Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Primary Prevention”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2026

Polygenic Risk Identifies Older Adults Who May Benefit From Aspirin for the Primary Prevention of Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose aspirin is no longer recommended for routine primary prevention in older adults due to bleeding risks outweighing vascular benefits. We hypothesized that an integrative polygenic score (iPGS) could identify a subgroup of older individuals who derive net benefit from aspirin for the primary prevention of ischemic stroke. METHODS: We performed post hoc analysis of the ASPREE randomized, placebo-controlled trial (Aspirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly) of daily 100-mg aspirin, in 12 031 genotyped participants of European ancestry aged >70 years without prior cardiovascular disease. The iPGS was derived from >1.2 million variants and evaluated both continuously and by quintiles. Cox models assessed associations between polygenic risk, ischemic stroke, and major bleeding events, and tested the interaction between the iPGS and treatment allocation, with adjustment for baseline lifestyle and clinical covariates. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 75.1 years, and 54.9% were women. Over a median of 4.6 years, 187 ischemic strokes and 373 major bleeds occurred, including 101 intracranial bleeds (46 hemorrhagic strokes). Each 1-SD increase in the iPGS was associated with higher incident ischemic stroke risk (hazard ratio, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.20-1.62]). An interaction between the continuous iPGS and aspirin allocation was observed for ischemic stroke (P=0.04) but not major bleeding. In the highest iPGS quintile, aspirin reduced ischemic stroke by 51% (hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28-0.85]) without significantly increasing major bleeding (hazard ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.71-1.88]). No benefit was observed in the overall cohort or in lower-risk quintiles. CONCLUSIONS: Among older adults, high polygenic risk identifies individuals who may experience substantial stroke reduction with aspirin, with no excess bleeding. These findings raise the possibility that genomic risk stratification may enable targeted aspirin use for the primary prevention of ischemic stroke. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01038583.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Eligibility of real-world patients for aspirin primary prevention trials in cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the net benefit of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is finely balanced, leading to variation in guideline recommendations internationally. External validity of randomised clinical trial (RCT) evidence may therefore be of particular importance. The aim of this study is to characterise real-world patients according to their eligibility for guideline-cited aspirin RCTs for primary CVD prevention. METHODS: Eligibility criteria from 14 RCTs were applied to a linked primary care/hospital discharge dataset of people&#x2009;&#x2265;&#x2009;40 years without CVD. Proportions eligible for each trial were calculated, and characteristics of eligible and ineligible patients compared for each trial, including Cox regression analysis of event rates for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), major bleeding events, and non-cardiovascular mortality. RESULTS: Of 570,211 included patients (300,500 [52.7%] women, 336,877 [59%]&#x2009;<&#x2009;60 years), the median proportion ineligible for 14 RCTs was 90.7% (range 42.5-99.4%) and 24.0% of patients were ineligible for all RCTs. On average, trial-ineligible populations were younger (median age trial-ineligible 57.8 vs trial-eligible 62.6 years, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.008) and a lower proportion had hypertension (23.9% vs 50.9%, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.004), diabetes (6.4% vs 11.5%, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.015), or a regular statin prescription (11.8% vs 26.7%, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.001). Trial-ineligible populations had a higher hazard of MACE compared to trial-eligible in four RCTs and lower in ten (hazard ratio [HR] range across all RCTs 0.45 [95%CI 0.40-0.51] to 2.78 [95%CI 2.61-2.96]). Hazards of bleeding events in the trial-ineligible were lower than the trial-eligible in eight RCTs and higher in four (HR range across all RCTs 0.63 [95%CI, 0.59-0.66] to 1.69 [95%CI, 1.53-1.86]), and time-varying hazards of non-CVD death were consistently lower in four RCTs and higher in five (HR range across all RCTs and time points 0.29 [95%CI 0.24-0.36] to 11.42 [95%CI 9.91-13.17]). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with trial-ineligible populations within the same age and sex strata, RCTs recruited people of varying CVD risk but often excluded people at high risk of bleeding or non-CVD death, highlighting that many trials may overestimate the net benefit of aspirin for primary prevention.

Humans↗
PubMed2025

Lp(a) testing for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in high-income countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cost-effectiveness of Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] testing is not established. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Lp(a) testing in the cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention population from healthcare and societal perspectives. METHODS: We constructed and validated a multi-state microsimulation Markov model for a population of 10,000 individuals aged between 40 and 69 years without CVD, selected randomly from the UK Biobank. The model evaluated Lp(a) testing in individuals not initially classified as high-risk based on age, diabetes status, or the SCORE-2 algorithm. Those with an Lp(a) level &#x2265;105&#xa0;nmol/L (50&#xa0;mg/dL) were treated as high risk (initiation of a statin plus blood pressure lowering). The Lp(a) testing intervention was compared to standard of care. The primary analyses were conducted from the Australian and UK healthcare perspectives in 2023AUD/GBP. A cost adaptation method estimated cost-effectiveness in multiple European countries, Canada, and the USA. RESULTS: Among 10,000 individuals, 1,807 had their treatment modified from Lp(a) testing. This led to 217 and 255 quality-adjusted life years gained in Australia and the UK, respectively, with corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of 12,134 (cost-effective) and -3,491 (cost-saving). From a societal perspective, Lp(a) testing saved $85 and &#xa3;263 per person in Australia and the UK, respectively. Lp(a) testing was cost-saving among all countries tested in the cost adaptation analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Lp(a) testing in the primary prevention population to reclassify CVD risk and treatment is cost-saving and warranted to prevent CVD.

Humans↗
PubMed1979

Recruitment for the Coronary Primary Prevention Trial.

A preliminary account of some aspects of recruitment for the Coronary Primary Prevention Trial is provided. Extension of recruitment sources to include various forms of community screening resulted in more rapid acquisition of potential participants than was possible when recruitment was restricted to the more traditional sources of physician and laboratory referral. Extended recruitment was supported by augmented data feedback and by the development of the job of recruitment coordinator at each participating clinic. The identification of delays in reaching the maximal recruitment rate from particular sources points to the need for detailed planning of a recruitment campaign before large-scale clinical trials are begun.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed1979

The HSA: a focus for advancing primary preventive dental programs.

In conclusion, as community agencies under P.L. 93-641 embark upon the definition of health status goals, health system goals, and program implementation, dentists have the opportunity to clarify and assist in developing a vigorous approach to meeting dental health needs through primary prevention. Insofar as public health dentistry is able to provide technical assistance and leadership at the local HSA and SHPDA levels, the powerful tools for change embodied in this law can be a force for promoting the oral health of our population.

Community Participation↗
PubMed1977

Primary prevention of coronary heart disease: a critique.

The question is whether alteration of risk factors will aid primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Critical review of available evidence indicates that inferences have been made about the beneficial effects of risk factor modification without an adequate test of the hypothesis. Trial interventions to assess the efficacy of serum cholesterol-lowering measures have had negative or equivocal results. It remains to be seen whether the findings of clinical trials on hypertension can be applied toward primary prevention of coronary heart disease in the community. The cigarette smoking habit seems to be unique among coronary heart disease risk factors. The evidence appears sufficient to justify serious consideration of a strategy of preventing the smoking habit now, persuading patients to stop and encouraging teenagers not to start.

Adult↗
PubMed1978

Primary prevention of child abuse: focus on the special child.

The authors review the literature on child abuse and present evidence demonstrating that children who are born prematurely or who are sickly or handicapped are at high risk for child abuse. The authors describe ways to identify such children and suggest a number of primary prevention techniques that can reduce parental stress and help prevent child abuse. The techniques include day-care programs for handicapped children, mothers' social clubs, and lay health visitors to give support and impart proper maternal attitudes.

Child↗
PubMed1978

Efficacy of lidocaine in preventing primary ventricular fibrillation within 1 hour after a 300 mg intramuscular injection. A double-blind, randomized study of 300 hospitalized patients with acute myocardial infarction.

The effectiveness of intramuscular lidocaine in preventing in-hospital primary ventricular fibrillation within 1 hour after injection of the drug in patients with acute myocardial infarction was assessed in a double-blind randomized study performed in 300 such patients admitted within 6 hours of myocardial infarction. Six of 147 patients treated with 300 mg of intamuscular lidocaine had ventricular fibrillation compared with 4 of 153 control subjects. The lidocaine blood level of the patients who experienced ventricular fibrillation was 1.4 +/- 0.7 microgram/ml (mean +/- standard deviation) at the time of fibrillation, a value not significantly different from that of treated patients who did not experience fibrillation. Lidocaine blood levels in the latter were 1.9 +/- 1.1, 2.1 +/- 1.1, 2.1 +/- 1.1 and 1.7 +/- 0.7 microgram/ml, respectively, 7, 15, 30 and 60 minutes after injection. In this study intramuscular lidocaine was ineffective in preventing ventricular fibrillation, possibly because the given dose, 300 mg, prevented attainment of adequqte blood levels of the drug.

Adult↗