Search

There are limited data from the US on outcomes of patients in specialty care for familial hypercholesterolemia (FH).CASCADE FH Registry data were analyzed to assess longitudinal changes in medication usage, in low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, and the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE (myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, stroke or transient ischemic attack) in adults with FH followed in US specialty clinics.The cohort consisted of 1900 individuals (61% women, 87% Caucasian), with mean age of 56 ± 15 years, 37% prevalence of ASCVD at enrollment, mean pretreatment LDL-C 249 ± 68 mg/dl, mean enrollment LDL-C 145 mg/dl and 93% taking lipid lowering therapy. Over follow up of 20 ± 11 months, lipid lowering therapy use increased (mean decrease in LDL-C of 32 mg/dl (p0.001)). Only 48% of participants achieved LDL-C100 mg/dl and 22% achieved LDL-C70 mg/dl; ASCVD at enrollment was associated with greater likelihood of goal achievement. MACE event rates were almost 6 times higher among patients with prior ASCVD compared to those without (4.6 vs 0.8/100 patient years). Also associated with incident MACE were markers of FH severity and conventional ASCVD risk factors.With care in FH specialized clinics, LDL-C decreased, but LDL-C persisted100 mg/dl in 52% of patients. High ASCVD event rates suggest that adults with FH warrant designation as having an ASCVD risk equivalent. Earlier and more aggressive therapy of FH is needed to prevent ASCVD events.

Background The Dutch cascade screening model for FH was the most successful of such programs in the world. It remains unclear whether aspects of the Dutch model (i.e. direct engagement with FH probands and relatives outside usual healthcare settings) are feasible in the US. This is especially important since prior attempts at cascade screening in the US have had very low screening rates (, Graphical abstract Image, graphical abstract

Introduction: Despite familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) being a common cardiovascular genetic disorder, it is vastly underdiagnosed and undertreated. This is partly due to the lack of systematic screening methods to identify possible FH and little to no implementation of cascade screening approaches in the US. Screening models, such as machine learning algorithms, and family communication methods for cascade screening, such as chatbot technology and direct contact of at-risk relatives by a clinician, may help close the gap in FH identification. Methods: Focus groups were conducted with individuals with FH and clinicians. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for acceptability and feasibility of implementing screening models and family communication methods. Results: Individuals with FH and clinicians felt that models analyzing different data sources, including electronic health records, to screen for FH have the potential to activate patients and stimulate patient-clinician conversations about FH. While some expressed privacy and confidentiality concerns, individuals with FH found screening models acceptable, stating that these could have led to an earlier diagnosis and treatment and expressing their frustration with the status quo. Most had a strong desire to be notified of screening models’ outcomes at the same time as their clinician. Clinicians felt strongly that automated models would be helpful in identifying FH. Many with FH felt responsible for notifying their family about FH first; however, some indicated comfort with their clinician, healthcare system, or other professionals helping to communicate FH risk to their relatives via direct contact methods. Further, they indicated a strong willingness to use chatbots to share FH risk information with their relatives. Clinicians felt the need to support their patients and offer their services when sharing FH risk information with relatives, while individuals with FH expressed doubt that their clinicians would have time and resources to provide active support. Conclusions: Individuals with FH and clinicians agreed that FH screening models and enhanced family communication methods would be beneficial, acceptable, and feasible to implement in US healthcare systems.

ImportanceFamilial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an underdiagnosed and undertreated genetic disorder that leads to premature morbidity and mortality due to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Familial hypercholesterolemia affects 1 in 200 to 250 people around the world of every race and ethnicity. the lack of general awareness of FH among the public and medical community has resulted in only 10% of the FH population being diagnosed and adequately treated. the World Health Organization recognized FH as a public health priority in 1998 during a consultation meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. the World Health Organization report highlighted 11 recommendations to address FH worldwide, from diagnosis and treatment to family screening and education. Research since the 1998 report has increased understanding and awareness of FH, particularly in specialty areas, such as cardiology and lipidology. However, in the past 20 years, there has been little progress in implementing the 11 recommendations to prevent premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in an entire generation of families with FH. ObservationsIn 2018, the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Foundation and the World Heart Federation convened the international FH community to update the 11 recommendations. Two meetings were held: one at the 2018 FH Foundation Global Summit and the other during the 2018 World Congress of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Health. Each meeting served as a platform for the FH community to examine the original recommendations, assess the gaps, and provide commentary on the revised recommendations. the Global Call to Action on Familial Hypercholesterolemia thus represents individuals with FH, advocacy leaders, scientific experts, policy makers, and the original authors of the 1998 World Health Organization report. Attendees from 40 countries brought perspectives on FH from low-, middle-, and high-income regions. Tables listing country-specific government support for FH care, existing country-specific and international FH scientific statements and guidelines, country-specific and international FH registries, and known FH advocacy organizations around the world were created. Conclusions and RelevanceBy adopting the 9 updated public policy recommendations created for this document, covering awareness; advocacy; screening, testing, and diagnosis; treatment; family-based care; registries; research; and cost and value, individual countries have the opportunity to prevent atherosclerotic heart disease in their citizens carrying a gene associated with FH and, likely, all those with severe hypercholesterolemia as well. This guideline presents updated recommendations for management of familial hypercholesterolemia. (c) 2020 American Medical Association. All rights reserved., AmgenAmgen; Sanofi Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Funding to support the 2 international meetings to achieve consensus was provided by Amgen and Sanofi Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Guided by the Conceptual Model of Implementation Research, we explored the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of: (1) automated screening approaches utilizing existing health data to identify those who require subsequent diagnostic evaluation for familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and (2) family communication methods including chatbots and direct contact to communicate information about inherited risk for FH. Focus groups were conducted with 22 individuals with FH (2 groups) and 20 clinicians (3 groups). These were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using deductive (coded to implementation outcomes) and inductive (themes based on focus group discussions) methods. All stakeholders described these initiatives as: (1) acceptable and appropriate to identify individuals with FH and communicate risk with at-risk relatives, and (2) feasible to implement in current practice. Stakeholders cited current initiatives, outside of FH (e.g., pneumonia protocols, colon cancer and breast cancer screenings), that gave them confidence for successful implementation. Stakeholders described perceived obstacles, such as nonfamiliarity with FH, that could hinder implementation and potential solutions to improve systematic uptake of these initiatives. Automated health data screening, chatbots, and direct contact approaches may be useful for patients and clinicians to improve FH diagnosis and cascade screening.

Background Barriers to genetic testing and subsequent family cascade screening for familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) include cost, patient and provider awareness, privacy and discrimination concerns, need for a physician order, underutilization of genetic counselors, and family concerns about the implications of genetic testing for care. Objectives The objective of the study was to determine the uptake of genetic testing with cost and privacy removed. Methods The FH Foundation offered free genetic testing and counseling to patients in the patient portal of the CASCADE FH Registry, who had not previously undergone genetic testing for 3 genes associated with FH (LDLR, APOB, and PCSK9). The free testing offer was extended to first-degree relatives of participants who had a positive genetic test result for cascade screening. Results Of 435 eligible patients, 147 opted in to participate, 122 consented, and 110 (68.2% female, median age: 52 years) received genetic testing. Of the participants, 64 had a positive genetic test result for a pathogenic variant in LDLR (59) or APOB (5); 11 had a variant of uncertain significance. Only 3 first-degrees relatives underwent genetic testing. Conclusions Although there was substantial interest in genetic testing, uptake of family cascade screening was poor. Innovative approaches to increase family cascade screening should be explored.

Although awareness of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is increasing, this common, potentially fatal, treatable condition remains underdiagnosed. Despite FH being a genetic disorder, genetic testing is rarely used. The Familial Hypercholesterolemia Foundation convened an international expert panel to assess the utility of FH genetic testing. The rationale includes the following: 1) facilitation of definitive diagnosis; 2) pathogenic variants indicate higher cardiovascular risk, which indicates the potential need for more aggressive lipid lowering; 3) increase in initiation of and adherence to therapy; and 4) cascade testing of at-risk relatives. The Expert Consensus Panel recommends that FH genetic testing become the standard of care for patients with definite or probable FH, as well as for their at-risk relatives. Testing should include the genes encoding the low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR), apolipoprotein B (APOB), and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9); other genes may also need to be considered for analysis based on patient phenotype. Expected outcomes include greater diagnoses, more effective cascade testing, initiation of therapies at earlier ages, and more accurate risk stratification.

Most familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) patients remain undertreated, and it is unclear what role health disparities may play for FH patients in the US. We sought to describe sex and racial/ethnic disparities in a national registry of US FH patients.We analyzed data from 3167 adults enrolled in the CAscade SCreening for Awareness and DEtection of Familial Hypercholesterolemia (CASCADE-FH) registry. Logistic regression was used to evaluate for disparities in LDL-C goals and statin use, with adjustments for covariates including age, cardiovascular risk factors, and statin intolerance.In adjusted analyses, women were less likely than men to achieve treated LDL-C of100 mg/dL (OR 0.68, 95% CI, 0.57-0.82) or ≥50% reduction from pretreatment LDL-C (OR 0.79, 95% CI, 0.65-0.96). Women were less likely than men to receive statin therapy (OR, 0.60, 95% CI, 0.50-0.73) and less likely to receive a high-intensity statin (OR, 0.60, 95% CI, 0.49-0.72). LDL-C goal achievement also varied by race/ethnicity: compared with whites, Asians and blacks were less likely to achieve LDL-C levels100 mg/dL (Asians, OR, 0.47, 95% CI, 0.24-0.94; blacks, OR, 0.49, 95% CI, 0.32-0.74) or ≥50% reduction from pretreatment LDL-C (Asians, OR 0.56, 95% CI, 0.32-0.98; blacks, OR 0.62, 95% CI, 0.43-0.90).In a contemporary US population of FH patients, we identified differences in LDL-C goal attainment and statin usage after stratifying the population by either sex or race/ethnicity. Our findings suggest that health disparities contribute to the undertreatment of US FH patients. Increased efforts are warranted to raise awareness of these disparities.

Background— Cardiovascular disease burden and treatment patterns among patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) in the United States remain poorly described. In 2013, the FH Foundation launched the Cascade Screening for Awareness and Detection (CASCADE) of FH Registry to address this knowledge gap. Methods and Results— We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 1295 adults with heterozygous FH enrolled in the CASCADE-FH Registry from 11 US lipid clinics. Median age at initiation of lipid-lowering therapy was 39 years, and median age at FH diagnosis was 47 years. Prevalent coronary heart disease was reported in 36% of patients, and 61% exhibited 1 or more modifiable risk factors. Median untreated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was 239 mg/dL. At enrollment, median LDL-C was 141 mg/dL; 42% of patients were taking high-intensity statin therapy and 45% received >1 LDL-lowering medication. Among FH patients receiving LDL-lowering medication(s), 25% achieved an LDL-C 1 LDL-lowering medication (1.80; 1.34–2.41). Conclusions— FH patients in the CASCADE-FH Registry are diagnosed late in life and often do not achieve adequate LDL-C lowering, despite a high prevalence of coronary heart disease and risk factors. These findings highlight the need for earlier diagnosis of FH and initiation of lipid-lowering therapy, more consistent use of guideline-recommended LDL-lowering therapy, and comprehensive management of traditional coronary heart disease risk factors.

In the US familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), patients are underidentified, despite an estimated prevalence of 1:200 to 1:500. Criteria to identify FH patients include Simon Broome, Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN), or Make Early Diagnosis to Prevent Early Deaths (MEDPED). The use of these criteria in US clinical practices remains unclear.To characterize the FH diagnostic criteria applied by US lipid specialists participating in the FH Foundation's CASCADE FH (CAscade SCreening for Awareness and DEtection of Familial Hypercholesterolemia) patient registry.We performed an observational, cross-sectional analysis of diagnostic criteria chosen for each adult patient, both overall and by baseline patient characteristics, at 15 clinical sites that had contributed data to the registry as of September 8, 2015. A sample of 1867 FH adults was analyzed. The median age at FH diagnosis was 50 years, and the median pretreatment low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) value was 238 mg/dL. The main outcome was the diagnostic criteria chosen. Diagnostic criteria were divided into five nonexclusive categories: "clinical diagnosis," MEDPED, Simon Broome, DLCN, and other.Most adults enrolled in CASCADE FH (55.0%) received a "clinical diagnosis." The most commonly used formal criteria was Simon-Broome only (21%), followed by multiple diagnostic criteria (16%), MEDPED only (7%), DLCN only (1%), and other (0.5%), P .0001. Of the patients with only a "clinical diagnosis," 93% would have met criteria for Simon Broome, DLCN, or MEDPED based on the data available in the registry.Our findings demonstrate heterogeneity in the application of FH diagnostic criteria in the United States. A nationwide consensus definition may lead to better identification, earlier treatment, and ultimately CHD prevention.