Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17356986›Full record

GuidelineJournal of general internal medicine2007

Estimating the impact of adding C-reactive protein as a criterion for lipid lowering treatment in the United States.

Steven Woloshin, Lisa M Schwartz, Kevin Kerin, H Gilbert Welch

Open access · bronzeAbstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Journal of general internal medicine, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Steven WoloshinVA Outcomes Group, White River Junction, VT, USA. Steven.Woloshin@dartmouth.edu
Lisa M Schwartz
Kevin Kerin
H Gilbert Welch
White River Junction VA Medical Center · USDartmouth College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere 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.

objectiveTo 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.

methodsWe 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.

resultsAbout 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).

conclusionThere 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.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsC-Reactive ProteinFemaleGuideline AdherenceHealth Planning GuidelinesHumansHypercholesterolemiaHypolipidemic AgentsMaleMiddle AgedUnited StatesC-Reactive ProteinHypolipidemic Agents

Identifiers

PMID17356986
PMCPMC1824732
OpenAlexW2165524648

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.