Publication

Measurement of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels in Primary and Secondary Prevention Patients: Insights From the PALM Registry

Downloadable Content

Persistent URL
Last modified
  • 05/21/2025
Type of Material
Authors
    Angela M. Lowenstern, Duke Clinical Research InstituteShuang Li, Duke Clinical Research InstituteAnn Marie Navar, Duke Clinical Research InstituteVeronique L. Roger, Mayo ClinicJennifer G. Robinson, University of IowaAnne C. Goldberg, Washington UniversitySalim S. Virani, Baylor College of MedicineL. Veronica Lee, SanofiPeter Wilson, Emory UniversityMichael J. Louie, Regeneron Pharmaceut IncEric D. Peterson, Duke Clinical Research InstituteTracy Y. Wang, Duke Clinical Research Institute
Language
  • English
Date
  • 2018-09-18
Publisher
  • Wiley Open Access: Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial
Publication Version
Copyright Statement
  • © 2018 The Authors.
License
Final Published Version (URL)
Title of Journal or Parent Work
ISSN
  • 2047-9980
Volume
  • 7
Issue
  • 18
Start Page
  • e009251
End Page
  • e009251
Grant/Funding Information
  • This study was supported by Sanofi Pharmaceuticals and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.
Abstract
  • Background The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults recommended testing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to identify untreated patients with LDL-C ≥190 mg/dL, assess lipid-lowering therapy adherence, and consider nonstatin therapy. We sought to determine whether clinician lipid testing practices were consistent with these guidelines. Methods and Results The PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry enrolled primary and secondary prevention patients from 140 US cardiology, endocrinology, and primary care offices in 2015 and captured demographic data, lipid treatment history, and the highest LDL-C level in the past 2 years. Core laboratory lipid levels were drawn at enrollment. Among 7627 patients, 2787 (36.5%) had no LDL-C levels measured in the 2 years before enrollment. Patients without chart-documented LDL-C levels were more often women, nonwhite, uninsured, and non-college graduates (all P<0.01). Patients without prior lipid testing were less likely to receive statin treatment (72.6% versus 76.0%; P=0.0034), a high-intensity statin (21.5% versus 24.3%; P=0.016), nonstatin lipid-lowering therapy (24.8% versus 27.3%; P=0.037), and had higher core laboratory LDL-C levels at enrollment (median 97 versus 92 mg/dL; P<0.0001) than patients with prior LDL-C testing. Of 166 individuals with core laboratory LDL-C levels ≥190 mg/dL, 36.1% had no LDL-C measurement in the prior 2 years, and 57.2% were not on a statin at the time of enrollment. Conclusions In routine clinical practice, LDL-C testing is associated with higher-intensity lipid-lowering treatment and lower achieved LDL-C levels.
Author Notes
  • Correspondence to: Angela M. Lowenstern, MD, Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, NC 27705. E-mail: angela.sandelin@dm.duke.edu
Keywords
Research Categories
  • Health Sciences, General

Tools

Relations

In Collection:

Items