
Figure 1
Age-standardized mean non-HDL cholesterol (mmol/L–1) across the world from the NCD Risk Factor Collaboration. Reproduced from NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC). Repositioning of the global epicentre of non-optimal cholesterol. Nature 582, 73–77 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2338-1 licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
a, Age-standardized mean non-HDL cholesterol in women in 1980. b, Age-standardized mean non-HDL cholesterol in women in 2018. c, Age-standardized mean non-HDL cholesterol in men in 1980. d, Age-standardized mean non-HDL cholesterol in men in 2018.

Figure 2
Events avoided based on baseline absolute risk and absolute lowering of LDL-C (Duality of risk and LDL-C lowering as determinants of benefit from lipid lowering therapies). Adapted from CTT Lancet 2012 The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: Meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised trials [87].

Figure 3
Benefit of reducing cumulative exposure to LDL on the lifetime risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Panel A shows the effect of reducing LDL by 50% from a population median of 3.5 mmol/L (135 mg/dl) resulting in an absolute difference of 1.75 mmol/L (67.7 mg/dL) on the lifetime risk of experiencing a major atherosclerotic cardiovascular event (defined as fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal or non-fatal ischemic stroke, or coronary revascularization) if LDL lowering is started at ages 30, 40, 50 or 60 years and continued up to age 80 years as compared to either no LDL reduction of lifelong exposure to the same magnitude of lower LDL. Panel B shows the effect on the lifetime risk of experiencing a major atherosclerotic cardiovascular event up to age 80 years from reducing LDL by 33% beginning at age 40 years, or by 50% beginning at age 55 years. Greater benefits are observed if LDL-C lowering is begun at an earlier age.
Table 1
Potential LDL-C reductions achievable through different combinations of lipid lowering treatments.
| EXPECTED LDL CHOLESTEROL REDUCTION | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PATIENT TYPE | STATIN TOLERANT | STATIN INTOLERANCE | ||
| Achieveable Reductions | ≥60% | ≥80% | ≥35% | ≥60% |
| Potential Combinations | Rosuvastatin 20–40 + Ezetimibe 10 | Rosuvastatin 20–40 + Alirocumab/Evolocumab (+ Ezetimibe 10) | Ezetimibe 10 + Bile acid abs | |
| Atorvastatin 40–80 + Ezetimibe 10 | Atorvastatin 40–80 + Alirocumab/Evolocumab (+ Ezetimibe 10) | Ezetimibe 10 + Alirocumab/Evolocumab | ||
| Rosuvastatin 5–10 + Alirocumab/Evolocumab | ||||
| Atorvastatin 10–20 + Alirocumab/Evolocumab | ||||
| Rosuvastatin 5–10 + Inclisiran | Atorvastatin 40–80 + Inclisiran (+ Ezetimibe 10) | Bempedoic acid 180 + Ezetimibe 10 | ||
| Atorvastatin 10–20 + Inclisiran | Rosuvastatin 20–40 + Inclisiran (+ Ezetimibe 10) | Bempedoic acid 180 + Ezetimibe 10 + Evolocumab, Alirocumab or inclisiran | ||
| Atorvastatin 20 + Ezetimibe 10 + Bempedoic acid 180 | Ezetimibe 10 + Inclisiran | |||
[i] Reproduced from Ray KK Eur Heart J, ehab718 [76]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab718

Figure 4
Selected WHF member survey responses (based on responses from 38 countries from all WHO regions) © World Heart Federation.
Table 2
Recommendations for population strategies, tests and therapies which should be available globally to manage lipids and ASCVD risk.
| LIC | LMIC | HIC | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population strategies (e.g., food labelling/regulation; tobacco legislation) | Y | Y | Y |
| Screening • Population strategy (e.g., all before 10/reverse cascade) • Individual Lipids (TC, HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, non-HDL-C) • Lp(a) • apo B • Imaging for risk stratification | Y Y | Y Y Y Y Y | Y Y Y Y Y |
| Reshaping Healthcare Systems e.g., Digital Solutions for data generation informing policy, disease management, decision support tools | Y | Y | Y |
| Access to therapies General (primary or secondary prevention including HeFH and HoFH) Generic high-intensity statins (essential medication) Generic statin-ezetimibe combination | Y Y Y | Y Y Y | Y Y Y |
| Statin intolerant patients Ezetimibe Bempedoic acid/bempedoic acid plus ezetimibe | Y | Y Y | Y Y |
| ASCVD or HeFH * PCSK9 Mab Inclisiran | (Based on LDL-C level and/or risk) Y Y | (Based on LDL-C level and/or risk) Y Y | |
| HoFH- Apheresis Lomitapide Evinacumab | Y Y Y | Y Y Y | Y Y Y |
| Icosapent ethyl ester | Y | Y | |
| Fibrates (as TG lowering therapies for prevention of pancreatitis) | Y | Y | Y |
[i] ** In LIC industry and governments should reach agreement on significantly discounted costs so that that those with inherited lipid disorders are not disenfranchised.

Figure 5
Actionable solutions to address cholesterol control as a means to reduce ASCVD © World Heart Federation.
Table 3
Five focus areas to implement actionable solutions to address cholesterol control as a means to reduce ASCVD.
| FOCUS AREA 1: IMPROVE AWARENESS | FOCUS 2: ROLL OUT POPULATION-BASED APPROACHES TO PREVENT ASCVD AND REDUCE POPULATION LEVEL CHOLESTEROL EXPOSURE THROUGHOUT THE LIFE-COURSE |
|---|---|
Health professionals
Patients and general populations [78]
|
|
| FOCUS 3: REINFORCE ASCVD RISK ASSESSMENT AND POPULATION SCREENING TO REDUCE UNDER-DIAGNOSIS OF GENETIC DYSLIPIDAEMIAS | FOCUS 4: IMPLEMENT SYSTEM-LEVEL APPROACHES TARGETING SPECIFICALLY HIGH-RISK INDIVIDUALS |
General population
Screening for FH and Lp(a)
Allocate sufficient resources for screening and diagnosis throughout the life-course, and risk stratification beginning in childhood on a fair basis, in the best interests of the child, similar to other genetic conditions. |
|
| FOCUS 5: ESTABLISH NATIONAL/REGIONAL SURVEILLANCE OF CHOLESTEROL AND ASCVD OUTCOMES | |
| |
| FOCUS 5: ESTABLISH NATIONAL/REGIONAL SURVEILLANCE OF CHOLESTEROL AND ASCVD OUTCOMES | |
| |

Figure 6
Redesigning healthcare strategies to focus on the burden of atherosclerosis throughout the life-course (panel A), with different population approaches using different ‘treatment’ strategies across different age ranges and hence the absolute numbers targeted (Panel B). Low-cost large scale forward thinking provides benefits in the longer term for those at high lifetime risk but low short-term risk and higher cost lower scale provide near time benefits in those at highest short-term risk. Panel C shows the current healthcare expenditure (exemplar) as a proportion of treating the consequences of ASCVD versus prevention of ASCVD and Panel D shows healthcare expenditure if current focus is shifted to prevention (exemplar). © World Heart Federation.
