Should identical CVD risks in young and old patients be managed identically? Results from two models

Su May Liew, Rod Jackson, David Mant, Paul Glasziou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)
73 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: To assess whether delaying risk reduction treatment has a different impact on potential life years lost in younger compared with older patients at the same baseline short-term cardiovascular risk. Design: Modelling based on population data. Methods: Potential years of life lost from a 5-year treatment delay were estimated for patients of different ages but with the same cardiovascular risk (either 5% or 10% 5-year risk). Two models were used: an agebased residual life expectancy model and a Markov simulation model. Age-specific case fatality rates and time preferences were applied to both models, and competing mortality risks were incorporated into the Markov model. Results: Younger patients had more potential life years to lose if untreated, but the maximum difference between 35 and 85 years was <1 year, when models were unadjusted for time preferences or competing risk. When these adjusters were included, the maximum difference fell to about 1 month, although the direction was reversed with older people having more to lose. Conclusions: Surprisingly, age at onset of treatment has little impact on the likely benefits of interventions that reduce cardiovascular risk because of the opposing effects of life expectancy, case fatality, time preferences and competing risks. These findings challenge the appropriateness of recommendations to use lower risk-based treatment thresholds in younger patients.

Original languageEnglish
Article numberA22
JournalBMJ Open
Volume2
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint

Life Expectancy
Mortality
Risk Reduction Behavior
Therapeutics
Age of Onset
Population

Cite this

@article{4f112f51dbeb4887a5a47242420463c8,
title = "Should identical CVD risks in young and old patients be managed identically? Results from two models",
abstract = "Objectives: To assess whether delaying risk reduction treatment has a different impact on potential life years lost in younger compared with older patients at the same baseline short-term cardiovascular risk. Design: Modelling based on population data. Methods: Potential years of life lost from a 5-year treatment delay were estimated for patients of different ages but with the same cardiovascular risk (either 5{\%} or 10{\%} 5-year risk). Two models were used: an agebased residual life expectancy model and a Markov simulation model. Age-specific case fatality rates and time preferences were applied to both models, and competing mortality risks were incorporated into the Markov model. Results: Younger patients had more potential life years to lose if untreated, but the maximum difference between 35 and 85 years was <1 year, when models were unadjusted for time preferences or competing risk. When these adjusters were included, the maximum difference fell to about 1 month, although the direction was reversed with older people having more to lose. Conclusions: Surprisingly, age at onset of treatment has little impact on the likely benefits of interventions that reduce cardiovascular risk because of the opposing effects of life expectancy, case fatality, time preferences and competing risks. These findings challenge the appropriateness of recommendations to use lower risk-based treatment thresholds in younger patients.",
author = "Liew, {Su May} and Rod Jackson and David Mant and Paul Glasziou",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000728",
language = "English",
volume = "2",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "2",

}

Should identical CVD risks in young and old patients be managed identically? Results from two models. / Liew, Su May; Jackson, Rod; Mant, David; Glasziou, Paul.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 2, No. 2, A22, 2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Should identical CVD risks in young and old patients be managed identically? Results from two models

AU - Liew, Su May

AU - Jackson, Rod

AU - Mant, David

AU - Glasziou, Paul

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Objectives: To assess whether delaying risk reduction treatment has a different impact on potential life years lost in younger compared with older patients at the same baseline short-term cardiovascular risk. Design: Modelling based on population data. Methods: Potential years of life lost from a 5-year treatment delay were estimated for patients of different ages but with the same cardiovascular risk (either 5% or 10% 5-year risk). Two models were used: an agebased residual life expectancy model and a Markov simulation model. Age-specific case fatality rates and time preferences were applied to both models, and competing mortality risks were incorporated into the Markov model. Results: Younger patients had more potential life years to lose if untreated, but the maximum difference between 35 and 85 years was <1 year, when models were unadjusted for time preferences or competing risk. When these adjusters were included, the maximum difference fell to about 1 month, although the direction was reversed with older people having more to lose. Conclusions: Surprisingly, age at onset of treatment has little impact on the likely benefits of interventions that reduce cardiovascular risk because of the opposing effects of life expectancy, case fatality, time preferences and competing risks. These findings challenge the appropriateness of recommendations to use lower risk-based treatment thresholds in younger patients.

AB - Objectives: To assess whether delaying risk reduction treatment has a different impact on potential life years lost in younger compared with older patients at the same baseline short-term cardiovascular risk. Design: Modelling based on population data. Methods: Potential years of life lost from a 5-year treatment delay were estimated for patients of different ages but with the same cardiovascular risk (either 5% or 10% 5-year risk). Two models were used: an agebased residual life expectancy model and a Markov simulation model. Age-specific case fatality rates and time preferences were applied to both models, and competing mortality risks were incorporated into the Markov model. Results: Younger patients had more potential life years to lose if untreated, but the maximum difference between 35 and 85 years was <1 year, when models were unadjusted for time preferences or competing risk. When these adjusters were included, the maximum difference fell to about 1 month, although the direction was reversed with older people having more to lose. Conclusions: Surprisingly, age at onset of treatment has little impact on the likely benefits of interventions that reduce cardiovascular risk because of the opposing effects of life expectancy, case fatality, time preferences and competing risks. These findings challenge the appropriateness of recommendations to use lower risk-based treatment thresholds in younger patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860123197&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000728

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000728

M3 - Article

VL - 2

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 2

M1 - A22

ER -