| 1. |
- Forbes, Carol A., et al.
(författare)
-
A systematic literature review comparing methods for the measurement of patient persistence and adherence
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Current Medical Research and Opinion. - : Taylor & Francis Group. - 0300-7995 .- 1473-4877. ; 34:9, s. 1613-1625
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: A systematic literature review was conducted comparing different approaches estimating persistence and adherence in chronic diseases with polypharmacy of oral and subcutaneous treatments. Methods: This work followed published guidance on performing systematic reviews. Twelve electronic databases and grey literature sources were used to identify studies and guidelines for persistence and adherence of oral and subcutaneous therapies in hypercholesterolemia, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis. Outcomes of interest of each persistence and adherence data collection and calculation method included pros: accurate, easy to use, inexpensive; and cons: inaccurate, difficult to use, expensive. Results: A total of 4158 records were retrieved up to March 2017. We included 16 observational studies, 5 systematic reviews and 7 guidelines, in patients with hypercholesterolemia (n=8), type 2 diabetes (n=4), hypertension (n=2), rheumatoid arthritis (n=1) and mixed patient populations (n=13). Pharmacy and medical records offer an accurate, easy and inexpensive data collection method. Pill count, medication event monitoring systems (MEMs), self-report questionnaires and observer report are easy to use. MEMS and biochemical monitoring tests can be expensive. Proportion of days covered (PDC) was recommended as a gold standard calculation method for long-term treatments. PDC avoids use of days' supply in calculation, hence is more accurate compared to medication possession ratio (MPR) to assess adherence to treatments in chronic diseases. Conclusions: Decisions on what method to use should be based on considerations of the route of medication administration, the resources available, setting and aim of the assessment. Combining different methods may provide wider insights into adherence and persistence, including patient behavior.
|
|
| 2. |
- Raal, Frederick J., et al.
(författare)
-
PCSK9 inhibition with evolocumab (AMG 145) in heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (RUTHERFORD-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - : Elsevier: Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 385:9965, s. 331-340
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia is characterised by low cellular uptake of LDL cholesterol, increased plasma LDL cholesterol concentrations, and premature cardiovascular disease. Despite intensive statin therapy, with or without ezetimibe, many patients are unable to achieve recommended target levels of LDL cholesterol. We investigated the effect of PCSK9 inhibition with evolocumab (AMG 145) on LDL cholesterol in patients with this disorder. Methods This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken at 39 sites (most of which were specialised lipid clinics, mainly attached to academic institutions) in Australia, Asia, Europe, New Zealand, North America, and South Africa between Feb 7 and Dec 19,2013.331 eligible patients (18-80 years of age), who met clinical criteria for heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia and were on stable lipid-lowering therapy for at least 4 weeks, with a fasting LDL cholesterol concentration of 2.6 mmol/L or higher, were randomly allocated in a 2:2:1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous evolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks, evolocumab 420 mg monthly, or subcutaneous placebo every 2 weeks or monthly for 12 weeks. Randomisation was computer generated by the study sponsor, implemented by a computerised voice interactive system, and stratified by LDL cholesterol concentration at screening (higher or lower than 4.1 mmol/L) and by baseline ezetimibe use (yes/no). Patients, study personnel, investigators, and Amgen study staff were masked to treatment assignments within dosing frequency groups. The coprimary endpoints were percentage change from baseline in LDL cholesterol at week 12 and at the mean of weeks 10 and 12, analysed by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01763918. Findings Of 415 screened patients, 331 were eligible and were randomly assigned to the four treatment groups: evolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks (n=111), evolocumab 420 mg monthly (n=110), placebo every 2 weeks (n=55), or placebo monthly (n=55). 329 patients received at least one dose of study drug. Compared with placebo, evolocumab at both dosing schedules led to a significant reduction in mean LDL cholesterol at week 12 (every-2-weeks dose: 59.2% reduction [95% CI 53.4-65.1], monthly dose: 61.3% reduction [53.6-69.0]; both pless than0.0001) and at the mean of weeks 10 and 12 (60.2% reduction [95% CI 54.5-65.8] and 65.6% reduction [59.8-71.3]; both pless than0.0001). Evolocumab was well tolerated, with rates of adverse events similar to placebo. The most common adverse events occurring more frequently in the evolocumab-treated patients than in the placebo groups were nasopharyngitis (in 19 patients [9%] vs five [5%] in the placebo group) and muscle-related adverse events (ten patients [5%] vs 1 [1%]). Interpretation In patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia, evolocumab administered either 140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly was well tolerated and yielded similar and rapid 60% reductions in LDL cholesterol compared with placebo.
|
|
| 3. |
- 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 FromDA 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.<55mg/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≥70mg/dl, the absolute LDL-C reduction required to achieve an LDL-C of<70 or<55mg/dl (LDL-C of 69 or 54mg/dl, respectively) was calculated. Relative and absolute risk reductions (RRRs andARRs) were simulated.Of the 2039 patients, 61% did not achieve LDL-C<70mg/dl. For patients with LDL-C≥70mg/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 54mg/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 10years versusthe ACC/AHA approach.
|
|
