A Comparison of Statin Treatment Algorithms Based on the ACC/AHA and Philippine Guidelines for Primary Prevention of Dyslipidemia in Statin-Naive Filipino Patients.
Bayani Pocholo Maglinte, Alex Junia, Jeremyjones Robles
{"title":"A Comparison of Statin Treatment Algorithms Based on the ACC/AHA and Philippine Guidelines for Primary Prevention of Dyslipidemia in Statin-Naive Filipino Patients.","authors":"Bayani Pocholo Maglinte, Alex Junia, Jeremyjones Robles","doi":"10.15605/jafes.037.02.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This cross-sectional study evaluates the degree of agreement between the 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA2018) and 2020 Philippine Guideline (PG2020) treatment algorithms for the primary prevention of dyslipidemia among Filipinos.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>This review included 159 charts of statin-naive Filipinos who are 45-79 years old. Using risk profile and lipid measurements, statin treatment recommendation was determined through the PG2020 algorithm and ACC/AHA-ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus web application. The degree of agreement was measured by Cohen's kappa statistic with the two algorithms as independent raters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 159 patients were included in the final analysis. There was a slight agreement with a kappa coefficient of 0.209 or 4.4% (95% CI 0.078-0.340, <i>p</i>=0.003). Statin treatment was recommended in 69 out of 159 patients (43.4%) by the PG2020 overlapping with ACC/AHA2018 in 56 cases (81.2%). On the other hand, 109 cases (68.6%) were recommended for statin treatment by ACC/AHA2018 overlapping with PG2020 in only 51.4%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The low degree of agreement between the two treatment algorithms highlights the key demographic and ethnic variations in dyslipidemia management necessitating outcome-based studies to translate these differences. Overestimation of ASCVD risk calculation in the ACC/AHA2018 and consideration of important, unique risk factors among Filipinos favors the applicability of the Philippine guideline.</p>","PeriodicalId":41792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies","volume":"37 2","pages":"34-41"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/bc/63/JAFES-37-2-34.PMC9758551.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15605/jafes.037.02.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: This cross-sectional study evaluates the degree of agreement between the 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA2018) and 2020 Philippine Guideline (PG2020) treatment algorithms for the primary prevention of dyslipidemia among Filipinos.
Methodology: This review included 159 charts of statin-naive Filipinos who are 45-79 years old. Using risk profile and lipid measurements, statin treatment recommendation was determined through the PG2020 algorithm and ACC/AHA-ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus web application. The degree of agreement was measured by Cohen's kappa statistic with the two algorithms as independent raters.
Results: A total of 159 patients were included in the final analysis. There was a slight agreement with a kappa coefficient of 0.209 or 4.4% (95% CI 0.078-0.340, p=0.003). Statin treatment was recommended in 69 out of 159 patients (43.4%) by the PG2020 overlapping with ACC/AHA2018 in 56 cases (81.2%). On the other hand, 109 cases (68.6%) were recommended for statin treatment by ACC/AHA2018 overlapping with PG2020 in only 51.4%.
Conclusions: The low degree of agreement between the two treatment algorithms highlights the key demographic and ethnic variations in dyslipidemia management necessitating outcome-based studies to translate these differences. Overestimation of ASCVD risk calculation in the ACC/AHA2018 and consideration of important, unique risk factors among Filipinos favors the applicability of the Philippine guideline.
目的:本横断面研究评估了2018年美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会(ACC/AHA2018)和2020年菲律宾指南(PG2020)治疗算法在菲律宾人血脂异常一级预防方面的一致程度。方法:本综述包括159例45-79岁的菲律宾未使用他汀的患者。通过风险概况和脂质测量,通过PG2020算法和ACC/AHA-ASCVD risk Estimator Plus web应用程序确定他汀类药物的治疗建议。通过Cohen的kappa统计来衡量一致性的程度,这两种算法作为独立的评分者。结果:159例患者纳入最终分析。kappa系数为0.209或4.4% (95% CI 0.078-0.340, p=0.003)。159例患者中有69例(43.4%)推荐他汀类药物治疗,PG2020与56例(81.2%)的ACC/AHA2018重叠。另一方面,109例(68.6%)推荐他汀类药物治疗,ACC/AHA2018与PG2020重叠的比例仅为51.4%。结论:两种治疗算法之间的低程度一致性突出了血脂异常管理中关键的人口统计学和种族差异,需要基于结果的研究来解释这些差异。ACC/AHA2018中对ASCVD风险计算的高估,以及对菲律宾人重要、独特风险因素的考虑,有利于菲律宾指南的适用性。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies (JAFES) is an OPEN ACCESS, internationally peer-reviewed, English language, medical and health science journal that is published in print two times a year by the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies. It shall serve as the endocrine window between the ASEAN region and the world, featuring original papers and publishing key findings from specialists and experts of endocrinology.