Lipid-lowering therapy for primary prevention of premature atherosclerotic coronary artery disease: Eligibility, utilization, target achievement, and predictors of initiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Despite advances in screening and prevention, rates of premature coronary artery disease (CAD) have been stagnant. The goals of this study were to investigate the barriers to early risk detection and preventive treatment in patients with premature CAD. In particular, we: 1) assessed the performance of the latest versions of major international guidelines in detection of risk of premature CAD and eligibility for preventive treatment; and, 2) investigated real-life utilization of primary prevention with lipid-lowering therapies in these patients. METHODS: We included patients in the Study to Avoid cardioVascular Events in British Columbia (SAVE BC), an observational study of patients with premature (males ≤ 50 years, females ≤ 55 years) angiographically confirmed CAD. Eligibility for primary prevention and treatment received were assessed retrospectively based on information recorded prior to or at the index presentation with CAD. RESULTS: Of 417 patients (28.1% females) who met the criteria, 94.3% had at least one major cardiovascular risk factor. In the retrospective risk assessment, 41.7%, 61.4%, and 34.3% (p < 0.001) of patients met criteria for initiation of statin therapy, and an additional 13.9%, 8.4%, and 46.8% may be considered for treatment using the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, Canadian Cardiovascular Society, and European Society of Cardiology guidelines, respectively. Only 17.1% of patients received statins and 11.0% achieved guideline-recommended lipid goals before presentation. Diabetes and elevated plasma lipid levels were positively associated with treatment initiation, while smoking was associated with non-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The current versions of major guidelines fail to recognize many patients who develop premature CAD as being at risk. The vast majority of these patients, including patients who have guideline-directed indications, do not receive lipid-lowering therapy before presenting with CAD. Our findings highlight the need for more effective screening and prevention strategies for premature CAD
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".