Boston researchers reported yesterday they have developed a strategy that
dramatically reduces the risk of heart attacks, strokes, and even death among
older adults who don't have the traditional warning signs of perilously clogged
arteries.
Using a test they pioneered, scientists from Brigham and Women's Hospital
screened patients for evidence of cardiovascular disease missed by conventional
cholesterol tests and then gave them preventive doses of a type of drug known as
a statin.
The result: Heart attacks and strokes were cut by roughly 50 percent among
patients who received the pill as part of a sprawling medical study that spanned
26 countries and included nearly 18,000 people. And the patients who got the
medication rosuvastatin, marketed under the brand name Crestor, suffered only
one side effect potentially linked to the pill, according to the study, which
was paid for by the drug's maker, AstraZeneca.
A half-dozen specialists not involved in the research predicted that the
findings, presented in New Orleans at an American Heart Association convention
that attracts thousands of cardiologists, will spawn a seismic shift in heart
disease prevention.
Describing the study as a landmark, the doctors said millions of patients who
previously would not have been considered candidates for statins now appear
destined to receive some form of the medication widely used to lower
cholesterol.
"The extent of reduction in death, heart attacks, and stroke is larger than
we've seen in any trial I can remember," said Dr. Steven Nissen, a prominent
Cleveland Clinic cardiologist. "I don't know how you get much bigger than that."
The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute will take the findings under
"strong consideration" as it revises guidelines on preventing and treating heart
disease next year, said Dr. Elizabeth Nabel, the agency's director. That could
translate into widespread use of the Brigham test among men over 50 and women
over 60 - and more prescriptions for drugs.
Still, reflecting persistent controversy over how best to detect and treat heart
disease, a cardiovascular researcher at Stanford University sounded a cautionary
note about rushing to prescribe statins, already the top-selling drugs in
America, to millions of additional patients.
Scientists need to better identify those patients who stand to benefit the most
from a medication designed to prevent, not treat, an illness, because all drugs
carry medical risks and financial costs, warned Dr. Mark A. Hlatky, who penned a
critical editorial published online with the study in The New England Journal of
Medicine.
"You and I have all seen drugs that everybody thought were wonderful and safe,
but after a few years you say, 'Uh-oh,' " he said. "The reason I'm cautious
about this is because of that history."
Every year, nearly 900,000 Americans die from cardiovascular disease, the
nation's number one killer. But half of people who suffer heart attacks or
strokes had no warning signs, such as previous episodes of chest pain or
elevated levels of bad cholesterol, which gums up arteries.
"And that's what this study is all about," said Dr. Paul Ridker, the Brigham
specialist who presided over the research. "It's about the guy who goes running
and does not come back, and the doctor and the spouse are shocked because this
is someone who was thin and seemingly in good health and with a good cholesterol
level."
So years ago Ridker invented a blood test to identify some of these people by
detecting C-reactive protein, or CRP, a measurement of inflammation in arteries
that suggests patients are prone to catastrophic blood clots. Because Brigham
holds patents on the high-sensitivity CRP test, both the hospital and Ridker
stand to profit handsomely from royalties if it becomes as common as a
cholesterol screening.
Some doctors have been reluctant, however, to use the test, which typically
costs less than $100 and is sometimes covered by insurance.
"We've known that CRP has been an indicator of risk, but never had the data to
suggest that once you've identified patients with the risk factor, if you were
to treat them, would it make a difference?" said Dr. W. Douglas Weaver,
president of the American College of Cardiology.
Ridker's study was crafted to answer that question.
People were eligible to participate if they had a high CRP result but healthy
cholesterol readings. Patients are generally advised to keep their total
cholesterol levels below 200; more specifically, a reading lower than 130 is
recommended for the bad form of cholesterol, known as LDL.
The study participants, on average, were 66 years old and overweight, but not
obese.
Half received a 20 milligram dose of rosuvastatin each day while the others
received a placebo. The study was supposed to last for five years, but a board
monitoring the safety of the trial stopped it early because the results were so
overwhelmingly positive.
"They said, 'Dr. Ridker, we think it's unethical to continue giving anyone in
your trial a placebo,' " the Brigham doctor recalled. "We were just stunned by
the result."
LDL cholesterol and CRP levels plunged, and patients who received the drug
suffered considerably fewer health emergencies, with 31 heart attacks and 33
strokes, compared with 68 heart attacks and 64 strokes among people who took the
placebo. Deaths also fell, by 20 percent.
The only indication of a serious side effect was that patients taking the
medication were more likely to be diagnosed with diabetes, a concern previously
identified with the drugs.
Statins - with $18.4 billion in US sales in 2007, according to consulting
company IMS Health - have generated their fair share of criticism. Some doctors
complained the drugs had not been tested sufficiently in women, and others were
concerned that pharmaceutical companies underreported side effects.
Dr. Gregg Fonarow, a heart specialist at the University of California, Los
Angeles, said that because of the sheer size of the study and the significant
percentages of women, African-Americans, and Hispanics included, lingering
concerns about statins should be silenced.
"This really changes everything," said Fonarow, who was not involved in the
study but has received consulting and other payments from statin makers. Now, he
said, when doctors encounter patients in their 50s, 60s, or older, they should
"make sure there are absolutely no risk factors present and no elevation of CRP
before deciding it's safe for that person to leave without a statin
prescription."
Specialists said it remained unclear how many additional patients would be
eligible to receive statins if the findings from the Brigham study were widely
implemented, with Ridker estimating at least 6 million Americans while other
specialists forecast tens of millions. Worldwide, 13 million patients already
take rosuvastatin; in his editorial, Hlatky pegged the monthly cost at about
$100 a patient.
By one standard measurement used to evaluate whether it makes sense to give a
drug to big groups of people, rosuvastatin fared quite well. The researchers
found that 25 people would need to take the statin for five years to prevent one
serious cardiovascular episode.
"As expensive as this might be to give this drug to all these people, it might
still save money if you take into account" costs associated with the
complications of heart attacks and strokes, said Dr. James E. Muller, chief
executive of InfraReDx, a Burlington biotech company that makes a system to
detect fatty deposits embedded in arteries.