Advertisement

The epidemiological concept of residual risk

  • Diego VanuzzoEmail author
SYMPOSIUM – WHAT INTERVENTION TRIALS DON’T TELL US: THE RESIDUAL RISK

Abstract

Residual cardiovascular risk can be defined as the residual risk of incident vascular events or progression of established vascular damage persisting in patients treated with current evidence-based recommended care including the risk that established from risk factors, such as dyslipidemia, high blood pressure, and the risk related to emerging or newer risk factors. The concept clearly derives from intervention trials, mainly the statin trials, and there is a lot of debate about the residual risk conferred by other lipid components, in particular low levels of HDL cholesterol and high levels of triglycerides. A meta-analysis of 53 fibrates (16,802 subjects) and 30 niacin trials (4,749 subjects) revealed an average HDL-C increase of 10% with fibrates and 16% with niacin, a triglyceride decrease of 36% with fibrates and 20% with niacin, and a LDL-C decrease of 8% with fibrates and 14% with niacin. These lipid changes resulted in similar overall reductions in major coronary events evidenced by a 25% decrease with fibrates and 27% with niacin. However, recent analyses of the primary and secondary prevention trials like JUPITER, Treating to New Targets (TNT) and PROVE-IT TIMI 22 force to reconsider the issue. In these three trials, HDL-C was useful in the initial risk assessment but when LDL-C was aggressively lowered the residual risk predictive value of HDL-C was markedly attenuated. Also epidemiological studies evaluate the residual risk in treated hypertensives and dyslipidemic subjects within a general population. The PRIME study in Northern Ireland and France and the Progetto CUORE study in Italy, both with a 10-year follow-up were able to test the hypothesis of the residual cardiovascular risk in treated hypertensives, because the proportion of treated dyslipidemic subjects was too low at baseline. In both studies treatment with antihypertensive agents was associated with a sizeable residual cardiovascular risk with the hazard ratio of 1.5–1.7, suggesting that more efficient risk reduction strategies in hypertension should be developed as a priority. In conclusion residual cardiovascular risk should be better studied in cardiovascular epidemiology, refining the methods to evaluate it, to consider measures of exposure to the modifiable risk factors and indicators of treatment (both at pharmacological and lifestyle level) over the time. Repeated measures and cohortal follow-up are needed and also new statistical methods are necessary to evaluate the residual risk to understand how to reduce it.

Keywords

Cardiovascular residual risk Lipid trials Longitudinal epidemiological studies Residual risk of treated hypertensives 

Notes

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Hermans MP, Fruchart JC (2010) Reducing Residual Vascular Risk in Patients with Atherogenic Dyslipidemia: Where do we go from here? Clin Lipidology. 5(6):811–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vandenbroucke JP (2004) When are observational studies as credible as randomised trials? Lancet 363:1728–1731PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW, Wagner EH. Clinical Epidemiology: The Essentials. 3rd edn. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins; 1996:2Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lauer MS (2001) Medical therapy for coronary artery disease works, even (especially) in the real world. Am J Med 110:497–498PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    MacMahon S, Peto R, Cutler J, Collins R, Sorlie P, Neaton J et al (1990) Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 1, prolonged differences in blood pressure: prospective observational studies corrected for the regression dilution bias. Lancet 335:765–774PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Collins R, Peto R, MacMahon S, Hebert P, Fiebach NH, Eberlein KA et al (1990) Blood pressure, stroke and coronary heart disease. Part 2, short term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context. Lancet 335:827–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Andersson OK, Almgren T, Persson B, Samuelsson O, Hedner T, Wilhelmsen L (1998) Survival in treated hypertension: follow up study after two decades. BMJ. 317:167–171PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glynn RJ, L’Italien GJ, Sesso HD, Jackson EA, Buring JE (2002) Development of predictive models for long-term cardiovascular risk associated with systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Hypertension. 39:105–110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blacher J, Evans A, Arveiler D, Amouyel P, Ferrières J, Bingham A, Yarnell J, Haas B, Montaye M, Ruidavets J-B, Ducimetière P, PRIME Study Group (2010) Residual cardiovascular risk in treated hypertension and hyperlipidaemia: the PRIME Study. J Human Hypertension 24:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Libby PL (2005) The forgotten majority. Unfinished business in cardiovascular risk reduction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol 46:1225–1228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fruchart J-C, Sacks F, Hermans MP et al (2008) Executive statement: the Residual Risk Reduction Initiative: a call to action to reduce residual vascular risk in dyslipidemic patients. A condensed position paper by the Residual Risk Reduction Initiative (R3i). Diab. Vasc. Dis. Res 5:319–335Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR et al (2005) American Heart Association; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement. Circulation 112:2735–2752PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Graham I, Atar D, Borch-Johnsen K et al (2007) European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG): European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice. Executive summary. Eur. Heart J. 28:2375–2414Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ryden L, Standl E, Bartnik M et al (2007) Guidelines on diabetes, prediabetes, and cardiovascular diseases: executive summary. The Task Force on Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Eur. Heart J. 28:88–136PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brown G, Albers JJ, Fisher LD et al (1990) Regression of coronary artery disease as a result of intensive lipid-lowering therapy in men with high levels of apolipoprotein B. N Engl J Med 323:1289–1298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    HPS Collaborative Group: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of Cholesterol-Lowering with Simvastatin in 5, 963 People with Diabetes: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. (2003) Lancet 361: 2005–2016Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sacks FM, Tonkin AM, Shepherd J et al (2000) Effect of pravastatin on coronary disease events in subgroups defined by coronary risk factors: the Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project. Circulation 102:1893–1900PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Colhoun HM, Betteridge DJ, Durrington PN et al (2004) CARDS investigators: Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with atorvastatin in Type 2 diabetes in the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS): multicentre randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 364:685–696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    LaRosa JC, Grundy SM, Waters DD et al (2005) Intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin in patients with stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 352:1425–1435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shepherd J, Barter P, Carmena R et al (2006) Treating to New Targets Investigators: Effect of lowering LDL cholesterol substantially below currently recommended levels in patients with coronary heart disease and diabetes: The Treating to New Targets (TNT) study. Diabetes Care 29:1220–1226PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FA, JUPITER Study Group et al (2008) Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and women with elevated C-reative protein. N. Engl. J. Med 359:2195–2207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Taylor AJ, Villines TC, Stanek EJ et al (2009) Extended-Release Niacin or Ezetimibe and Carotid Intima-Thickness. New Engl J Med 361:2113–2122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ginsberg HN, Elam MB, Lovato LC, The ACCORD Study Group et al (2010) Effects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes. New Engl J Med 362:1563–1574PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Carey VJ, Bishop L, Laranjo N et al (2010) Contribution of high plasma triglyceride and low HDL-C to residual risk or coronary heart disease after establishment of LDL-C control. Am J Cardiol 106:757–763PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Birjmohun RS, Hutten BA, Kastelein JJ et al (2005) Efficacy and safety of HDL-C increasing compounds. J Am Coll Cardiol 45:185–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ridker PM, Genest J, Boekholdt AM et al (2010) HDL-C and residual risk of first cardiovascular events after treatment with potent statin therapy: an analysis of JUPITER trial. Lancet 376:333–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barter P, Gotto AM, LaRosa JC et al (2007) HDL-C, very low levels of LDL-C and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 357:1301–1310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH et al (2004) Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 350:1495–1505PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nicholls SJ, Tuzcu EM, Sipahi I et al (2007) Statins, HDL-C and regression of coronary atherosclerosis. JAMA 297:499–508PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cui Y, Watson DJ, Girman CJ et al (2009) Effects of increasing HDL-C and decreasing LDL-C on the incidence of first acute coronary event from the Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study. Am J Cardiol 104:829–834PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Downs J, Clearfield M, Weis S et al (1998) Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention study. Primary prevention of acute coronary events with lovastatin in men and women with average cholesterol levels. JAMA 279:1615–1622Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lloyd-Jones DM, Dyer AR, Wang R, Daviglus ML, Greenland P (2007) Risk factor burden in middle age and lifetime risks for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular death. (Chicago Heart Association Detection Project in Industry). Am J Cardiol 99:535–540PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cohen JC, Boerwinkle E, Mosely TH, Hobbs HH (2006) Sequence variations in PCSK9, low LDL and protection against coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 354:1264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cholesterol Treatment Trialists Collaboration. Efficacy and safety of cholesterol lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90056 participants from 14 randomized trials of statins. (2005) Lancet 366: 1267-78Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pedersen TR, Cater NB, Faergeman O et al (2010) Comparison of atorvastatin 80 mg/day versus simvastatin 20 to 40 mg/day on frequency of cardiovascular events late (five years) after acute myocardial infarction (from the Incremental in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL) Trial. Am J Cardiol 106:354–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ford I, Murray H, Packard C et al (2007) Long term follow-up of the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. N Engl J Med 357:1477–1486PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kones R (2011) Is prevention a fantasy, or the future of medicine? A panoramic view of recent data, status, and direction in cardiovascular prevention. Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis. 5:61–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ferrario M, Chiodini P, Chambless LE et al (2005) CUORE Project Research Group. Prediction of coronary events in a low incidence population. Assessing accuracy of the CUORE cohort study prediction equation. Int J Epidemiol 34:413–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    WHO MONICA Project. MONICA manual (1998–1999) Geneva. Switzerland: World Health Organization, Office of Cardiovasculr Diseases. Available from: URL: http://www.ktl.fi/publications/monica/manual/index.htm

Copyright information

© SIMI 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cardiovascular Prevention Centre, Health Unit 4 “Medio Friuli”UdineItaly

Personalised recommendations