Published in:
01-02-2007 | Original Articles
Estimating the Impact of Adding C-Reactive Protein as a Criterion for Lipid Lowering Treatment in the United States
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 2/2007
Login to get accessBackground
There is growing interest in using C-reactive protein (CRP) levels to help select patients for lipid lowering therapy—although this practice is not yet supported by evidence of benefit in a randomized trial.
Objective
To estimate the number of Americans potentially affected if a CRP criteria were adopted as an additional indication for lipid lowering therapy. To provide context, we also determined how well current lipid lowering guidelines are being implemented.
Methods
We analyzed nationally representative data to determine how many Americans age 35 and older meet current National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) treatment criteria (a combination of risk factors and their Framingham risk score). We then determined how many of the remaining individuals would meet criteria for treatment using 2 different CRP-based strategies: (1) narrow: treat individuals at intermediate risk (i.e., 2 or more risk factors and an estimated 10–20% risk of coronary artery disease over the next 10 years) with CRP > 3 mg/L and (2) broad: treat all individuals with CRP > 3 mg/L.
Data source
Analyses are based on the 2,778 individuals participating in the 1999–2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey with complete data on cardiac risk factors, fasting lipid levels, CRP, and use of lipid lowering agents.
Main measures
The estimated number and proportion of American adults meeting NCEP criteria who take lipid-lowering drugs, and the additional number who would be eligible based on CRP testing.
Results
About 53 of the 153 million Americans aged 35 and older meet current NCEP criteria (that do not involve CRP) for lipid-lowering treatment. Sixty-five percent, however, are not currently being treated, even among those at highest risk (i.e., patients with established heart disease or its risk equivalent)—62% are untreated. Adopting the narrow and broad CRP strategies would make an additional 2.1 and 25.3 million Americans eligible for treatment, respectively. The latter strategy would make over half the adults age 35 and older eligible for lipid-lowering therapy, with most of the additionally eligible (57%) coming from the lowest NCEP heart risk category (i.e., 0–1 risk factors).
Conclusion
There is substantial underuse of lipid lowering therapy for American adults at high risk for coronary disease. Rather than adopting CRP-based strategies, which would make millions more lower risk patients eligible for treatment (and for whom treatment benefit has not yet been demonstrated in a randomized trial), we should ensure the treatment of currently defined high-risk patients for whom the benefit of therapy is established.