This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Lipids and Lipid Disorders  • Randomized Controlled Trial  • Alert me on articles by topic

Where Do We Go From Here?

Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:922-924.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

ALTHOUGH THERE is little to no controversy about controlling lipids in patients with manifest atherosclerosis, the role of primary prevention has been a subject of considerable debate, with cogent arguments on all sides informed by pathology, epidemiology, ethics, and health economics. These issues have been consolidated generally under the rubric of "evidence-based medicine," in which the gold standard for any intervention has become hard clinical end-point data from well-designed, adequately powered studies. The case for lipid control to prevent coronary disease in asymptomatic patients has been made by several such trials, including the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT) of cholestyramine,¹ the Helsinki Heart Study (HHS) of gemfibrozil,² the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS) of pravastatin,³ and the Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TexCAPS) of lovastatin.⁴

THE TRIALS

In the early LRC-CPPT, 3806 men with primary hypercholesterolemia and no evidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) were randomized . . . [Full Text of this Article]

THE FRAMINGHAM HEART STUDY

COMMENT

CONCLUSIONS

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Dyslipidemia Patients Not Studied in CAD Primary Prevention Trials
JWatch General 2001;2001:3-3.
FULL TEXT