cvd risk assessment and prevention in 2019 and beyond: how

19
CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How, When, and Why? Donald M. Lloyd‐Jones, MD ScM FACC FAHA Eileen M. Foell Professor Chair, Dept. of Preventive Medicine Senior Associate Dean Director, NUCATS Institute Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine Disclosures Dr. Lloyd‐Jones has no RWI/COI Grant funding: NIH, CMS, AHA Members of the 2018 Cholesterol Guidelines and 2019 Primary Prevention Guidelines Panels had no RWI/COI

Upload: others

Post on 14-May-2022

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019and Beyond: How, When, and Why?Donald M. Lloyd‐Jones, MD ScM FACC FAHAEileen M. Foell ProfessorChair, Dept. of Preventive MedicineSenior Associate DeanDirector, NUCATS InstituteNorthwestern Feinberg School of Medicine

Disclosures

•Dr. Lloyd‐Jones has no RWI/COIGrant funding: NIH, CMS, AHA

•Members of the 2018 Cholesterol Guidelines and 2019 Primary Prevention Guidelines Panels had no RWI/COI

Page 2: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Case

52‐year‐old South Asian male presents for routine follow‐up

•PMH: CKD (eGFR 50 mL/min/1.73 m2), HTN•SH: denies tobacco, alcohol•Meds: lisinopril 10 mg PO daily•BP 142/86 mm Hg; Waist 42”•Lipids (mg/dL): TC 225   HDL‐C 35   LDL‐C 150   TG 200 •10‐yr ASCVD risk 9.7%

Case

Question #1: According to the 2018 ACC/AHA cholesterol and 2019 primary prevention guidelines, which risk category is most applicable for this patient? 

A. Low risk primary preventionB. Borderline risk primary preventionC. Intermediate risk primary preventionD. High risk primary prevention

Page 3: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Case

Question #2: According to the 2018 ACC/AHA cholesterol and 2019 primary prevention guidelines, which initial treatment strategy should be considered for this patient? 

A. Lifestyle modifications onlyB. Lifestyle modifications + moderate‐intensity statinC. Lifestyle modifications + high‐intensity statinD. Lifestyle modifications + high‐intensity statin + ezetimibe

Topics

•Rationale and evidence base for quantitative risk assessment

•Current guideline recommendations

•Strengths/limitations of existing risk scores

•Refining risk estimates for individual patients

Clinician‐patient discussionRisk‐enhancing factorsMeasurement of CAC

• Implementing risk assessment and shared decision making –practical approaches

Page 4: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Lloyd‐Jones et al. Circulation 2019; JACC 2019

Cholesterol Treatment Trialists

Blood Pressure Lowering 

Treatment Trialists

•Allows identification of patients at sufficient risk to merit treatment with higher likelihood of net individual and societal benefit

•Allows direct comparison of potential benefits and harms from drug therapy

CTT, Lancet 2012BPLTTC, Lancet 2014Lloyd‐Jones et al., Circ and JACC 2018

Rationale for Absolute Risk Estimation

Page 5: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Karmali et al., Cochrane Reviews 2017Lloyd‐Jones et al., Circ and JACC 2018

Evidence Base for Risk Estimation

• Providing CVD risk score data had 

statistically significant but 

modest effects on: 

• Initiation/intensification of BP and cholesterol medications

• Levels of CVD risk factors

• Estimated 10‐year CVD risk at follow‐up

• Harm very unlikely

• Use of validated, quantitative risk assessment scores appears to be appropriate, safe, and moderately efficacious in helping to control risk factors … with the potential for additional value to improve decision‐making

2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guidelines

Page 6: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

2018 AHA/ACC/Multi‐Specialty Cholesterol Guidelines

Primary Prevention Recommendations for Adults 40 to 75 Years of Age With LDL levels 70 to 189 mg/dL

Referenced studies that support recommendations are summarized in Online Data Supplement 16.

COR LOE Risk Assessment‐Related Recommendations

I B‐NR

For the primary prevention of clinical ASCVD* in adults 40 to 75 years of age without diabetes 

mellitus and with an LDL‐C level of 70 to 189 mg/dL (1.7 to 4.8 mmol/L), the 10‐year ASCVD risk 

of a first “hard” ASCVD event (fatal and nonfatal MI or stroke) should be estimated by using the 

race‐ and sex‐specific PCE, and adults should be categorized as being at low risk (<5%), 

borderline risk (5% to <7.5%), intermediate‐risk (7.5% to <20%), and high‐risk (20%).

I B‐NR

Clinicians and patients should engage in a risk discussion that considers risk factors, adherence

to healthy lifestyle, the potential for ASCVD risk‐reduction benefits, and the potential for

adverse effects and drug–drug interactions, as well as patient preferences, for an individualized

treatment decision.

IIa B‐RIn intermediate‐risk adults, risk‐enhancing factors favor initiation or intensification of statin

therapy.

IIa B‐NR

In intermediate‐risk or selected borderline‐risk adults, if the decision about statin use remains

uncertain, it is reasonable to use a CAC score in the decision to withhold, postpone or initiate

statin therapy.

2018 AHA/ACC/Multi‐specialty Cholesterol Guidelines

Page 7: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Approach to Risk Assessment in 1o PreventionEstimate Absolute 10‐year ASCVD Risk

Low Risk0 ‐ <5%

High Risk≥20%

Intermediate Risk 7.5% ‐ <20%

If uncertainty or patient indecision remains, consider CAC score 

and revise decision based on results 

Lifestyleand drug therapy

Lifestylemodification

Borderline Risk 5% ‐ <7.5%

Clinician‐patient discussion considering risk‐enhancing factors and net benefit of therapy

Calculate

Personalize

Reclassify

C= Calculate: Use Pooled Cohort Equations for ASCVD Risk Estimation

•Recommended for use based on: Broad utilization and desired endpoint of hard ASCVD Most widely validated score in contemporary US populations

• SR identified 23 manuscripts evaluating PCE in diverse populations

PCE are well calibrated near decision thresholds (e.g., 7.5% 10‐year risk) in broad US clinical population 

As with all risk scores, PCE can under‐ and over‐estimate true risk in some subgroups Reclassification by CAC well understood

•New recommendations ‐ Deploy PCE with: Expanded clinician‐patient discussion with consideration of risk‐enhancing factors Judicious use of CAC measurement in intermediate risk and selected borderline risk patients to reclassify risk 

Page 8: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Performance of Pooled Cohort Equations in Diverse Population Samples: Predictable

‐Over‐EstimateRisk

Under‐Under‐EstimateRisk

Low SES, HIV,Inflammatory dz

High SES,engaged patients

Broad USClinical

Population

Reasonable Calibration

Clinician-Patient Discussion

Estimated 10-y ASCVD Risk

C = Calculate: Tools for Risk Estimation

•Pooled Cohort Equations – App or Online (or EHR programmable)

•ACC ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus (online/app) http://tools.acc.org/ASCVD‐Risk‐Estimator‐Plus/#!/calculate/estimate/

•AHA ASCVD Risk Calculator (online/app) http://static.heart.org/riskcalc/app/index.html#!/baseline‐risk

Page 9: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Guideline Clinical App

To download app search for “ACC

Guideline Clinical App” in your app

store

Page 10: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

P = Personalize: Refine Risk for Individual Patients

Estimate Absolute 10‐year ASCVD Risk

Low Risk0 ‐ <5%

High Risk≥20%

Intermediate Risk 7.5% ‐ <20%

Lifestyleand drug therapy

Lifestylemodification

Borderline Risk 5% ‐ <7.5%

Clinician‐patient discussion considering risk‐enhancing factors and net benefit of therapy

P = Personalize: Refine Risk for Individual Patients

• Family hx of premature ASCVD•1o hypercholesterolemia (LDL‐C 160‐189 mg/dL)

•Metabolic syndrome•Chronic kidney disease•Chronic inflammatory conditions (RA, psoriasis, HIV)

•Hx premature menopause or pregnancy‐associated risk conditions

•High‐risk race/ethnic groups• Lipid/biomarkers 1o hypertriglyceridemia If measured:

Elevated hs‐CRP ≥2 mg/LElevated Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dLElevated apoB ≥130 mg/dLABI <0.9

Risk‐Enhancing Factors

Page 11: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Estimate Absolute 10‐year ASCVD Risk

Low Risk0 ‐ <5%

High Risk≥20%

Intermediate Risk 7.5% ‐ <20%

If uncertainty or patient indecision remains, consider CAC score 

and revise decision based on results 

Lifestyleand drug therapy

Lifestylemodification

Borderline Risk 5% ‐ <7.5%

Clinician‐patient discussion considering risk‐enhancing factors and net benefit of therapy

R = Reclassify Risk in Selected Patients

10‐year risk 5% ‐ <7.5% or 7.5% ‐ <20%

Below Threshold for Statin BenefitConsider avoiding or 

postponing drug therapy.*

Above Threshold for Statin Benefit Recommend statin therapy.

Consider CAC measurement If performed:

Engage patient in discussion regarding net benefit of statin 

therapy

CAC = 0

Decision for No Drug Therapy

Decision for Drug Therapy

CAC 1 – 99 and <75th

%ile for age/sex raceCAC ≥ 100 or ≥75th

%ile for age/sex/race

Subclinical atherosclerosis present; risk estimate similar. Repeat clinician‐patient discussion with new information. Consider statin therapy now or postpone 

statin and consider repeat CAC in 5 years

Decision

Patient Undecided or Clinical Uncertainty Regarding Net Benefit of Statin Therapy

See ACC/AHA 2018 Guideline for Cholesterol Management

Consider risk‐enhancing factors

*Clinicians and patients may not wish to postpone therapy in patients with a CAC score of 0 and diabetes mellitus, heavy current cigarette smoking, or strong family history of premature ASCVD.

R = Reclassify Risk in Selected Patients

Page 12: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Nasir et al., MESA Study, JACC 2015

Example: MESA Study

7.5% 10‐year riskThreshold for considering statin

Reclassification of Risk by CAC

Nasir et al., MESA Study, JACC 2015

Example: MESA Study

Reclassification of Risk by CAC

Identifies pts with event ratesbelow net statin benefit range 

Page 13: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Nasir et al., MESA Study, JACC 2015

Example: MESA Study

Reclassification of Risk by CAC

Approach to Risk Assessment in 1o Prevention: CPREstimate Absolute 10‐year ASCVD Risk

Low Risk0 ‐ <5%

High Risk≥20%

Intermediate Risk 7.5% ‐ <20%

If uncertainty or patient indecision remains, consider CAC score 

and revise decision based on results 

Lifestyleand drug therapy

Lifestylemodification

Borderline Risk 5% ‐ <7.5%

Clinician‐patient discussion considering risk‐enhancing factors and net benefit of therapy

Calculate

Personalize

Reclassify

Page 14: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Perform CPR …Then Treat Accordingly

•Risk‐based and risk‐enhanced algorithm for selecting patients considered for treatment with statins in primary prevention likely to lead to better decisions and greater patient satisfaction/adherence

•This CPR now or that CPR later

Step Resources and Tools

Estimating 10‐year and lifetime 

risks for ASCVD

Many EHRs can calculate 10‐y ASCVD risk automatically  ACC ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus AHA ASCVD Risk Calculator

Clinician‐patient discussion

ACC ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus

Mayo Clinic Shared Decision Making Cardiovascular Primary Prevention Choice 

tool (https://shareddecisions.mayoclinic.org/decision‐aid‐information/decision‐

aids‐for‐chronic‐disease/cardiovascular‐prevention/ )

Martin SS et al., JACC 2015

Table 7 in 2018 Cholesterol Guideline

Interpretation of CAC score 

(age/sex/race %ile)

MESA CAC Tools

(https://www.mesa‐nhlbi.org/Calcium/input.aspx)

Monitoring indicators of 

response to therapy routinely 

(LDL‐C, BP levels)

ACC LDL‐C Manager

(https://www.acc.org/LDLCmanager)

Supporting Resources and Tools

Page 15: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Case

52‐year‐old South Asian male presents for routine follow‐up

•PMH: CKD (eGFR 50 mL/min/1.73 m2), HTN•SH: denies tobacco, alcohol•Meds: lisinopril 10 mg PO daily•BP 142/86 mm Hg; Waist 42”•Lipids (mg/dL): TC 225   HDL‐C 35   LDL‐C 150   TG 200 •10‐yr ASCVD risk 9.7%

Case

52‐year‐old South Asian male presents for routine follow‐up

•PMH: CKD (eGFR 50 mL/min/1.73 m2), HTN, (no DM)•SH: denies tobacco, alcohol•Meds: lisinopril 10 mg PO daily•BP 142/86 mm Hg; Waist 42”•Lipids (mg/dL): TC 225   HDL‐C 35   LDL‐C 150   TG 200 •10‐yr ASCVD risk 9.7%

Page 16: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Case

52‐year‐old South Asian male presents for routine follow‐up

•PMH: CKD (eGFR 50 mL/min/1.73 m2), HTN, (no DM)•SH: denies tobacco, alcohol•Meds: lisinopril 10 mg PO daily•BP 142/86 mm Hg; Waist 42”•Lipids (mg/dL): TC 225   HDL‐C 35   LDL‐C 150   TG 200 •10‐yr ASCVD risk 9.7%

CaseRisk category• Intermediate risk primary prevention

Risk enhancing factors• South Asian• CKD• Metabolic syndrome (waist, HTN, low HDL‐C, elevated TG)

Initial treatment strategy:• Lifestyle modifications + moderate‐intensity statin

Page 17: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Case – Next Steps

After the clinician‐patient discussion, the patient is hesitant to initiate statin therapy based on the information discussed.

According to the 2018 ACC/AHA cholesterol guideline, what else may be done to assess this patient’s risk and aid in decision making? 

2018 ACC/AHA cholesterol guideline

Page 18: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Summary• 10‐year and lifetime risk estimates can assist with decision making regarding intensity of prevention efforts

• These data start the discussion, they do not prescribe a drug• When applying risk scores to individual patients, in the context of a clinician‐patient discussion, consider personalized risk‐enhancing factors 

• If clinical uncertainty or patient indecision remain, consider CAC measurement in intermediate risk and selected borderline risk patients

• CAC=0 can meaningfully down‐classify risk; statin avoidance reasonable

• CAC 1‐99 and <75th %ile for age/sex/race does not meaningfully reclassify risk; use clinical judgment

• CAC ≥100 or ≥75th %ile for age/sex/race can meaningfully up‐classify risk; confirms likely statin benefit

Take Home Points

•Treatment strategy should match ASCVD risk•With primary prevention + 10‐yr ASCVD risk 5 ‐ <20%, consider ASCVD risk enhancers

•Use clinician‐patient shared decision making to determine treatment strategy

•With uncertain treatment decision for 10‐yr ASCVD risk ≥7.5 ‐ <20%, may use a CAC score in the risk assessment and treatment decision

Page 19: CVD Risk Assessment and Prevention in 2019 and Beyond: How

Lloyd‐Jones et al. Circulation 2019; JACC 2019