Prevalence and pharmacologic management of familial hypercholesterolemia in an unselected contemporary cohort of patients with stable coronary artery disease

INTRODUCTION: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an inherited disorder characterized by elevated plasma levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) associated with premature cardiovascular disease. METHODS: Using the data from the START (STable Coronary Artery Diseases RegisTry) study, a nationwide, prospective survey on patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), we described prevalence and lipid lowering strategies commonly employed in these patients. The study population was divided into "definite/probable FH," defined as a Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) score ≥6, "possible FH" with DLCN 3-5, and "unlikely FH" in presence of a DLCN <3. RESULTS: Among the 4030 patients with the DLCN score available, 132 (3.3%) were classified as FH (2.3% with definite/probable and 1.0% with possible FH) and 3898 (96.7%) had unlikely FH. Patients with both definite/probable and possible FH were younger compared to patients not presenting FH. Mean on-treatment LDL-C levels were 107.8 ± 41.5, 84.4 ± 40.9, and 85.8 ± 32.3 (P < 0.0001) and a target of ≤70 mg/dL was reached in 10.9%, 30.0%, and 22.0% (P < 0.0001) of patents with definite/probable, possible FH, and unlikely FH, respectively. Statin therapy was prescribed in 85 (92.4%) patients with definite/probable FH, in 38 (95.0%) with possible FH, and in 3621 (92.9%) with unlikely FH (P = 0.86). The association of statin and ezetimibe, in absence of other lipid-lowering therapy, was more frequently used in patients with definite/probable FH compared to patients without FH (31.5% vs 17.5% vs 9.5%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of consecutive patients with stable CAD, FH was highly prevalent and generally undertreated with lipid lowering therapies

Influence of heart rate, blood pressure, and beta-blocker dose on outcome and the differences in outcome between carvedilol and metoprolol tartrate in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the COMET trial.

AIMS: We studied the influence of heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and beta-blocker dose on outcome in the 2599 out of 3029 patients in Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET) who were alive and on study drug at 4 months after randomization (time of first visit on maintenance therapy). METHODS AND RESULTS: By multivariable analysis, baseline HR, baseline SBP, and their change after 4 months were not independently related to subsequent outcome. In a multivariable analysis including clinical variables, HR above and SBP below the median value achieved at 4 months predicted subsequent increased mortality [relative risk (RR) for HR>68 b.p.m. 1.333; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.152-1.542; P120 mmHg 0.78; 95% CI 0.671-0.907; P<0.0013]. Achieving target beta-blocker dose was associated with a better outcome (RR 0.779; 95% CI 0.662-0.916; P<0.0025). The superiority of carvedilol as compared to metoprolol tartrate was maintained in a multivariable model (RR 0.767; 95% CI 0.663-0.887; P=0.0004) and there was no interaction with HR, SBP, or beta-blocker dose. CONCLUSION: Beta-blocker dose, HR, and SBP achieved during beta-blocker therapy have independent prognostic value in heart failure. None of these factors influenced the beneficial effects of carvedilol when compared with metoprolol tartrate at the pre-defined target doses used in COMET

Should beta-blocker therapy be reduced or withdrawn after an episode of decompensated heart failure? Results from COMET.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether beta-blocker therapy should be reduced or withdrawn in patients who develop acute decompensated heart failure (HF). We studied the relationship between changes in beta-blocker dose and outcome in patients surviving a HF hospitalisation in COMET. METHODS: Patients hospitalised for HF were subdivided on the basis of the beta-blocker dose administered at the visit following hospitalisation, compared to that administered before. RESULTS: In COMET, 752/3029 patients (25%, 361 carvedilol and 391 metoprolol) had a non-fatal HF hospitalisation while on study treatment. Of these, 61 patients (8%) had beta-blocker treatment withdrawn, 162 (22%) had a dose reduction and 529 (70%) were maintained on the same dose. One-and two-year cumulative mortality rates were 28.7% and 44.6% for patients withdrawn from study medication, 37.4% and 51.4% for those with a reduced dosage (n.s.) and 19.1% and 32.5% for those maintained on the same dose (HR,1.59; 95%CI, 1.28-1.98; p<0.001, compared to the others). The result remained significant in a multivariable model: (HR, 1.30; 95%CI, 1.02-1.66; p=0.0318). No interaction with the beneficial effects of carvedilol, compared to metoprolol, on outcome was observed (p=0.8436). CONCLUSIONS: HF hospitalisations are associated with a high subsequent mortality. The risk of death is higher in patients who discontinue beta-blocker therapy or have their dose reduced. The increase in mortality is only partially explained by the worse prognostic profile of these patients

Predicting heart failure outcome from cardiac and comorbid conditions: The 3C-HF score

Background: Prognostic stratification in heart failure (HF) is crucial to guide clinical management and treatment decision-making. Currently available models to predict HF outcome have multiple limitations. We developed a simple risk stratification model, based on routinely available clinical information including comorbidities, the Cardiac and Comorbid Conditions HF (3C-HF) Score, to predict all-cause 1-year mortality in HF patients. Methods: We recruited in a cohort study 6274 consecutive HF patients at 24 Cardiology and Internal Medicine Units in Europe. 2016 subjects formed the derivation cohort and 4258 the validation cohort.Weentered information on cardiac and comorbid candidate prognostic predictors in amultivariablemodel to predict 1-year outcome

Influence of heart rate, blood pressure, and beta-blocker dose on outcome and the differences in outcome between carvedilol and metoprolol tartrate in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the COMET trial

Aims We studied the influence of heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and beta-blocker dose on outcome in the 2599 out of 3029 patients in Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET) who were alive and on study drug at 4 months after randomization (time of first visit on maintenance therapy). Methods and results By multivariable analysis, baseline HR, baseline SBP, and their change after 4 months were not independently related to subsequent outcome. In a multivariable analysis including clinical variables, HR above and SBP below the median value achieved at 4 months predicted subsequent increased mortality [relative risk (RR) for HR>68 b.p.m. 1.333; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.152-1.542; P120 mmHg 0.78; 95% CI 0.671-0.907; P<0.0013]. Achieving target beta-blocker dose was associated with a better outcome (RR 0.779; 95% CI 0.662-0.916; P<0.0025). The superiority of carvedilol as compared to metoprolol tartrate was maintained in a multivariable model (RR 0.767; 95% CI 0.663-0.887; P=0.0004) and there was no interaction with HR, SBP, or beta-blocker dose. Conclusion Beta-blocker dose, HR, and SBP achieved during beta-blocker therapy have independent prognostic value in heart failure. None of these factors influenced the beneficial effects of carvedilol when compared with metoprolol tartrate at the pre-defined target doses used in COME

Prevalence and Persistence of Breathing Disorders in Chronic Heart Failure Patients: Preliminary Results from Home Telemonitoring in the HHH Study

In this paper we present preliminary results of the European Community multicountry trial HHH (Home or Hospital in Heart Failure), which assessed the prevalence and persistence of nocturnal breathing disorders in mild-to-moderate CHF patients. All subjects (465) carried out a baseline respiratory recording in the hospital, followed by 12 recordings (one per month) at home. The latter were totally self-managed by the patients, and data were transmitted to the referring hospital through telephone lines. We found that 43 % of the patients had a periodic breathing pattern (PB, waxing and waning of ventilation with or without apneas) during the night lasting ≥ 1 hour, and the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) was ≥ 5 events/hour in 51 % of them. During the 1-year follow-up, a PB ≥ 1 hour and an AHI ≥ 5 events/hour were persistent (i.e., occurred in&gt; 50 % of the recordings) in 43 % and 52 % of the patients. These findings confirm the high prevalence of nocturnal breathing disorders in CHF patients and show that in a large proportion of patients they tend to persist over time. 1

Arrhythmogenic Phenotype in Dilated Cardiomyopathy: Natural History and Predictors of Life-Threatening Arrhythmias

BACKGROUND-\u2014Patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) may present with ventricular arrhythmias early in the disease course, unrelated to the severity of left ventricular dysfunction. These patients may be classified as having an arrhythmogenic DCM (ARDCM). We investigated the phenotype and natural history of patients with AR-DCM. METHODS AND RESULTS-\u2014Two hundred eighty-five patients with a recent diagnosis of DCM (median duration of the disease 1 month, range 0 to 7 months) and who had Holter monitoring at baseline were comprehensively evaluated and followed for 107 months (range 29 to 170 months). AR-DCM was defined by the presence of 651 of the following: unexplained syncope, rapid nonsustained ventricular tachycardia ( 655 beats, 65150 bpm), 651000 premature ventricular contractions/24 hours, and 6550 ventricular couplets/ 24 hours, in the absence of overt heart failure. The primary end points were sudden cardiac death (SCD), sustained ventricular tachycardia (SVT), or ventricular fibrillation (VF). The secondary end points were death from congestive heart failure or heart transplantation. Of the 285 patients, 109 (38.2%) met criteria for AR-DCM phenotype. AR-DCM subjects had a higher incidence of SCD/SVT/VF compared with non\u2013AR-DCM patients (30.3% vs 17.6%, P=0.022), with no difference in the secondary end points. A family history of SCD/SVT/VF and the AR-DCM phenotype were statistically significant and cumulative predictors of SCD/SVT/VF. CONCLUSIONS-\u2014One-third of DCM patients may have an arrhythmogenic phenotype associated with increased risk of arrhythmias during follow-up. A family history of ventricular arrhythmias in DCM predicts a poor prognosis and increased risk of SCD