<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_348"
                     title="No Rebound Seen After Antiplatelet Withdrawal (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.011"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/PCI/tb/18226?impressionId=1265743998921"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;No evidence of a platelet aggregation rebound occurs with abrupt discontinuation of clopidogrel (Plavix) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), investigators in a randomized clinical trial concluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Values for adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation did not differ significantly between patients whose clopidogrel therapy was withdrawn abruptly and those in whom clopidogrel was tapered before discontinuation, they wrote in an article in the Feb. 9 issue of the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American College of Cardiology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The findings also showed that tapering of clopidogrel does not lead to lower platelet aggregation values after clopidogrel withdrawal, according to Dirk Sibbing, MD, of Technical University Munich in Germany, and colleagues&lt;em&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The time course of platelet aggregation values  --  regardless of the device, the agonist, or the agonist concentration used  --  after clopidogrel cessation provides no evidence for the existence of a rebound phenomenon of platelets after discontinuing clopidogrel,&quot; they wrote in conclusion.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For patients undergoing PCI, dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel has become the mainstay for prevention of thrombotic events. Lifelong aspirin therapy is recommended for patients after PCI, but clinical guidelines recommend discontinuation of clopidogrel after six or 12 months. The standard practice is to withdraw clopidogrel abruptly, the authors noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Recent studies have shown a clustering of thrombotic events in the first few weeks after discontinuation of long-term clopidogrel therapy. The observations have led to the hypothesis of a rebound phenomenon of platelet aggregation. However, the hypothesis had not been examined specifically within the context of clopidogrel withdrawal.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Because different studies have demonstrated that insufficient suppression of platelet reactivity to ADP is associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events after coronary stent placement, the observed clustering of adverse events reported in clinical studies might be related to an intermittent status of platelet hyperreactivity or so-called platelet rebound with very high ADP-induced platelet aggregation levels,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;A tapering of clopidogrel treatment over a certain period of time before stopping the intake of the drug completely might provide a beneficial treatment strategy to attenuate this supposed rebound phenomenon of platelets.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Sibbing and colleagues designed a randomized clinical trial to determine whether a rebound phenomenon exists after discontinuation of clopidogrel and whether the rebound can be attenuated by a clopidogrel-tapering regimen.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The investigators enrolled 69 patients receiving clopidogrel in association with PCI procedures. In all cases, discontinuation of clopidogrel was planned.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The patients were randomized to two strategies of discontinuation: tapering of the clopidogrel dose over four weeks, followed by discontinuation; or treatment for four weeks, as planned, followed by abrupt discontinuation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investigators assessed platelet aggregation at enrollment and during weeks two through eight after randomization. Aggregation was assessed simultaneously by light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The primary endpoint was the highest rate of ADP-induced platelet aggregation by LTA in weeks five through eight after clopidogrel withdrawal.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Platelet aggregation by LTA peaked at 73% in the group that had clopidogrel abruptly withdrawn and at 69.3% in the tapering group, resulting in a nonsignificant difference (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.21). The between-group values did not differ across the range of ADP concentrations used (1.25 to 20 &amp;#181;mol/L).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Results by MEA were similar: The peak aggregation value associated with abrupt withdrawal was 925 AU x min compared with 890 AU x min with clopidogrel tapering (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.55).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Studies with different agonists of platelet aggregation also yielded similar results in the two patient groups.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Despite finding no difference between the two strategies for clopidogrel withdrawal, the authors did not rule out the possibility of a beneficial effect of tapering clopidogrel.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It could be hypothesized that, apart from the maximal values of platelet aggregation observed, a more gradual increase of platelet aggregation values achieved by a clopidogrel-tapering regimen is beneficial for the reduction of thrombotic events,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;In fact, we observed a relatively rapid increase of platelet aggregation values in the [abrupt withdrawal] group of patients in our study. Whether this rapid increase might be disadvantageous in case of stopping clopidogrel treatment remains uncertain.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by Cordis, Medtronic, and Dynabyte.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sibbing disclosed relationships with Dynabyte and Eli Lilly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Co-author Adnan Kastrati disclosed relationships with Eli Lilly, sanofi-aventis, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Co-author Nicolas von Beckerath disclosed relationships with Eli Lilly and sanofi-aventis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_325"
                     title="MRI Reveals Risk for Kidney Failure in Diabetic Patients (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.006"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Nephrology/Diabetes/tb/18195?impressionId=1265743998921"
                     
      So-called silent strokes, visible on cerebral MRI scans, predict kidney failure in patients with type 2 diabetes, Japanese researchers said.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;After an average follow-up of 7.5 years, diabetic patients with evidence of small cerebral infarctions at baseline later suffered death or kidney failure at more than twice the rate seen in patients who had not had silent strokes, reported Takashi Uzu, MD, of Shiga University of Medical Sciences in Shiga, Japan, and colleagues.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Silent strokes are a consequence of cerebral microvascular disease and thus may logically accompany the development of similar abnormalities in renal blood vessels, ultimately leading to kidney failure, the researchers explained online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American Society of Nephrology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It is important to identify individuals who are at risk of progression of diabetic renal disease,&quot; Uzu and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The current standard prognostic test is the albumin-creatinine ratio, but it is not entirely adequate for the purpose, they suggested: &quot;Recent clinical studies have shown that renal insufficiency can occur in the absence of microalbuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But they acknowledged that brain MRI scans would be too expensive and inconvenient for routine prognostic testing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;New strategies are needed to determine the presence of renal and/or extrarenal microvascular diseases,&quot; Uzu and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Their study involved 608 patients with type 2 diabetes who had no clinical signs of cerebrovascular or cardiovascular disease or overt nephropathy. Their mean age at baseline was about 60 and the average glycated hemoglobin level was about 8.6%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Participants underwent cerebral MRI scans at baseline, with 177 showing evidence of silent cerebral infarctions, defined as focal lesions of at least 3 mm in diameter with low signal intensity on T1-weighted images and high intensity with T2 weighting. Dilated perivascular spaces were distinguished from infarcts with proton density scans. Patients with positive findings who had a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack were excluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those with silent infarctions at baseline differed significantly from other participants according to several parameters. Not surprisingly, patients with cerebral infarcts on average were somewhat older (63 versus 57), had had diabetes for a longer period of time (9.8 years versus 7.6), had higher blood pressure (146.8 mm Hg systolic versus 136.5 ), and were more likely to have a history of smoking (58% versus 46%). All differences were significant at &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.01.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, baseline fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin levels were both significantly lower in the patients who&apos;d had silent infarctions: mean 163 mg/dL versus 176 for glucose and 8.3% versus 8.7% for HbA1c (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;#8804;0.01 for both).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were followed for up to 10 years, with a mean of 7.5. The primary outcome was end-stage renal disease or death, and Uzu and colleagues chose a secondary outcome combining dialysis with doubling of serum creatinine.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Kaplan-Meier curves for the patients with and without silent infarctions at baseline indicated that the primary outcome occurred at equal rates through the first four years of follow-up, but then the curves diverged abruptly.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At year eight, approximately 6% of the noninfarcted group had experienced the primary outcome, compared with 21% of those who&apos;d had silent strokes (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001), according to Uzu and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Curves for the secondary outcome began diverging by year three. At year eight, about 6% of the noninfarct participants had gone to dialysis or had serum creatinine levels double, whereas these endpoints occurred in nearly 30% of the infarct group (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, the hazard ratio associated with baseline silent cerebral infarctions for the primary outcome during follow-up was 2.44 (95% CI 1.36 to 4.38).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The hazard ratio for death alone was somewhat smaller (1.61, 95% CI 0.71 to 3.62), indicating that most of the risk measured by the primary outcome was actually in end-stage renal disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For the secondary outcome, the hazard ratio was 4.79 (95% CI 2.72 to 8.46).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All the hazard ratios reflected adjustments for age, sex, duration of diabetes, body mass index, smoking status, HbA1c, blood pressure, serum lipids, and standard lab indices of kidney function at baseline.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) during follow-up also decreased faster in patients with silent strokes. After five years, mean eGFR had fallen by 8 ml/min/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in the patients without silent infarcts at baseline compared with 10.5 ml/min/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in those with cerebral microvascular disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers noted that the study was conducted at two clinical sites, which used somewhat different MRI procedures. But they also indicated that the prevalence of silent infarctions did not differ between the sites.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Other limitations included use of an older creatinine assay, inclusion of larger silent infarcts which could reflect macrovascular disease, and more patients in the cerebral infarct group who were taking renin-angiotensin system blocking drugs, which have renal impairment as an adverse effect.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;External funding for the study was not reported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;No potential conflicts of interest were reported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_222"
                     title="Benefits of Cutting Down on Salt Quantified (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Prevention/tb/18075?impressionId=1265743998921"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Cutting daily salt intake by 3 grams a day  --  about 30% of the current average  --  could prevent 32,000 strokes and 54,000 myocardial infarctions a year, if a computer model developed by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco accurately depicts the clinical impact of salt reduction.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The results of the analysis, which used a computer simulation of heart disease in U.S. adults ages 35 to 84, also suggest that even a 1 gram per day reduction in salt over the next decade would be a more cost-effective strategy for treating hypertension than use of even the cheapest antihypertensive, wrote Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, MD, PhD, and colleagues in a paper published online by the &lt;em&gt;New England Journal of Medicine.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lee Goldman, MD, MPH, of Columbia University, who co-authored the paper, told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt; that their study builds on what has long been known about the adverse health effects of salt on a society that believes it to be the spice of life.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, Goldman said that most people seeking a healthy choice will check food labels and restaurant menus for calorie counts and trans fats, but will not pay attention to salt.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is not the first time a call for salt reduction has been issued. As recently as last November, a meta-analysis published in &lt;em&gt;BMJ &lt;/em&gt;suggested that cutting salt intake in half  --  a reduction of about 5 grams a day or roughly a teaspoonful  --  would lower the stroke rate by 23% and reduce overall cardiovascular disease by as much as 17%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Americans, like those in many Western countries, take in an average of about 10 g of salt a day; whereas the World Health Organization recommends only 5 g per day, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture recommends daily intake be limited to 5.8 g.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bibbins-Domingo and colleagues reported that a 3 gram per day reduction in dietary salt would &quot;save 194,00 to 392,00 quality-adjusted life-years and $10 billion to $24 billion in healthcare costs annually.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an editorial that accompanied the study, Lawrence J. Appel, MD, MPH, and Cheryl A.M. Anderson, PhD, MPH, of Johns Hopkins University, wrote that &quot;the evidence supporting the call to reduce salt intake as a means of preventing cardiovascular disease is compelling.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They concluded with this admonition: &quot;As we deliberate healthcare reform, let us not neglect this inexpensive, yet highly effective public health intervention for the prevention of disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that Appel was also first author on a position paper from the American Society of Hypertension that also called for salt reduction as public policy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Franz H. Messerli, MD, director of the hypertension program at St. Luke&apos;s-Roosevelt Hospital and a colleague of Goldman&apos;s, said the computer model used in the study was impressive but probably underestimates the benefit of reducing dietary salt &quot;because salt reduction has been shown to have a direct (blood pressure independent) effect on the heart, the brain, the kidneys, and also reduces stomach cancer and osteoporosis  --  factors that were not considered in this analysis.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But Messerli found it difficult to lead the victory parade, noting &quot;this is a modeling study and statements such as &apos;A modest reduction of 1 gm per day would be more cost-effective than using medication to lower blood pressure in all persons with hypertension&apos; are to be taken with a good grain of salt.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Messerli&apos;s measured response was not echoed by his colleagues in the hypertension world.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, Henry Black, MD, president of the American Society of Hypertension, and director of hypertension research at the New York University School of Medicine said that, although the paper extended the findings of many other studies, it is &quot;more comprehensive and is especially useful by comparing the benefits of [sodium] and [salt] reduction to those of other widely accepted public health approaches that the public and governmental bodies have embraced, including drug treatment.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Clyde Yancy, MD, president of the American Heart Association, said that while the study was a computer modeling analysis that may be as good as it gets because &quot;it would be impossible to do a randomized trial in large numbers of high versus low sodium consumption, and the use of modeling with reasonable assumptions represents a solid if not ideal alternative.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, Yancy argued that &quot;the costs and effort involved in setting and/or changing policy&quot; require strong imperatives, and he thought the data reported today &quot;provide that imperative.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Three grams of salt comes to about a teaspoonful, but Goldman said it was foolish to think of sodium reduction in terms of such measurements because so much sodium comes from processed foods and from restaurant food. Achieving the needed reduction requires a concerted national effort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bibbins-Domingo noted that their study was limited &quot;by any uncertainty concerning the data entered into the model.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Also they noted that they did not &quot;account fully for the possible effects of salt reduction that are unrelated to control of blood pressure  --  for example, potential improvements in outcomes for the increasing numbers of patients with heart failure or prevention of other serious conditions, such as end-stage renal disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported in part by a grant from the American Heart Association Western States Affiliate and a grant from the University of California, San Francisco Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors said they had &quot;no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This article was developed in collaboration with ABC News. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; mce_src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_207"
                     title="ISET: Women Fare Better in Small Leg Vessel Procedures (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/PeripheralArteryDisease/tb/18051?impressionId=1265743998921"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;HOLLYWOOD, Fla.  --  Contrary to expectations, women who undergo last-ditch, minimally-invasive procedures to open small blood vessels in the leg  --  and forestall amputation  --  generally have better outcomes than men, researchers reported here.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, 87.5% of women who underwent the infragenicular endoscopic angioplasty avoided amputation for at least two years, compared with 82.9% of the men who were similarly treated (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.041), according to Tejas Shah, MD, of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This study is the first to compare the outcomes of men and women being treated for blocked lower-leg arteries with endovascular therapy,&quot; Shah said at the International Symposium on Endovascular Therapy (ISET). &quot;The results suggest endovascular therapy should be strongly considered in women with blocked arteries below the knee.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In many endovascular procedures, women tend to do worse then men, generally because they tend to have smaller blood vessels. But in this study, involving the smallest leg blood vessels, the opposite occurred. &quot;We really don&apos;t have any good reason why there should be this gender difference,&quot; Shah said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;What made this difference significant,&quot; Shah told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;, &quot;was that the women in the study, overall, were at significantly greater risk of amputation than the male patients.&quot; He said that about 22.3% of men underwent treatment for claudication, compared with 12.3% of the women, but 77.7% of men were being treated for limb-threatening conditions compared with 87.7% of women.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The retrospective study involved review of angioplasties, stenting, and atherectomies performed on 152 men and 125 women at Mount Sinai between July 1999 and November 2009.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When adjusted for comorbidities, women treated for tibial lesions with concurrent proximal disease had higher 24-month primary patency rates compared with men.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Some 46% of treated leg arteries in women remained open, compared with 30% (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.016) in men. Shah said that a subanalysis of isolated tibial lesions indicated that 50% of women achieved 24-month primary patency rates, compared with 28.8% of men (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; =0.002).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the downside, women experienced higher rates of blood clots forming at the access site of the treatment (9% versus 0.6%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;.0001). Clotting, typically treated with blood thinners, may require a longer stay in the hospital (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;In both men and women it is hard to keep these smaller leg blood vessels open,&quot; said Constantino Pe&amp;#241;a, MD, medical director of vascular imaging at Baptist Cardiac &amp;amp; Vascular Institute, Miami.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It might be possible that women do better because of their hormone status. But we need to do prospective clinical trials to see if we can determine what factor is involved in making the procedure work better for women.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;Shah listed no relevant disclosures.  Pe&amp;#241;a reported financial relationships with Bard and Medtronic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_189"
                     title="Tailoring Trumps Targeting for Cholesterol Control (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0.003"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Dyslipidemia/tb/18023?impressionId=1265743998921"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Lipid control is more than a simple matter of &quot;knowing your numbers,&quot; according to a computer model that found tailoring statin therapy to fit an individual&apos;s five-year risk of heart attack or stroke is a better prevention strategy than treating to preset goals.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the model, patients who whose five-year coronary artery disease risk was 5% to 15% received 40 mg of simvastatin (Zocor), while those whose risk was greater were given 40 mg of atorvastatin (Lipitor).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In every scenario, the tailored approach was preferable, Rodney A. Hayward, MD, of the University of Michigan and the Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, and colleagues wrote in the Jan. 19 &lt;em&gt;Annals of Internal Medicine.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While treating-to-target is appealingly simple, that simplicity may be its main limitation, the researchers argued.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Treating to a single target means that one risk factor receives &quot;dramatically more weight than all other predictors of treatment benefit, resulting in other highly relevant information being either ignored or underweighted,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That approach, tailoring treatment to reflect multiple risk factors rather than treating-to-target, is an &quot;interesting&quot; one, according to Christopher Cannon, MD, of Brigham and Women&apos;s Hospital in Boston, who was not involved in the study.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But Cannon, principal investigator of a number of statin trials, said the idea may be a little too late to impact clinical practice.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The guidelines won&apos;t shift to this approach any time soon, and in two years, atorvastatin will be generic, so all patients can inexpensively be treated with more intensive therapy (which is better for everyone at all risk levels),&quot; Cannon wrote in an e-mail.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although intensive therapy may be better as a rule, he conceded, it&apos;s less cost-effective when an expensive drug is used. When atorvastatin becomes available as a generic, he wrote, for &quot;$4 a month at Walmart it is simply cheaper  --  and of course better  --  to treat everyone with atorvastatin 80 mg.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Assuming a population of Americans ages 30 to 75 with no history of myocardial infarction, the authors developed three treatment models: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Standard National Cholesterol Education Program III (NCEP) treat-to-target recommendation, which requires treatment to an LDL target of less than 190 mg/dL for low-risk individuals, less than 160 mg/dL for moderate-risk, and less than 130 mg/dL for high-risk individuals&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Intensive NCEP III treat-to-target approach, with targets of less than 100 mg/dL for high-risk individuals&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;The tailored model, with 40 mg of simvastatin for patients who whose five-year coronary artery disease risk was 5% to 15% and 40 mg of atorvastatin (Lipitor) for higher-risk patients&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(In both NCEP III strategies statins would be used in a stepwise fashion  --  20 mg simvastatin, 40 mg simvastatin, 40 mg atorvastatin, and, finally, 80 mg atorvastatin  --  to achieve targets).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Using standard NCEP III treat-to-target recommendations, &quot;37.9 million U.S. persons should receive statins, of which 7.9 million should receive high dose-potency therapy (atorvastatin 40 to 80 mg),&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Compared with no treatment, the standard strategy would save an estimated 48 quality adjusted life years (QALYs) per 1,000 Americans treated for five years, or a total of 1.83 million total QALYs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The intensive NCEP III treat-to-target recommendations would &quot;recommend that 53.4 million U.S. persons receive statins&quot; and would save about 570,000 more QALYs than the standard treatment.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Using the computer model, this strategy prevented &quot;about 720,000 more nonfatal CAD events and 30,000 more deaths&quot; than the standard treatment.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Tailored treatment, by contrast, would require that about the same number of people receive a statin  --  53 million. But only 13.3 million would require high-dose statin therapy, versus roughly 18 million who would be given high-dose statin therapy using the intensive NCEP III strategy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Even so, the tailored approach would save 520,000 more QALYs than the intensive treatment approach, the authors found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The tailored treatment approach was superior to both NCEP III approaches, resulting in both more CAD morbidity and mortality prevented in the overall population and higher treatment efficiency (greater benefit per person treated),&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors noted a number of limitations, including the paucity of clinical trial data on statin therapy in persons ages 75 or older.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, although the model suggested a robust benefit for tailored treatment, &quot;the absolute population-level benefit of the tailored treatment over the treat-to-target approaches are much less certain and can vary substantially on the basis of several factors, such as statin&apos;s effect on total mortality (estimates of which are less precise in the literature than estimates for nonfatal CAD events) and the level of treatment adherence that is achievable in real-world clinical practice.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Whether a tailored treatment approach is superior for other conditions in which treat-to-target strategies are currently recommended, such as blood pressure and glycemic control, warrants examination,&quot; they concluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded in part by the Department of Veteran Affairs Health Services Research &amp;amp; Development Service&apos;s Quality Enhancement Research Initiative.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hayward did not report any financial disclosures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cannon reported receiving research/grants/suport from Accumetrics, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Sanofi Partnership, GlaxoSmithKline, Intekrin Therapeutics, Merck, Merck/Schering-Plough Partnership, Novartis, and Takeda. He is a clinical adviser with equity in Automedics Medical Systems.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>