ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Prescriber Uptake and Use of Novel Lipid-Lowering Therapies.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Temporal Trends in Lipid-Lowering Therapy Use and Adherence in Patients With Premature Coronary Artery Disease.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Clinician-level variation in lipid management for secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: Opportunities for practice improvement.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- Cholesterol management in US adults with ASCVD in the Family Heart Database® during 2022-23: Current state of care and opportunities for improvement.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe uptake of novel lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) has been low; however, variations in clinician prescribing patterns have not been well studied. This study sought to describe early prescribing patterns of novel LLT and identify factors associated with high usage.
methodsWe identified prescriptions for any LLT using pharmacy transaction data (covering >80% of the United States) from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2022, and identified patients newly initiated on PCSK9i (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor) monoclonal antibodies or bempedoic acid (BA). We assessed the proportion of LLT prescribers overall and by specialty who had prescribed PCSK9i and BA, and the volume of patients prescribed. The association between use of PCSK9i and BA was assessed.
resultsOf 996 421 LLT prescribers, only 9.2% (N=91 166) and 2.4% (N=23 674) had prescribed PCSK9i and BA, respectively, by December 31, 2022. Usage was higher among cardiologists, but still only 62.8% and 18.2% of cardiologists had given a PCSK9i or BA prescription. The top 10% of prescribers were responsible for starting 57.3% and 51.2% of PCSK9i and BA prescriptions, respectively.
conclusionsThe majority of US clinicians prescribing LLT have never prescribed a PCSK9i or BA, and among those who do, most have used these therapies in only a few patients. However, there exist distinct groups of early adopters and high-volume users with higher approval rates, slightly more years in practice, and more cardiologists. Given that prescription approval rates for both PCSK9i and BA have now increased to >80% in our analysis, increasing uptake of novel LLT will require interventions to increase use among clinicians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.