| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Dan, GA, et al.
(författare)
-
Corrigendum
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1532-2092. ; 20:5, s. 738-738
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Penson, Peter E., et al.
(författare)
-
Step-by-step diagnosis and management of the nocebo/drucebo effect in statin-associated muscle symptoms patients : a position paper from the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP)
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2190-5991 .- 2190-6009. ; 13:3, s. 1596-1622
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3–5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)—what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.
|
|
| 9. |
- Vallejo-Vaz, Antonio J, et al.
(författare)
-
Implications of ACC/AHA Versus ESC/EAS LDL-C Recommendations for Residual Risk Reduction in ASCVD: A Simulation Study From DA VINCI.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cardiovascular drugs and therapy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1573-7241 .- 0920-3206.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recommendations differ between the 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) (< 70 vs. < 55 mg/dl, respectively). In the DA VINCI study, residual cardiovascular risk was predicted in ASCVD patients. The extent to which relative and absolute risk might be lowered by achieving ACC/AHA versus ESC/EAS LDL-C recommended approaches was simulated.DA VINCI was a cross-sectional observational study of patients prescribed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) across 18 European countries. Ten-year cardiovascular risk (CVR) was predicted among ASCVD patients receiving stabilized LLT. For patients with LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dl, the absolute LDL-C reduction required to achieve an LDL-C of < 70 or < 55 mg/dl (LDL-C of 69 or 54 mg/dl, respectively) was calculated. Relative and absolute risk reductions (RRRs and ARRs) were simulated.Of the 2039 patients, 61% did not achieve LDL-C < 70 mg/dl. For patients with LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dl, median (interquartile range) baseline LDL-C and 10-year CVR were 93 (81-115) mg/dl and 32% (25-43%), respectively. Median LDL-C reductions of 24 (12-46) and 39 (27-91) mg/dl were needed to achieve an LDL-C of 69 and 54 mg/dl, respectively. Attaining ACC/AHA or ESC/EAS goals resulted in simulated RRRs of 14% (7-25%) and 22% (15-32%), respectively, and ARRs of 4% (2-7%) and 6% (4-9%), respectively.In ASCVD patients, achieving ESC/EAS LDL-C goals could result in a 2% additional ARR over 10 years versus the ACC/AHA approach.
|
|
| 10. |
- Vallejo-Vaz, Antonio J., et al.
(författare)
-
Overview of the current status of familial hypercholesterolaemia care in over 60 countries - The EAS Familial Hypercholesterolaemia Studies Collaboration (FHSC)
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Atherosclerosis. - : ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD. - 0021-9150 .- 1879-1484. ; 277, s. 234-255
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and aims: Management of familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) may vary across different settings due to factors related to population characteristics, practice, resources and/or policies. We conducted a survey among the worldwide network of EAS FHSC Lead Investigators to provide an overview of FH status in different countries. Methods: Lead Investigators from countries formally involved in the EAS FHSC by mid-May 2018 were invited to provide a brief report on FH status in their countries, including available information, programmes, initiatives, and management. Results: 63 countries provided reports. Data on FH prevalence are lacking in most countries. Where available, data tend to align with recent estimates, suggesting a higher frequency than that traditionally considered. Low rates of FH detection are reported across all regions. National registries and education programmes to improve FH awareness/knowledge are a recognised priority, but funding is often lacking. In most countries, diagnosis primarily relies on the Dutch Lipid Clinics Network criteria. Although available in many countries, genetic testing is not widely implemented (frequent cost issues). There are only a few national official government programmes for FH. Under-treatment is an issue. FH therapy is not universally reimbursed. PCSK9-inhibitors are available in similar to 2/3 countries. Lipoprotein-apheresis is offered in similar to 60% countries, although access is limited. Conclusions: FH is a recognised public health concern. Management varies widely across countries, with overall suboptimal identification and under-treatment. Efforts and initiatives to improve FH knowledge and management are underway, including development of national registries, but support, particularly from health authorities, and better funding are greatly needed.
|
|
