Key result
Real-world LDL-C goal attainment rises to ~31% at 1 year, lagging in older patients.
Why the study?
Does lipid-lowering therapy use and LDL-C goal attainment differ across age groups in high- and very high-risk patients at 1-year follow-up?
Observational (n=9,136)
Yes
Does lipid-lowering therapy use and LDL-C goal attainment differ across age groups in high- and very high-risk patients at 1-year follow-up?
Absolute Event Rate: 30.9% vs 21.2%
Real-world data from the European SANTORINI study demonstrates that older patients are treated less intensively with lipid-lowering therapies, and overall LDL-C goal attainment remains low at 1 year across all age groups.
Background Cardiovascular (CV) disease continues to pose a significant global health challenge, particularly among older adults. Evidence from SANTORINI showed that only 30% of patients achieved their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal. However, it remains unclear how this differs across age groups. Purpose To assess age-related differences in lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) use and LDL-C goal attainment in the European SANTORINI cohort of patients at 1-year follow-up (1YFU). Methods SANTORINI was an observational, prospective study that enrolled high- and very high-risk patients from primary and secondary care settings across 14 European countries between March 2020 to February 2021. Patients with non-missing LLT and non-missing LDL-C values at baseline (BL) and 1YFU were included in the full analysis set (FAS) and LDL-C set, respectively. Patients were stratified into three age groups: <60 years, 60–69 years and ≥70 years. LLT use, LDL-C levels and goal attainment (defined as LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L for high-risk patients and <1.4 mmol/L for very high-risk patients, from the 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society guidelines) were compared at BL vs 1YFU. Results 9136 patients were included in the FAS and 7210 patients were included in the LDL-C set; results are reported at BL vs 1YFU. In patients aged <60 years, 28.5% did not receive LLT at BL, which decreased to 3.6% at 1YFU, monotherapy increased from 40.7% to 48.1% and combination therapy increased from 30.8% to 47.4% (Table). Mean (SD) LDL-C levels decreased from 2.68 (1.42) mmol/L to 2.06 (1.09) mmol/L and goal attainment increased from 20.1% to 31.0% (Figure). In patients aged 60–69 years, the proportion of untreated patients decreased from 20.2% to 3.0%, monotherapy increased from 53.3% to 56.5% and combination therapy increased from 26.5% to 39.4%. Mean (SD) LDL-C levels decreased from 2.42 (1.20) mmol/L to 1.96 (0.90) mmol/L, and goal attainment increased from 21.0% to 31.2%. In patients aged ≥70 years, the proportion of untreated patients decreased from 16.0% to 3.4%, monotherapy increased from 63.1% to 64.1% and combination therapy increased from 21.0% to 29.8%. Mean (SD) LDL-C levels decreased from 2.21 (1.01) mmol/L to 1.94 (0.86) mmol/L, and goal attainment increased from 22.3% to 30.6%. Overall, the proportion of untreated patients decreased from 20.9% to 3.3%, monotherapy increased from 53.6% to 57.1% and combination therapy increased from 25.6% to 37.9%. Mean (SD) LDL-C levels decreased from 2.42 (1.22) mmol/L to 1.98 (0.95) mmol/L, and goal attainment increased from 21.2% to 30.9%. Conclusions This analysis showed that in the real-world older patients are treated less intensively than younger patients. At 1YFU, many older patients were still unable to reach their LDL-C goal, thus highlighting the unmet need for more intensive treatment strategies to improve CV outcomes in the older population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Connolly et al. (2025) conducted an observational in High and very high cardiovascular risk (n=9,136). Lipid-lowering therapy vs. Baseline was evaluated on LDL-C goal attainment. In a real-world cohort of high-risk patients, overall LDL-C goal attainment increased from 21.2% at baseline to 30.9% at 1 year, though older patients were treated less intensively than younger ones.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: