Suppr超能文献

胆固醇降低干预研究(CRIS):一项评估临床实践中有效性和成本的随机试验。

Cholesterol-reduction intervention study (CRIS): a randomized trial to assess effectiveness and costs in clinical practice.

作者信息

Oster G, Borok G M, Menzin J, Heyse J F, Epstein R S, Quinn V, Benson V, Dudl R J, Epstein A M

机构信息

Policy Analysis Inc, Brookline, Mass, USA.

出版信息

Arch Intern Med. 1996 Apr 8;156(7):731-9. doi: 10.1001/archinte.156.7.731.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The 1988 US National Cholesterol Education Program Expert Panel Report recommended initial treatment with niacin or bile acid sequestrants, followed by other agents if needed, to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in hypercholesterolemic patients who require drug therapy. It is unknown how the effectiveness and costs of such an approach ("stepped care") compare in typical clinical practice to those of initial therapy with lovastatin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We randomly assigned 612 patients, aged 20 to 70 years, who met 1988 National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines for drug treatment of elevated LDL-C level and had not previously used cholesterol-lowering medication, to either a stepped-care regimen or initial therapy with lovastatin (both n=306). The study, conducted at Southern California Kaiser Permanente, was designed to approximate typical practice: provider compliance with treatment plans was encouraged but not enforced, and patients paid for medication as they customarily would.

RESULTS

At 1 year, the decline in mean LDL-C level was significantly greater among patients assigned to initial treatment with lovastatin (22% vs 15% for stepped care; P<.001), as was the number who attained goal LDL-C level (</= 4.14 mmol/L [</= 160 mg/dL], or </= 3.36 mmol/L [</= 130 mg/dL] if coronary heart disease or two or more risk factors were present) (40% vs 24%; P<.001). The increase in mean high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels was significantly greater in the stepped-care group, however (8% vs 1% for lovastatin; P<.001). Patients who were randomized to stepped care were more likely to report substantial bother caused by side effects (30% vs 16% for lovastatin; P<.001) and discontinuation of therapy at 1 year (28% vs 18%, respectively; P<.01). Costs of care were $333 higher per patient in the lovastatin group ($786 vs $453; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A stepped-care regimen beginning with niacin is less costly than initial therapy with lovastatin, but also less effective in lowering LDL-C level. While it is more effective in increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, the tolerability of such a regimen may be a problem.

摘要

背景

1988年美国国家胆固醇教育计划专家小组报告建议,对于需要药物治疗的高胆固醇血症患者,初始治疗采用烟酸或胆汁酸螯合剂,必要时再使用其他药物,以降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平。在典型临床实践中,这种“阶梯式治疗”方法的有效性和成本与洛伐他汀初始治疗相比如何尚不清楚。

患者与方法

我们将612名年龄在20至70岁之间、符合1988年美国国家胆固醇教育计划关于LDL-C水平升高的药物治疗指南且此前未使用过降胆固醇药物的患者,随机分为阶梯式治疗方案组或洛伐他汀初始治疗组(每组n = 306)。这项在南加州凯撒医疗集团进行的研究旨在模拟典型临床实践:鼓励但不强制医疗服务提供者遵守治疗计划,患者按常规方式支付药物费用。

结果

1年后,接受洛伐他汀初始治疗的患者平均LDL-C水平下降幅度显著更大(阶梯式治疗组为15%,洛伐他汀组为22%;P <.001),达到LDL-C目标水平(≤4.14 mmol/L[≤160 mg/dL],若存在冠心病或两个或更多危险因素则≤3.36 mmol/L[≤130 mg/dL])的患者数量也更多(分别为24%和40%;P <.001)。然而,阶梯式治疗组平均高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平的升高幅度显著更大(洛伐他汀组为1%,阶梯式治疗组为8%;P <.001)。随机分配至阶梯式治疗的患者更有可能报告副作用带来的严重困扰(洛伐他汀组为16%,阶梯式治疗组为30%;P <.001)以及1年后停药(分别为18%和28%;P <.01)。洛伐他汀组每位患者的护理成本高出333美元(分别为786美元和453美元;P <.001)。

结论

以烟酸开始的阶梯式治疗方案比洛伐他汀初始治疗成本更低,但在降低LDL-C水平方面效果也更差。虽然它在升高高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平方面更有效,但这种治疗方案的耐受性可能是个问题。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验