Opinion

Video

Real-World Outcomes Data on Failure to Achieve LDL-C Thresholds

Mary McGowan, MD, FNLA, reviews real-world data from the Family Heart Database on the clinical consequences of failing to reach LDL-C thresholds.

Mary McGowan, MD, FNLA: We have a second analysis, and the second analysis was to assess the consequences of the failure to achieve the LDL [low-density lipoprotein] guideline thresholds in patients at elevated risk, again using the same Family Heart database. But we are using it in a slightly different way. It’s the same 324 million individuals from 2012 to 2021. But in this data set, it’s a retrospective analysis looking at annual cardiovascular event rates. This is 56,000 individuals who met the following criteria: had to have 48 months or more of sufficient diagnostic, procedure, prescription, and lab data; [and] had to have more than 3 cholesterol levels—and this was something that eliminated a lot of people. It’s amazing how few people get regular cholesterol checking, even if they’re not at below threshold. Then we looked at those above or below thresholds for 70% of the time during the study period, including the baseline. We used the same guideline thresholds for high-risk primary and secondary prevention.

The patient histories were divided into contiguous episodes characterized by lipid-lowering therapies, whether it’s monotherapy, combination therapy, or, far too often, no therapy, prescriptions filled, and LDL levels, and we’ll look at the figure with that. We used an 18-month baseline period, and this was used to determine the covariates for the propensity score matching that we did. Individuals with a cardiac event during the baseline period were excluded. Following the baseline period, individuals were observed for 30 months or longer to determine that first cardiovascular event [and] the annual incidence rates. We also looked at second events too.

In total, there were 39,000 individuals who met the criteria for above threshold for greater than 70% of the time, and 17,000 who met the [criteria for] below threshold for 70% of the time. Then we one-to-one propensity score matched, giving us 14,755 individuals in each group. These patients were followed for a long period of time, 2091 days. What we found was not surprising but disturbing. Real-world data from the Family Heart database demonstrates that US residents in the above-threshold group had an annual incidence rate of first cardiovascular event [that was] 44% higher—this is a little over 4 years—than those below threshold. The event rates [were] 2.2% vs 1.5%, [respectively]. Total cardiovascular event—some people went on to a second event—in the above-threshold group was also 49% higher than those in the below-threshold group. This is a rather busy slide, but I’ll just say if you look at the individuals who are in the above-threshold group that’s represented by the top group of real-world evidence, you can see a lot of white, yellow—which is not on any drug—and pink and red—meaning on 1 or more medicines but still not at threshold. Below, where individuals were over 70% of the time below threshold, there's lots of green indicating below threshold on a single agent, or dark-green [indicating] below threshold on multiple agents. Our conclusion for this second analysis is that real-world evaluation of high-risk individuals achieving guideline recommended thresholds [showed] substantial reduction in the occurrence of a cardiovascular event. If you get to that below threshold [goal], you’re going to do better. So, a greater emphasis, as we’re all talking about today, on achieving LDL control will improve cardiovascular health at the population level.

Transcript Edited for Clarity

Related Videos
Transformations in Aortic Disease Management with Mehrdad Ghoreishi, MD | Image Credit: Baptist Health South Florida
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.