce such suggested testing. Methods: PRSs were developed using LASSO regression among 273 222 and 356 958 UK Biobank participants of white British ancestry for Lp(a) and ApoB, respectively, and validated in separate sets of 60 771 UK Biobank and 15 050 European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Norfolk participants. We then assessed the proportion of participants who, based on these PRSs, were unlikely to benefit from Lp(a) or ApoB measurements, according to current lipid guidelines. Results: In the UK Biobank and European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Norfolk cohorts, the area under the receiver operating curve for the PRS-predicted Lp(a) and ApoB to identify individuals with elevated Lp(a) and ApoB was at least 0.91 (95% CI, 0.90–0.92) and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.73–0.75), respectively. The Lp(a) PRS and measured Lp(a) showed comparable association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease incidence, whereas the ApoB PRS was in general less predictive of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk than measured ApoB. In the context of the ESC/EAS lipid guidelines, at a 95% sensitivity to identify individuals with elevated Lp(a) and ApoB levels, at least 54% of Lp(a) and 24% of ApoB testing could be reduced by prescreening with a PRS while maintaining a low false-negative rate. Conclusions: A substantial proportion of suggested testing for elevated Lp(a) and a modest proportion of testing for elevated ApoB could potentially be reduced by prescreening individuals with PRSs.

Abstract 17652: Application of Pediatric and Adult Lipid Treatment Guidelines to U.S. Adolescents Transitioning to Young Adulthood

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Holly C Gooding ◽  
Angie M Rodday ◽  
John B Wong ◽  
Donald Lloyd-Jones ◽  
Matthew W Gillman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
Young People ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk Factors ◽  
Cardiovascular Health ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Statin Treatment ◽  
Blood Cholesterol ◽  
Health And Nutrition ◽  
Lipid Guidelines

Introduction: Current pediatric and adult lipid treatment guidelines differ in their approach to pharmacologic treatment of cholesterol in adolescents and young adults. We hypothesized that a greater proportion of young people ages 17-21 would meet criteria for statin treatment under the pediatric guidelines compared to adult guidelines, but that overall eligibility for statin treatment would be low in this age group. Methods: We applied treatment algorithms from the 2011 NHLBI Integrated Guidelines for Cardiovascular Health and Risk Reduction in Children and Adolescents and the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults to participants in the 1999-2011 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys who were 17-21 years of age and had an LDL level measured (n=2,652). We extrapolated the results to a population of 11.2 million individuals ages 17-21 years living in the US. Results: Almost 2% of participants (n=50, 1.9%) qualified for statin treatment under the pediatric guidelines, but only 0.7% (n=18) met treatment criteria under the adult guidelines. Participants who met pediatric criteria had lower mean LDL levels but were more likely to have other cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension, smoking, and obesity (Table 1). Despite the relatively low percentage of participants reaching LDL treatment thresholds under either guideline, 258,816 U.S. young people would be eligible for statin treatment under the pediatric guidelines and 84,651 would be eligible for treatment under the adult guidelines. Conclusions: Providers who care for adolescents transitioning to adulthood are faced with incongruent lipid guidelines. Application of pediatric guidelines, which use a life course approach and consider additional cardiovascular risk factors beyond age, may result in statin treatment for more young people.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document