Asian Science Citation Index is committed to provide an authoritative, trusted and significant information by the coverage of the most important and influential journals to meet the needs of the global scientific community.  
ASCI Database
308-Lasani Town,
Sargodha Road,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Fax: +92-41-8815544
Contact Via Web
Suggest a Journal
 
Articles by Terry A. Jacobson
Total Records ( 14 ) for Terry A. Jacobson
  Michael J. Blaha , Roger S. Blumenthal , Eliot A. Brinton and Terry A. Jacobson
  Plasma levels of lipids and lipoproteins are essential to the management of lipid disorders by generalists and by practitioners of the emerging specialty of clinical lipidology. The routine lipid panel consists of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides. Several additional lipid parameters are emerging as potentially valuable adjuncts to the standard panel, including measurements of apolipoproteins and LDL particle size and concentration, but most of these serve mainly as research tools at present. One major exception is non-HDL-C, which is readily available for routine clinical use. This review outlines some of the numerous research studies that clearly establish the clinical utility and even preeminence of non-HDL-C as a comprehensive measure of atherogenic lipoproteins. Non-HDL-C was highlighted as a key secondary goal of therapy several years ago in the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III national lipid treatment guidelines and recently was further emphasized as a major goal of therapy in the consensus guidelines for lipoprotein management in patients with cardiometabolic risk from the American Diabetes Association and the American College of Cardiology. Non-HDL-C is superior to LDL-C for the prediction of cardiovascular events and has many other compelling advantages over LDL-C and other traditional lipid parameters. Importantly, it can be calculated directly from values in routine lipid panels, at no added expense. It is our opinion that non-HDL-C should be reported on all routine lipid profiles and used regularly in the management of dyslipidemia for optimal prevention of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.
  Michael H. Davidson , Christie M. Ballantyne , Terry A. Jacobson , Vera A. Bittner , Lynne T. Braun , Alan S. Brown , W. Virgil Brown , William C. Cromwell , Ronald B. Goldberg , James M. McKenney , Alan T. Remaley , Allan D. Sniderman , Peter P. Toth , Sotirios Tsimikas , Paul E. Ziajka , Kevin C. Maki and Mary R. Dicklin
  The National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel guidelines have established low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment goals, and secondary non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-C treatment goals for persons with hypertriglyceridemia. The use of lipid-lowering therapies, particularly statins, to achieve these goals has reduced cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality; however, significant residual risk for events remains. This, combined with the rising prevalence of obesity, which has shifted the risk profile of the population toward patients in whom LDL-C is less predictive of CVD events (metabolic syndrome, low HDL-C, elevated triglycerides), has increased interest in the clinical use of inflammatory and lipid biomarker assessments. Furthermore, the cost effectiveness of pharmacological intervention for both the initiation of therapy and the intensification of therapy has been enhanced by the availability of a variety of generic statins. This report describes the consensus view of an expert panel convened by the National Lipid Association to evaluate the use of selected biomarkers [C-reactive protein, lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2, apolipoprotein B, LDL particle concentration, lipoprotein(a), and LDL and HDL subfractions] to improve risk assessment, or to adjust therapy. These panel recommendations are intended to provide practical advice to clinicians who wrestle with the challenges of identifying the patients who are most likely to benefit from therapy, or intensification of therapy, to provide the optimum protection from CV risk.
  Terry A. Jacobson , Sara B. Glickstein , Jonathan D. Rowe and Paresh N. Soni
  In this exploratory, hypothesis-generating literature review, we evaluated potentially differential effects of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG), and non-HDL-C in published studies of ω-3 fatty acid supplementation or prescription ω-3 fatty acid ethyl esters. Placebo-adjusted changes in mean lipid parameters were compared in randomized, controlled trials in subjects treated for ≥4 weeks with DHA or EPA. Of 22 studies identified, 6 compared DHA with EPA directly, 12 studied DHA alone (including 14 DHA-treated groups), and 4 examined EPA alone. In studies directly comparing EPA with DHA, a net increase in LDL-C of 3.3% was observed with DHA (DHA: +2.6%; EPA: −0.7%). In such head-to-head comparative studies, DHA treatment was associated with a net decrease in TG by 6.8% (DHA: −22.4%; EPA: −15.6%); a net increase in non-HDL-C by 1.7% (DHA: −1.2%; EPA −2.9%); and a net increase in HDL-C by 5.9% (DHA: +7.3%; EPA: +1.4%). Increases in LDL-C were also observed in 71% of DHA-alone groups [with demonstrated statistical significance (P < .05) in 67% (8 of 12) DHA-alone studies] but not in any EPA-alone studies. Changes in LDL-C significantly correlated with baseline TG for DHA-treated groups. The range of HDL-C increases documented in DHA-alone vs EPA-alone studies further supports the fact that HDL-C is increased more substantially by DHA than EPA. In total, these findings suggest that DHA-containing supplements or therapies were associated with more significant increases in LDL-C and HDL-C than were EPA-containing supplements or therapies. Future prospective, randomized trials are warranted to confirm these preliminary findings, determine the potential effects of these fatty acids on other clinical outcomes, and evaluate the generalizability of the data to larger and more heterogeneous patient populations.
  Jerome D. Cohen , Eliot A. Brinton , Matthew K. Ito and Terry A. Jacobson
 

Background

Statins substantially reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease and are generally well-tolerated. Despite this, many patients discontinue therapy. A better understanding of the characteristics of current and former statin users may be helpful for formulating strategies to improve long-term adherence.

Objective

The Understanding Statin Use in America and Gaps in Education (USAGE) survey assessed the attitudes, beliefs, practices, and behavior of current and former statin users.

Methods

Individuals 18 years or older who reported a history of high cholesterol and current or former statin use were identified within a registered consumer panel cohort in the United States and invited to participate in an Internet survey.

Results

Of the 10,138 respondents, 8918 (88%) were current statin users and 1220 (12%) were former users. Participants (mean age 61 years) were predominantly white (92%), female (61%), of middle income (median $44,504/yr), and had health insurance (93%). Among current users, 95% took a statin alone, and 70% had not missed a dose in the past month. Although ∼70% reported that their physicians had explained the importance of cholesterol levels for their heart health former users were less satisfied with the discussions (65% vs. 83%, P < .05). Muscle-related side effects were reported by 60% and 25% of former and current users, respectively (P < .05). Nearly half of all respondents switched statins at least once. The primary reason for switching by current users was cost (32%) and the primary reason for discontinuation was side effects (62%).

Conclusions

This survey provides important insights into behavior and attitudes among current and former statin users and the results suggest that more effective dialogue between healthcare providers and patients may increase persistence of statin use, particularly when the patient has concerns about side effects and drug costs.

  Gregory A. Nichols , Bhakti Arondekar and Terry A. Jacobson
 

Background

Severe hypertriglyceridemia is associated with resource-intensive conditions such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and pancreatitis. Whether triglyceride (TG) reduction reduces annual medical costs has not been studied.

Objective

The objective was to compare medical care costs after changes in triglyceride levels for up to 5 years of follow-up.

Methods

Using an observational cohort, we identified 808 individuals who had a baseline TG level ≥500 mg/dL in calendar year 2004 and had a second measure 6 to 24 weeks later. We collected all subsequent inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy use and medical cost data through 2009. Percentage change from baseline TG level was used to create six categories: decreased ≥60%, 45%-59%, 30%-44%, 15%-29%, 0%-14%, and TG increase. We estimated and compared annualized medical care costs by adjusting for baseline costs, baseline TG, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, age, sex, smoking status, body mass index, blood pressure, and presence of comorbidities such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Results

Mean age of the cohort was 55.9 ± 11.7 years and 66% were men. Patients who reduced their TG levels by ≥60% experienced a mean annualized reduction from baseline medical costs of $471, whereas costs increased in all other TG change categories. Between-group differences were most pronounced in the first three years, but none were statistically significant.

Conclusion

This observational study was unable to establish that TG lowering among patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia produced statistically significantly lower hospital use or medical care costs. However, the nonsignificant trends observed suggest that a larger study conducted with controlled TG lowering may be warranted.

  W. Virgil Brown , Terry A. Jacobson and Lynne T. Braun
  Not available
  Mark J. Cziraky , Vincent J. Willey , James M. McKenney , Siddhesh A. Kamat , Maxine D. Fisher , John R. Guyton , Terry A. Jacobson and Michael H. Davidson
 

Background

The occurrence of low rates of rhabdomyolysis among patients receiving lipid-lowering drugs (LLDs) in randomized clinical trials may be elucidated with population-based studies.

Objective

To determine the risk of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis associated with LLD therapy.

Methods

This observational study used claims data from 9 million members of five United States health plans to identify patients (≥18 years) who received >2 statin and nonstatin LLDs during July 2000 to December 2004. Inpatient International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, codes for rhabdomyolysis (791.3, 728.89, and 728.88) were observed during the follow-up period; cases were confirmed with patients' medical records. Rhabdomyolysis events were reported per 10,000 person-years of LLD exposure; multivariate analysis was conducted.

Results

The study cohort (N = 473,343) received 490,988 and 11,624 person-years of LLD, and combination therapy, respectively. Medical charts were obtained for 104 of 144 eligible patients with rhabdomyolysis claims; 42 cases were confirmed. With atorvastatin as reference, rhabdomyolysis rates (95% confidence interval) were greatest for cerivastatin, 8.4 (2.3-21.7); no difference among available statins was observed. Rates for other LLD monotherapies were: niacin, 2.1 (0.3−7.7), ezetimibe, 2.1 (0.3−7.8), fenofibrate, 0 (0−1.7), and gemfibrozil, 2.0 (0.5−5.2). Multivariate analysis showed only cerivastatin with a significantly greater risk of rhabdomyolysis (odds ratio 4.74, 95% confidence interval 1.1-21.2, P = .041) versus atorvastatin among the statins. Combination therapies had increased rhabdomyolysis risk (OR 7.1, 1.6-31.6, P = .010) versus LLDs alone.

Conclusion

The risk of habdomyolysis among hospitalized patients receiving statins was low; no difference among the available statins was evident. Further data are needed to establish the risk profile but current findings already offer guidance to physicians.

  Melissa Y. Wei , Matthew K. Ito , Jerome D. Cohen , Eliot A. Brinton and Terry A. Jacobson
 

Background

Although statins have been shown to reduce cardiovascular disease mortality, less than half of U.S. adults achieve their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal. In many patients initiated on a statin, adherence rates decrease over time.

Objective

To characterize current and former statin users, identify reasons for the discontinuation or switching of statins, and identify factors associated with adherence.

Methods

The USAGE survey is a cross-sectional, self-administered Internet-based survey of 10,138 U.S. adults fielded September to October 2011. The following statin users were identified and compared: adherent nonswitchers, adherent switchers, non-adherent switchers, and discontinuers. Univariate and multivariate models using a priori covariates for adherence and discontinuation were examined.

Results

Most participants were current statin users who adhered with their prescribed statin (82.5%, n = 8371). Former statin users or discontinuers (12%, n = 1220) cited muscle pain, a side effect, as the primary reason for discontinuation (60%), followed by cost (16%), and then perceived lack of efficacy (13%). Discontinuers were less satisfied with their physicians' explanation of cholesterol treatment, more likely to use the Internet to research statins, and less likely to undergo frequent cholesterol monitoring. Among adherent statin users, the primary reasons for switching were muscle side effects (33%) and cost (32%). Individuals at risk for non-adherence included those with low household income, those who experienced muscle pain as a side effect while on statin therapy, and those taking medication for cardiovascular disease.

Conclusion

Statin-related muscle side effects are common and contribute significantly to rates of discontinuation, switching, and non-adherence. Improved physician patient communication about side effects and benefits of statins are necessary to improve both adherence and outcomes.

  Karen E. Aspry , Roy Furman , Dean G. Karalis , Terry A. Jacobson , Audrey M. Zhang , Gregory S. Liptak and Jerome D. Cohen
 

Background

Large gaps in lipid treatment and medication adherence persist in high-risk outpatients in the United States. Health information technology (HIT) is being applied to close quality gaps in chronic illness care, but its utility for lipid management has not been widely studied.

Objective

To perform a qualitative review of the impact of HIT interventions on lipid management processes of care (screening or testing; drug initiation, titration or adherence; or referrals) or clinical outcomes (percent at low density lipoprotein cholesterol goal; absolute lipid levels; absolute risk scores; or cardiac hospitalizations) in outpatients with coronary heart disease or at increased risk.

Methods

PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched using Medical Subject Headings related to clinical informatics and cholesterol or lipid management. English language articles that described a randomized controlled design, tested at least one HIT tool in high risk outpatients, and reported at least 1 lipid management process measure or clinical outcome, were included.

Results

Thirty-four studies that enrolled 87,874 persons were identified. Study ratings, outcomes, and magnitude of effects varied widely. Twenty-three trials reported a significant positive effect from a HIT tool on lipid management, but only 14 showed evidence that HIT interventions improve clinical outcomes. There was mixed evidence that provider-level computerized decision support improves outcomes. There was more evidence in support of patient-level tools that provide connectivity to the healthcare system, as well as system-level interventions that involve database monitoring and outreach by centralized care teams.

Conclusion

Randomized controlled trials show wide variability in the effects of HIT on lipid management outcomes. Evidence suggests that multilevel HIT approaches that target not only providers but include patients and systems approaches will be needed to improve lipid treatment, adherence and quality.

  Jerome D. Cohen , Karen E. Aspry , Alan S. Brown , JoAnne M. Foody , Roy Furman , Terry A. Jacobson , Dean G. Karalis , Penny M. Kris-Etherton and Ralph LaForge
  The workshop discussions focused on how low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment can be enhanced with the use of health information technology (HIT) in different clinical settings. A gap is acknowledged in LDL-C goal attainment, but because of the passage of the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Acts there is now reason for optimism that this gap can be narrowed. For HIT to be effectively used to achieve treatment goals, it must be implemented in a setting in which the health care team is fully committed to achieving these goals. Implementation of HIT alone has not resulted in reducing the gap. It is critical to build an effective management strategy into the HIT platform without increasing the overall work/time burden on staff. By enhancing communication between the health care team and the patient, more timely adjustments to treatment plans can be made with greater opportunity for LDL-C goal attainment and improved efficiency in the long run. Patients would be encouraged to take a more active role. Support tools are available. The National Lipid Association has developed a toolkit designed to improve patient compliance and could be modified for use in an HIT system. The importance of a collaborative approach between nongovernmental organizations such as the National Lipid Association, National Quality Forum, HIT partners, and other members of the health care industry offers the best opportunity for long-term success and the real possibility that such efforts could be applied to other chronic conditions, for example, diabetes and hypertension.
  Ross J. Simpson , Kaan Tunceli , Dena R. Ramey , David R. Neff , David M. Kern , Hui-Min Hsieh , Debra A. Wertz , Judith J. Stephenson , Elizabeth Marrett , Joanne E. Tomassini and Terry A. Jacobson
 

Back ground

For high-risk patients who do not achieve guideline-recommended LDL-C levels, more intensive treatment including statin-uptitration to higher doses or potency, as well as combination therapy may be considered. A better understanding of statin treatment patterns in real-world clinical practice may contribute to improved lipid-lowering management in these patients.

Objective

We determined treatment pattern changes among patients with high risk of cardiovascular disease who were not at low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal on statin monotherapy.

Methods

Treatment pattern changes were evaluated among patients newly initiated on statins between January 1, 2006, and August 31, 2009, in the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. Rates and mean time to first and second treatment changes were examined in patients with claims for coronary heart disease (CHD), atherosclerotic vascular disease (AVD), and diabetes mellitus during 12 months before index, who were not at LDL-C <70 mg/dL at their first-eligible LDL-C test (≥4 weeks after index). Therapy change was assessed for 12 months after the LDL-C result.

Results

Of 11,473 eligible subjects, 61.3% had diabetes, 26.6% had CHD and AVD, and 12.1% had CHD and AVD and diabetes. At index, patients were prescribed medium-potency levels of statins, including simvastatin (44.7%), atorvastatin (31.5%), and other statins (23.8%). Mean ± SD LDL-C before statin initiation was 138 ± 34 mg/dL, and at the first-eligible LDL-C result after index, it was 101 ± 25 mg/dL. During follow-up, 7444 subjects (64.9%) experienced a first treatment change, with mean time to change of 93.8 ± 92 days, whereas 4029 (36.1%) had no treatment change. Discontinuation of index therapy occurred in 46.9% of subjects and medication switches or titration in 18.0% (index statin titration, switch to other statins, other lipid-lowering therapies [LLT], including ezetimibe). Of the discontinuers, 27.4% restarted LLT. Of subjects with a first treatment change who did not discontinue, 48.9% experienced a second therapy change. Results were similar between the 3 high-risk groups.

Conclusions

In this managed-care setting, among patients with high risk of cardiovascular disease who were not at LDL-C goal, statins were usually started at medium-potency doses without being titrated up, whereas nearly one-half had a discontinuation of LLT within 12 months. These treatment patterns indicate the need for better patient and provider education as well as other system-wide modifications to improve medication adherence.

  Jennifer B. Christian , Bhakti Arondekar , Erin K. Buysman , Susan L. Johnson , John D. Seeger and Terry A. Jacobson
 

Background

Increased levels of triglycerides are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and pancreatitis. In this study we investigated the association between patients with severely increased triglycerides whose follow-up triglyceride levels were <500 mg/dL and reduction of important clinical events and associated health care costs.

Methods

By using two large U.S. health care claims databases, we identified an initial cohort of 41,210 patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia between June 2001 and September 2010 who had a follow-up laboratory test result 6 to <24 weeks after the initial severe hypertriglyceridemia laboratory value. Of these, 8493 patients' follow-up triglyceride levels remained elevated (≥500 mg/dL) whereas 32,717 were <500 mg/dL. After their qualifying follow-up triglyceride level, patients' cardiovascular events, diabetes-related events, pancreatitis episodes, kidney disease, and related costs were identified. Adjusted incidence rate ratios with the use of Cox proportional hazards models were developed for each outcome.

Results

Patients whose triglycerides remained ≥500 mg/dL had a greater rate of pancreatitis episodes (hazard ratio [HR]1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.47−2.18), cardiovascular events (HR1.19; 95% CI 1.10−1.28), diabetes-related events (HR1.42; 95% CI 1.27−1.59), and kidney disease (HR1.13; 95% CI 1.04−1.22) compared with patients whose follow-up triglycerides were <500 mg/dL, after we adjusted for important confounders. Adjusted all-cause total and cardiovascular-related costs were significantly lower in the first 3 years in patients whose follow-up triglyceride levels were <500 mg/dL compared with those whose triglyceride levels remained increased.

Conclusion

When follow-up triglyceride levels were <500 mg/dL, we observed an associated reduction in the risk of clinical events and decrease in health care resource use and costs.

  Matthew K. Ito , Kevin C. Maki , Eliot A. Brinton , Jerome D. Cohen and Terry A. Jacobson
 

Background

Drug interactions have been identified as a risk factor for muscle-related side effects in statin users.

Objectives

The aim was to assess whether use of medications that inhibit cytochrome P450 (CYP450) isozymes, organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1 (OATP1B1), or P-glycoprotein (P-gp) are associated with muscle-related symptoms among current and former statin users.

Methods

Persons (n = 10,138) from the Understanding Statin Use in America and Gaps in Education (USAGE) internet survey were categorized about whether they ever reported new or worsening muscle pain while taking a statin (n = 2935) or ever stopped a statin because of muscle pain (n = 1516). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess associations between use of concomitant therapies that inhibit CYP450 isozymes, OATP1B1, P-gp, or a combination and muscle-related outcomes.

Results

In multivariate analyses, concomitant use of a CYP450 inhibitor was associated with increased odds for new or worse muscle pain (odds ratio [OR] = 1.42; P < .001) or ever having stopped a statin because of muscle pain (OR = 1.28; P = .037). Concomitant use of medication known to inhibit both OATP1B1 and P-gp was also associated with increased odds (OR = 1.80; P = .030) of ever having stopped a statin because of muscle pain.

Conclusions

Concomitant use of medication(s) that inhibit statin metabolism was associated with increased odds of new or worse muscle pain while taking a statin and having previously stopped a statin because of muscle symptoms. These data emphasize the importance of enhancing the capabilities of clinicians and health systems for identifying and reducing statin drug interactions.

  Terry A. Jacobson , Matthew K. Ito , Kevin C. Maki , Carl E. Orringer , Harold E. Bays , Peter H. Jones , James M. McKenney , Scott M. Grundy , Edward A. Gill , Robert A. Wild , Don P. Wilson and W. Virgil Brown
  Various organizations and agencies have issued recommendations for the management of dyslipidemia. Although many commonalities exist among them, material differences are present as well. The leadership of the National Lipid Association (NLA) convened an Expert Panel to develop a consensus set of recommendations for patient-centered management of dyslipidemia in clinical medicine. The current Executive Summary highlights the major conclusions in Part 1 of the recommendations report of the NLA Expert Panel and includes: (1) background and conceptual framework for formulation of the NLA Expert Panel recommendations; (2) screening and classification of lipoprotein lipid levels in adults; (3) targets for intervention in dyslipidemia management; (4) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk assessment and treatment goals based on risk category; (5) atherogenic cholesterol-non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-as the primary targets of therapy; and (6) lifestyle and drug therapies intended to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with dyslipidemia.
 
 
 
Copyright   |   Desclaimer   |    Privacy Policy   |   Browsers   |   Accessibility