ライフサイエンスコーパス: primary prevention

1 risk but have not yet had a vascular event (primary prevention).

2 early adulthood to inform discussions about primary prevention.

3 essential in developing strategies aimed at primary prevention.

4 nalyses among patients receiving statins for primary prevention.

5 in-related risks and benefits is critical in primary prevention.

6 concerning prescription of statin therapy in primary prevention.

7 or lifestyle were identified as targets for primary prevention.

8 ure CHD and may benefit from more aggressive primary prevention.

9 entify adults eligible for statin therapy as primary prevention.

10 They were started on statins for primary prevention.

11 Prophylactic HPV vaccine is available for primary prevention.

12 l-based evidence supports statin efficacy in primary prevention.

13 alance the risks and benefits of therapy for primary prevention.

14 t and effective, but understudied, tools for primary prevention.

15 ible cancer plans, including initiatives for primary prevention.

16 ear-old man considering starting aspirin for primary prevention.

17 of appropriate therapy than those placed for primary prevention.

18 randomized to egg were not amenable to this primary prevention.

19 ealth score (ICHS) is recommended for use in primary prevention.

20 recommendations for using statin therapy in primary prevention.

21 evidence supporting these recommendations in primary prevention.

22 The need to scale-up the primary prevention actions is urgent.

23 ater numbers of high-risk women eligible for primary prevention after BBD diagnosis are identified us

24 Future efforts could intensify primary prevention aimed at young adults, adolescents, a

25 Coverage of primary prevention alone saved 3.6 million disability-ad

26 per DALY averted, when compared with that of primary prevention alone.

27 The Justification for the Use of Statins in Primary Prevention: An Intervention Trial Evaluating Ros

28 TER [Justification for the Use of Statins in Primary Prevention: An Intervention Trial Evaluating Ros

29 are possible from sufficient uptake of both primary prevention and ART, but with continuation of the

30 Primary prevention and early detection are integral stra

31 rability of MESA with target populations for primary prevention and possibility of missed events in M

32 Primary prevention and screening among children and adol

33 ions was dominated by a strategy of covering primary prevention and tertiary treatment, which prevent

34 ey suggest novel pharmacological methods for primary prevention and treatment of posttraumatic stress

35 abolish reductions in function with ageing (primary prevention) and/or improve function or slow furt

36 ntion strategies that include biomedical and primary prevention approaches add complexity to the task

37 gent need to identify novel risk factors and primary prevention approaches for CVD in HIV.

38 inappropriate aspirin use was determined for primary prevention (aspirin use in those with 10-year CV

39 ions include secondary prevention, high-risk primary prevention based on formal risk assessment, and

40 both recommend lipid-lowering treatment for primary prevention based on global risk for cardiovascul

41 Statins for primary prevention based on low-density lipoprotein chol

42 vention based on formal risk assessment, and primary prevention based on single risk factor measureme

43 underwent first-time device implantation for primary prevention between April 2006 and December 2009.

44 o had previously undergone ICD placement for primary prevention but subsequently never received appro

45 liferative breast lesions are candidates for primary prevention, but few risk models incorporate beni

46 ted with cause-specific cardiac mortality in primary-prevention candidates with ischemic cardiomyopat

47 The primary prevention cohort comprised individuals >/=50 ye

48 Pooled analyses of primary prevention cohort studies showed that compared w

49 Forty patients had no prior history of VT (primary prevention cohort).

50 Conclusion In this community-based primary prevention cohort, guideline-based statin eligib

51 In this community-based primary prevention cohort, the ACC/AHA guidelines for de

52 ata from intervention trials that included a primary prevention cohort.

53 ere similarly increased in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.43-3.00

54 were similarly reduced in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts, respectively.

55 or greater expected benefit from statins in primary prevention compared with higher-risk individuals

56 eline also provides a new risk estimator for primary prevention decisions, including stroke outcomes

57 ricular arrhythmias (VAs) occur in a current primary prevention defibrillator (implantable cardiovert

58 iduals benefit from long-term statin use for primary prevention depends more on the disutility associ

59 Primary prevention efforts are being guided by study of

60 the importance of consistent primordial and primary prevention efforts throughout midlife to late li

61 whether they could therefore be targets for primary prevention efforts.

62 table cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention enrolled a limited number of women.

63 Primary prevention exceeds secondary prevention for CHD

64 Guidelines recommend initiating primary prevention for atherosclerotic cardiovascular di

65 ernment should make great efforts to provide primary prevention for those on high-risk cluster as a p

66 68,808 unique patients receiving aspirin for primary prevention from 119 U.S. practices.

67 esidents potentially eligible for statins in primary prevention from the National Health and Nutritio

68 secondary prevention group compared with the primary prevention group (36.9 versus 15.7/1000 patient-

69 ege of Cardiology/American Heart Association primary prevention guidelines are mainly on the basis of

70 Primary prevention guidelines focus on risk, often assum

71 Purpose: To systematically review current primary prevention guidelines on adult cardiovascular ri

72 Primary prevention had higher New York Heart Association

73 Primary prevention has several advantages: the effective

74 Each has their place, but upstream primary prevention has the largest effect on reduction o

75 ersal public health system, which focuses on primary prevention, has contributed to this achievement.

76 atins are projected to be cost-effective for primary prevention; however, even a small increase in ge

77 approximately one fourth of patients with a primary prevention ICD and no previous therapy have EF >

78 Prescription fills for recipients of primary prevention ICD between 2007 and 2011 were examin

79 herapy can be predicted in ICM patients with primary prevention ICD by quantifying the LGE border zon

80 and could inform clinical decision making on primary prevention ICD candidacy.

81 care patients with heart failure receiving a primary prevention ICD had frailty (10%) or dementia (1%

82 ta Registry ICD Registry who underwent first primary prevention ICD implantation between 2006 and 200

83 Rates of GDMT for HFrEF before primary prevention ICD implantation were low, and failur

84 l population of Medicare patients undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation were stable between

85 is relationship between age and outcome of a primary prevention ICD in patients with nonischemic syst

86 ns for continued device therapy in pediatric primary prevention ICD patients might be reconsidered af

87 Among primary prevention ICD patients, 40.0% had an improved L

88 d beta-blocker [HFBB]) within 90 days before primary prevention ICD placement in patients with HFrEF.

89 We assessed all primary prevention ICD recommendations listed in both do

90 430 women with heart failure who received a primary prevention ICD to 430 women who did not; we furt

91 educed left ventricular ejection fraction, a primary prevention ICD was associated with a significant

92 Among 19,733 patients with HFrEF and primary prevention ICD, 61.1% filled any GDMT before imp

93 g women with heart failure with or without a primary prevention ICD.

94 nalysis investigates the association between primary prevention ICDs and mortality among Medicare, ra

95 ty and dementia among older adults receiving primary prevention ICDs and to determine the impact of m

96 Primary prevention ICDs are associated with lower mortal

97 Primary prevention ICDs are efficacious at reducing all-

98 review of patients undergoing replacement of primary prevention ICDs at 2 tertiary Veterans Affairs M

99 Patients with primary prevention ICDs from the National Cardiovascular

100 e beneficiaries with heart failure receiving primary prevention ICDs have frailty or dementia.

101 e findings support guideline-directed use of primary prevention ICDs in eligible patients.

102 justed comparative effectiveness analysis of primary prevention ICDs in Medicare, racial/ethnic minor

103 Approximately 25% of patients who receive primary prevention ICDs may no longer meet guideline ind

104 Before data collection started, primary prevention ICDs were hypothesized to reduce all-

105 To investigate the association of primary prevention ICDs with all-cause mortality in pati

106 primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (primary prevention ICDs) in patients with nonischemic ca

107 ng patients who are unlikely to benefit from primary prevention ICDs.

108 ess likely to derive a survival benefit from primary prevention ICDs.

109 icular ejection fraction </=35% referred for primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillato

110 ful for understanding risk stratification of primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillato

111 ts with ischemic cardiomyopathy referred for primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillato

112 Primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillato

113 that women and black patients eligible for a primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

114 ilated cardiomyopathy patients evaluated for primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

115 rates occurred despite a low rate (4.0%) of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

116 ction fraction (HFrEF) is recommended before primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

117 Heart failure patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

118 he risks of death or rehospitalization after primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

119 are under-represented in clinical trials of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

120 sought to determine how often patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

121 ose with DCM may not benefit from additional primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillato

122 lator indications for patients with CHD were primary prevention in 1943 (61.9%) and secondary prevent

123 The ICD indication was primary prevention in 67% and secondary in 33% patients.

124 ary prevention in 10 patients (9.6%) and for primary prevention in 94 patients (90.4%).

125 Task Force recommendations for statin use in primary prevention in a cohort of adults who experienced

126 l variation in inappropriate aspirin use for primary prevention in a large U.S. nationwide registry.

127 Evidence to guide primary prevention in adults aged 75 years or older is l

128 Limited trial evidence targeting primary prevention in adults aged 75 years or older.

129 Primary prevention in adults aged younger than 60 years

130 ioverter-defibrillator (ICD) indications for primary prevention in Brugada syndrome (BrS) are still d

131 s the literature on the topic of aspirin for primary prevention in general, and in subjects with diab

132 he decision to initiate statin treatment for primary prevention in older adults requires further inve

133 However, the role of aspirin for primary prevention in patients with no overt cardiovascu

134 ardiovascular disease risk factor control as primary prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes mell

135 Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients with Primary Prevention Indication to Prolong Time to First S

136 ction fraction was 43 +/- 18%, and 65% had a primary prevention indication.

137 Lifetime aspirin use for primary prevention initiated at younger ages (40 to 69 y

138 t such a reduction requires a combination of primary prevention interventions and preventative effect

139 essing family history and suggest that early primary prevention interventions may be warranted at you

140 syndrome and 2) whether ICD implantation for primary prevention is associated with improved outcomes

141 However, aspirin as primary prevention is debated because of the risk of hem

142 Evidence for aspirin in primary prevention is heterogeneous and limited by rare

143 njuries is needed, and greater investment in primary prevention is needed.

144 der patients, so the use of these agents for primary prevention is possible.

145 CC/AHA guideline for expanded statin use for primary prevention is projected to treat more people, to

146 mation to cardiovascular risk prediction for primary prevention, is not currently recommended.

147 nd four randomised controlled trials of both primary prevention (JUPITER and ASCOT) and secondary pre

148 of benefits from risk-reducing therapies in primary prevention may help target therapies to those in

149 Primary prevention measures should be strengthened to pr

150 The decision to treat a patient in primary prevention must be a careful one because the ben

151 evaluate the effectiveness of synbiotics for primary prevention of AD.

152 sponse is logical for interventions aimed at primary prevention of allergic disease.

153 s will ultimately provide a road map for the primary prevention of allergic disease.

154 mmendations on initiating statin therapy for primary prevention of ASCVD (net 221 individuals appropr

155 ein cholesterol (LDL-C)-lowering therapy for primary prevention of ASCVD events.

156 mance of the ACC/AHA risk-based approach for primary prevention of ASCVD with statins was superior to

157 n before initiating a statin, especially for primary prevention of ASCVD.

158 ance induction is an attractive approach for primary prevention of asthma.

159 Statins are effective in the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular dis

160 Their role in the primary prevention of atherothrombosis remains controver

161 the absence of proven interventions for the primary prevention of atrial fibrillation, this post hoc

162 corporated into clinical assessments for the primary prevention of cardiac emergencies in basketball

163 ded "initiating low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and c

164 indicates that aspirin is effective for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and c

165 long-term benefits of lowering LDL-C for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease among indiv

166 ued a guideline titled, "Aspirin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Colorec

167 s and harms of behavioral counseling for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults w

168 st for screening and risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in apparent

169 benefit-risk profile of low-dose aspirin in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease is unclear.

170 Current guidelines recommend statins in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease on the basi

171 o 75 years, who initiated statin therapy for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

172 ive Services Task Force endorsed aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

173 ll included trials evaluated aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events.

174 For the primary prevention of CHD, Multi-Ethnic Study of Atheros

175 g from birth represents a first step towards primary prevention of childhood obesity.

176 gen and progestin has no net benefit for the primary prevention of chronic conditions for most postme

177 at estrogen alone has no net benefit for the primary prevention of chronic conditions for most postme

178 Hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in menopausal w

179 ds against the use of estrogen alone for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopaus

180 e of combined estrogen and progestin for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopaus

181 he use of menopausal hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic conditions.

182 hough the effects of supplementation for the primary prevention of clinical cardiovascular events in

183 Aspirin for the primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) is on

184 This paper discusses primary prevention of coronary heart disease that may be

185 ends initiating low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD and CRC in adults aged 50 to 5

186 ion to initiate low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD and CRC in adults aged 60 to 6

187 and harms of initiating aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD and CRC in adults aged 70 year

188 and harms of initiating aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD and CRC in adults younger than

189 ewed 5 additional studies of aspirin for the primary prevention of CVD and several additional analyse

190 The beneficial effect of aspirin for the primary prevention of CVD is modest and occurs at doses

191 According to the guidelines on primary prevention of CVD, aspirin use is considered app

192 ed eligibility for each of 10 major RCTs for primary prevention of CVD.

193 o improve evidence-based aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD.

194 help guide initiation of statin therapy for primary prevention of CVD.

195 deepens the need for clinicians to focus on primary prevention of de novo humoral allosensitization.

196 e ICD therapy with conventional care for the primary prevention of death of various causes in adults

197 The decrease in disability onset due to primary prevention of diabetes could play an important p

198 evaluation of antibiotic recommendations and primary prevention of exposure to Salmonella.

199 benefit in using nutritional supplements for primary prevention of eye disease.

200 o provide evidence-based recommendations for primary prevention of food allergy.

201 cines may reduce the economic burden through primary prevention of influenza and reduction in illness

202 intervention that seems justifiable for the primary prevention of Parkinson's disease is the promoti

203 The ICD therapy is routinely used for primary prevention of SCD in patients with cardiomyopath

204 risk stratification of patients with HCM for primary prevention of SCD, and calculating an individual

205 dioverter-defibrillator implantation for the primary prevention of SCD.

206 s are performed in asymptomatic patients for primary prevention of stroke, it is incumbent upon clini

207 an implantable cardiac defibrillator for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest after baseli

208 table cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (primary prev

209 cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) used for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) conclud

210 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in thos

211 implantable cardioverter defibrillators for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death are less like

212 The rate of ICD implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in this patie

213 LVEF assessments after ICD implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death.

214 e appropriate implantation of an ICD for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death.

215 table cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention of sudden death in patients with an e

216 able selection of patients likely to achieve primary prevention of sudden death with implantable defi

217 Previously, hormone therapy was used for the primary prevention of these chronic conditions.

218 These shared origins are targets for primary prevention of type 2 diabetes.

219 available regarding their potential role in primary prevention of type 2 diabetes.

220 Data on primary prevention of zinc status and diabetes risk are

221 ated with a Biventricular ICD [RELEVANT] and Primary Prevention Parameters Evaluation [PREPARE]).

222 Primary prevention participants (N=3486; 34%) were young

223 atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in a primary prevention patient; screening for familial lipid

224 and updated 10-year ASCVD risk estimates for primary prevention patients adhering to the appropriate

225 he cohort includes approximately 9.4 million primary prevention patients and approximately 400,000 se

226 ing heart disease, in a large study group of primary prevention patients with heart failure.

227 the use of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors in primary prevention patients with LDL-C <190 mg/dL with o

228 Designed especially for primary prevention patients, this process of shared deci

229 tion it might be more suitable for high-risk primary prevention patients, though future combinations

230 mulations, might be more suited to high-risk primary prevention patients.

231 ed with low-dose aspirin in secondary versus primary prevention patients.

232 of cardiovascular outcomes compared with the primary prevention patients.

233 l ASCVD and in a smaller number of high-risk primary prevention patients.

234 rted of $5588 when compared with coverage of primary prevention plus tertiary treatment.

235 eed for population-wide health promotion and primary prevention policies is emphasized.

236 Among the US primary prevention population represented by 3416 indivi

237 Among the 8.9% of individuals in the primary prevention population who would be recommended f

238 iovascular effects of LDL-C lowering among a primary prevention population with LDL-C >/=190 mg/dL.

239 In a contemporary primary prevention population, baseline cardiac troponin

240 tatins, and reflect response to therapy in a primary prevention population.

241 ompensated by the lower baseline risk in the primary prevention population.

242 In CVD primary prevention populations, aspirin's effect on tota

243 iated with adverse cardiovascular outcome in primary prevention populations.

244 n implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for primary prevention purposes.

245 aimed to confirm this observation in a third primary prevention randomized controlled trial.

246 lysis across the WOSCOPS, ASCOT, and JUPITER primary prevention, relative risk reduction in those at

247 The place of aspirin in primary prevention remains controversial, with North Ame

248 s of risk factor modification are a focus of primary prevention research.

249 act of expanding national insurance to cover primary prevention, secondary prevention, and tertiary t

250 , sudden, any cardiac, or noncardiac) in the primary prevention setting.

251 TnT to outcomes are limited, particularly in primary prevention settings.

252 Primary prevention should remain a priority for cancer c

253 ention) and for two blood pressure ranges in primary prevention (stage one, 140-159/90-99 mm Hg; stag

254 k threshold considered sufficient to warrant primary prevention statin therapy, and the decision not

255 lower number of individuals recommended for primary prevention statin therapy, including many younge

256 Eligibility for primary prevention statin therapy.

257 determine the difference in eligibility for primary prevention statin treatment among US adults, ass

258 to medication, yet most patients discontinue primary prevention statins within 3 years.

259 These findings could have implications for primary prevention strategies and help target at-risk ad

260 d might support the development of effective primary prevention strategies for allergy and asthma in

261 eating occasions, are potential targets for primary prevention strategies with large health impacts.

262 onal limitation or cognitive impairment, all primary prevention strategies would prevent MIs and CHD

263 ty may be a crucial factor in the success of primary prevention strategies, and a range of options, a

264 would contribute greatly to inform effective primary prevention strategies.

265 ear period, supporting the wider adoption of primary prevention strategies.

266 ality and provide an opportunity for testing primary prevention strategies.

267 y complementary regular supplementation in a primary prevention strategy rather than secondary preven

268 at early stages of the disease process in a primary prevention strategy.

269 ial infarction nor ischemic stroke, yet most primary prevention studies focus on these presentations.

270 Several observational and primary prevention studies have investigated these relat

271 Future primary prevention studies might explore medication disu

272 ith cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes in primary prevention studies.

273 ested cohort within the 1995 Canadian Asthma Primary Prevention Study intervention study was performe

274 ealth Study) and CAPPS/SAGE (Canadian Asthma Primary Prevention Study/Study of Asthma, Genetics and E

275 Despite significant progress in primary prevention, the rate of MI has not declined in y

276 Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for ne

277 icular Dysfunction, Non-ischemic Etiology in Primary Prevention Treated with a Biventricular ICD [REL

278 One large primary prevention trial found that a Mediterranean diet

279 of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study was a primary prevention trial in 45- to 64-year-old men with

280 Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin), a randomized primary prevention trial that compared rosuvastatin trea

281 events, including coronary death or MI) for primary prevention trials (1.5% lower event rate [95% CI

282 ever, in analyses of 2 randomized controlled primary prevention trials (ASCOT [Anglo-Scandinavian Car

283 Data Synthesis: Two primary prevention trials found no difference in all-cau

284 et autoimmunity is initiated in infancy, and primary prevention trials require children at high genet

285 ose that targeted communities or clinicians, primary prevention trials, and trials that reported even

286 In CVD primary prevention trials, cancer mortality (relative ri

287 Specifically, in the primary prevention trials, the number needed to treat to

288 vent one coronary heart disease event in the primary prevention trials.

289 Current algorithms for statin allocation in primary prevention use epidemiologic estimates of absolu

290 e randomized clinical trials have found that primary prevention use of an implantable cardioverter-de

291 of cardiovascular disease (secondary versus primary prevention) were prespecified for evaluation.

292 ss IIb assessment and is most appropriate in primary prevention when clinical decisions to initiate s

293 This goal is only fully achieved with primary prevention, which requires us to identify and pr

294 egies for the prevention of FA might include primary prevention, which seeks to prevent the onset of

295 Consideration of the safety of primary prevention with aspirin requires an individualiz

296 Overall, primary prevention with ICD therapy versus conventional

297 ipants from a randomized controlled trial of primary prevention with statin therapy (WOSCOPS [West of

298 Heart Association (AHA) guidelines recommend primary prevention with statins for individuals with >/=

299 receiving inappropriate aspirin therapy for primary prevention, with significant practice-level vari

300 her to provide a complementary public health primary prevention zinc strategy.