Ezetimibe for the prevention of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality events

Persistence and Adherence to PCSK9 Inhibitor Monoclonal Antibodies Versus Ezetimibe in Real-World Settings

INTRODUCTION

The cardiovascular disease risk reduction benefits of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor monoclonal antibodies (PCSK9i mAb) and ezetimibe are dependent on remaining on treatment and being persistent and adherent. We estimated the percentage of patients on therapy, persistent and adherent at 182 and 365 days among US adults with health insurance who initiated a PCSK9i mAb (n = 16,588) or ezetimibe (n = 83,086) between July 2015 and December 2019.

METHODS

Using pharmacy fill claims, being on therapy was defined as having a day of medication supply in the last 60 of 182 and 365 days following treatment initiation, being persistent was defined as not having a gap of 60 days or more between the last day of supply from one prescription fill and the next fill, and being adherent was defined by having medication available to take on ≥ 80% of the 182 and 365 days following treatment initiation. We estimated multivariable-adjusted risk ratios for being persistent and adherent comparing patients initiating PCSK9i mAb versus ezetimibe using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

At 182 days following initiation, 80% and 68% were on therapy and 76% and 64% were persistent among patients who initiated a PCSK9i mAb and ezetimibe, respectively. Among patients who were on therapy and persistent at 182 days following initiation, 88% and 81% of those who initiated a PCSK9i mAb and ezetimibe, respectively, were on therapy at 365 days. Among those on therapy and persistent at 182 days following initiation, being persistent and being adherent at 365 days were each more common among PCSK9i mAb versus ezetimibe initiators (persistent: 82% versus 76%, multivariable-adjusted risk ratio 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.08; adherent: 74% versus 71%, multivariable-adjusted risk ratio 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.03).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest approaches to increase persistence and adherence to PCSK9i mAb and ezetimibe should be implemented prior to or within 182 days following treatment initiation.

Unraveling Potential Sex-Specific Effects of Cardiovascular Medications on Longevity Using Mendelian Randomization

BACKGROUND

Establishing the sex-specific efficacy of cardiovascular medications is pivotal to evidence-based clinical practice, potentially closing the gender gap in longevity. Trials large enough to establish sex differences are unavailable. This study evaluated sex-specific effects of commonly prescribed cardiovascular medications on lifespan.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a two-sample Mendelian randomization study, established genetic variants mimicking effects of lipid-lowering drugs, antihypertensives, and diabetes drugs were applied to genetic associations with lifespan proxied by UK Biobank maternal (n=412 937) and paternal (n=415 311) attained age. Estimates were obtained using inverse variance weighting, with sensitivity analyses where possible. For lipid-lowering drugs, genetically mimicked PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) inhibitors were associated with longer lifespan, particularly in men (2.39 years per SD low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction [95% CI, 0.42-4.36], P for interaction=0.14). Genetically mimicked treatments targeting APOC3, LPL, or possibly LDLR were associated with longer lifespan in both sexes. For antihypertensives, genetically mimicked β-blockers and calcium channel blockers were associated with longer lifespan, particularly in men (P for interaction=0.17 for β-blockers and 0.31 for calcium channel blockers). For diabetes drugs, genetically mimicked metformin was associated with longer lifespan in both sexes. No associations were found for genetically mimicked statins, ezetimibe, or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

PCSK9 inhibitors, β-blockers, and calcium channel blockers may prolong lifespan in the general population, particularly men. Treatments targeting APOC3, LPL, or LDLR and metformin may be relevant to both sexes. Whether other null findings are attributable to lack of efficacy requires investigation. Further investigation of repurposing should be conducted.

Expanding the therapeutic landscape: ezetimibe as non-statin therapy for dyslipidemia

Dyslipidemia is a significant risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and statins are the primary therapeutic options for reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. However, it can be challenging to achieve optimal LDL-C goals with statin monotherapy. Ezetimibe, a cholesterol absorption inhibitor, offers a potential non-statin therapy to optimize LDL-C management. Key clinical trials, such as IMPROVE-IT and RACING, have demonstrated that the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy leads to further decreases in LDL-C or significant decreases in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), particularly in patients with high ASCVD risk. Subsequent meta-analyses and clinical trials have further supported the beneficial effect of ezetimibe, suggesting additive decreases in LDL-C and MACEs, as well as pleiotropic effects. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the clinical implications of ezetimibe for managing dyslipidemia; it also evaluates the available evidence that supports the role of ezetimibe as an adjunct non-statin therapy for long-term use. However, the long-term pleiotropic effects of ezetimibe remain controversial because of limited clinical data. Therefore, additional research is needed to clarify its potential benefits beyond LDL-C reduction. Nonetheless, an understanding of the role of ezetimibe in dyslipidemia management will help clinicians to develop effective treatment strategies.

A review on the efficacy and safety of lipid-lowering drugs in neurodegenerative disease

There is a train of thought that lipid therapies may delay or limit the impact of neuronal loss and poor patient outcomes of neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs). A variety of medicines including lipid lowering modifiers (LLMs) are prescribed in NDDs. This paper summarizes the findings of clinical and observational trials including systematic reviews and meta-analyses relating to LLM use in NDDs published in the last 15 years thus providing an up-to-date evidence pool. Three databases were searched PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science using key terms relating to the review question. The findings confirm the benefit of LLMs in hyperlipidemic patients with or without cardiovascular risk factors due to their pleotropic effects. In NDDs LLMs are proposed to delay disease onset and slow the rate of progression. Clinical observations show that LLMs protect neurons from α-synuclein, tau, and Aβ toxicity, activation of inflammatory processes, and ultimately oxidative injury. Moreover, current meta-analyses and clinical trials indicated low rates of adverse events with LLMs when used as monotherapy. LLMs appear to have favorable safety and tolerability profiles with few patients stopping treatment due to severe adverse effects. Our collated evidence thus concludes that LLMs have a role in NDDs but further work is needed to understand the exact mechanism of action and reach more robust conclusions on where and when it is appropriate to use LLMs in NDDs in the clinic.

Lipid-lowering therapies for cardiovascular disease prevention and management in primary care: PEER umbrella systematic review of systematic reviews

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of lipid-lowering therapies used to prevent or manage cardiovascular disease including bile acid sequestrants (BAS), ezetimibe, fibrates, niacin, omega-3 supplements, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, and statins.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and a grey literature search.

STUDY SELECTION

Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials published between January 2017 and March 2022 looking at statins, ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, fibrates, BAS, niacin, and omega-3 supplements for preventing cardiovascular outcomes were selected. Outcomes of interest included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and adverse events.

SYNTHESIS

A total of 76 systematic reviews were included. Four randomized controlled trials were also included for BAS because no efficacy systematic review was identified. Statins significantly reduced MACE (6 systematic reviews; median risk ratio [RR]=0.74; interquartile range [IQR]=0.71 to 0.76), cardiovascular mortality (7 systematic reviews; median RR=0.85, IQR=0.83 to 0.86), and all-cause mortality (8 systematic reviews; median RR=0.91, IQR=0.88 to 0.92). Major adverse cardiovascular events were also significantly reduced by ezetimibe (3 systematic reviews; median RR=0.93, IQR=0.93 to 0.94), PCSK9 inhibitors (14 systematic reviews; median RR=0.84, IQR=0.83 to 0.87), and fibrates (2 systematic reviews; mean RR=0.86), but these interventions had no effect on cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Fibrates had no effect on any cardiovascular outcomes when added to a statin. Omega-3 combination supplements had no effect on MACE or all-cause mortality but significantly reduced cardiovascular mortality (5 systematic reviews; median RR=0.93, IQR=0.93 to 0.94). Eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester alone significantly reduced MACE (1 systematic review, RR=0.78) and cardiovascular mortality (2 systematic reviews; RRs of 0.82 and 0.82). In primary cardiovascular prevention, only statins showed consistent benefits on MACE (6 systematic reviews; median RR=0.75, IQR=0.73 to 0.78), cardiovascularall-cause mortality (7 systematic reviews, median RR=0.83, IQR=0.81 to 0.90), and all-cause mortality (8 systematic reviews; median RR=0.91, IQR=0.87 to 0.91).

CONCLUSION

Statins have the most consistent evidence for the prevention of cardiovascular complications with a relative risk reduction of about 25% for MACE and 10% to 15% for mortality. The addition of ezetimibe, a PCSK9 inhibitor, or eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester to a statin provides additional MACE risk reduction but has no effect on all-cause mortality.

Aggressive LDL-C Lowering and the Brain: Impact on Risk for Dementia and Hemorrhagic Stroke: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

The objective of this scientific statement is to evaluate contemporary evidence that either supports or refutes the conclusion that aggressive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering or lipid lowering exerts toxic effects on the brain, leading to cognitive impairment or dementia or hemorrhagic stroke. The writing group used literature reviews, references to published clinical and epidemiology studies, clinical and public health guidelines, authoritative statements, and expert opinion to summarize existing evidence and to identify gaps in current knowledge. Although some retrospective, case control, and prospective longitudinal studies suggest that statins and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering are associated with cognitive impairment or dementia, the preponderance of observational studies and data from randomized trials do not support this conclusion. The risk of a hemorrhagic stroke associated with statin therapy in patients without a history of cerebrovascular disease is nonsignificant, and achieving very low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol does not increase that risk. Data reflecting the risk of hemorrhagic stroke with lipid-lowering treatment among patients with a history of hemorrhagic stroke are not robust and require additional focused study.

Intensive Statin Therapy Versus Upfront Combination Therapy of Statin and Ezetimibe in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis Based on the PL-ACS Data

Background We aimed to compare statin monotherapy and upfront combination therapy of statin and ezetimibe in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). Methods and Results The study included consecutive patients with ACS included in the PL-ACS (Polish Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes), which is a national, multicenter, ongoing, prospective observational registry that is mandatory for patients with ACS hospitalized in Poland. Data were matched using the Mahalanobis distance within propensity score matching calipers. Multivariable stepwise logistic regression analysis, including all variables, was next used in propensity score matching analysis. Finally, 38 023 consecutive patients with ACS who were discharged alive were included in the analysis. After propensity score matching, 2 groups were analyzed: statin monotherapy (atorvastatin or rosuvastatin; n=768) and upfront combination therapy of statin and ezetimibe (n=768 patients). The difference in mortality between groups was significant during the follow-up and was present at 1 (5.9% versus 3.5%; P=0.041), 2 (7.8% versus 4.3%; P=0.019), and 3 (10.2% versus 5.5%; P=0.024) years of follow-up in favor of the upfront combination therapy, as well as for the overall period. For the treatment, rosuvastatin significantly improved prognosis compared with atorvastatin (odds ratio [OR], 0.790 [95% CI, 0.732-0.853]). Upfront combination therapy was associated with a significant reduction of all-cause mortality in comparison with statin monotherapy (OR, 0.526 [95% CI, 0.378-0.733]), with absolute risk reduction of 4.7% after 3 years (number needed to treat=21). Conclusions The upfront combination lipid-lowering therapy is superior to statin monotherapy for all-cause mortality in patients with ACS. These results suggest that in high-risk patients, such an approach, rather than a stepwise therapy approach, should be recommended.

Established and Emerging Lipid-Lowering Drugs for Primary and Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention

Despite treatment with statins, patients with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglycerides remain at increased risk for adverse cardiovascular events. Consequently, novel pharmaceutical drugs have been developed to control and modify the composition of blood lipids to ultimately prevent fatal cardiovascular events in patients with dyslipidaemia. This article reviews established and emerging lipid-lowering drugs regarding their mechanism of action, development stage, ongoing clinical trials, side effects, effect on blood lipids and reduction in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We conducted a keyword search to identify studies on established and emerging lipid modifying drugs. Results were summarized in a narrative overview. Established pharmaceutical treatment options include the Niemann-Pick-C1 like-1 protein (NPC1L1) inhibitor ezetimibe, the protein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors alirocumab and evolocumab, fibrates as peroxisome proliferator receptor alpha (PPAR-α) activators, and the omega-3 fatty acid icosapent ethyl. Statins are recommended as the first-line therapy for primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention in patients with hypercholesterinaemia and hypertriglyceridemia. For secondary prevention in hypercholesterinaemia, second-line options such as statin add-on or statin-intolerant treatments are ezetimibe, alirocumab and evolocumab. For secondary prevention in hypertriglyceridemia, second-line options such as statin add-on or statin-intolerant treatments are icosapent ethyl and fenofibrate. Robust data for these add-on therapeutics in primary cardiovascular prevention remains scarce. Recent biotechnological advances have led to the development of innovative small molecules (bempedoic acid, lomitapide, pemafibrate, docosapentaenoic and eicosapentaenoic acid), antibodies (evinacumab), antisense oligonucleotides (mipomersen, volanesorsen, pelcarsen, olezarsen), small interfering RNA (inclisiran, olpasiran), and gene therapies for patients with dyslipidemia. These molecules specifically target new cellular pathways, such as the adenosine triphosphate-citrate lyase (bempedoic acid), PCSK9 (inclisiran), angiopoietin-like 3 (ANGPTL3: evinacumab), microsomal triglyceride transfer protein (MTP: lomitapide), apolipoprotein B-100 (ApoB-100: mipomersen), apolipoprotein C-III (ApoC-III: volanesorsen, olezarsen), and lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a): pelcarsen, olpasiran). The authors are hopeful that the development of new treatment modalities alongside new therapeutic targets will further reduce patients' risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Apart from statins, data on new drugs' use in primary cardiovascular prevention remain scarce. For their swift adoption into clinical routine, these treatments must demonstrate safety and efficacy as well as cost-effectiveness in randomized cardiovascular outcome trials.

Pharmacological interventions for asymptomatic carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenosis is narrowing of the carotid arteries. Asymptomatic carotid stenosis is when this narrowing occurs in people without a history or symptoms of this disease. It is caused by atherosclerosis; that is, the build-up of fats, cholesterol, and other substances in and on the artery walls. Atherosclerosis is more likely to occur in people with several risk factors, such as diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, and smoking. As this damage can develop without symptoms, the first symptom can be a fatal or disabling stroke, known as ischaemic stroke. Carotid stenosis leading to ischaemic stroke is most common in men older than 70 years. Ischaemic stroke is a worldwide public health problem.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of asymptomatic carotid stenosis in preventing neurological impairment, ipsilateral major or disabling stroke, death, major bleeding, and other outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and three trials registers from their inception to 9 August 2022. We also checked the reference lists of any relevant systematic reviews identified and contacted specialists in the field for additional references to trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of publication status and language, comparing a pharmacological intervention to placebo, no treatment, or another pharmacological intervention for asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of the trials. A third author resolved disagreements when necessary. We assessed the evidence certainty for key outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 RCTs with 11,571 participants. Data for meta-analysis were available from only 22 studies with 6887 participants. The mean follow-up period was 2.5 years. None of the 34 included studies assessed neurological impairment and quality of life. Antiplatelet agent (acetylsalicylic acid) versus placebo Acetylsalicylic acid (1 study, 372 participants) may result in little to no difference in ipsilateral major or disabling stroke (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 2.47), stroke-related mortality (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.59), progression of carotid stenosis (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.71), and adverse events (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.59), compared to placebo (all low-certainty evidence). The effect of acetylsalicylic acid on major bleeding is very uncertain (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.53; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure neurological impairment or quality of life. Antihypertensive agents (metoprolol and chlorthalidone) versus placebo The antihypertensive agent, metoprolol, may result in no difference in ipsilateral major or disabling stroke (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to1.16; 1 study, 793 participants) and stroke-related mortality (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.94; 1 study, 793 participants) compared to placebo (both low-certainty evidence). However, chlorthalidone may slow the progression of carotid stenosis (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.91; 1 study, 129 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to placebo. Neither study measured neurological impairment, major bleeding, adverse events, or quality of life. Anticoagulant agent (warfarin) versus placebo The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of warfarin (1 study, 919 participants) on major bleeding (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.46; very low-certainty evidence), but it may reduce adverse events (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99; low-certainty evidence) compared to placebo. The study did not measure neurological impairment, ipsilateral major or disabling stroke, stroke-related mortality, progression of carotid stenosis, or quality of life. Lipid-lowering agents (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, probucol, and rosuvastatin) versus placebo or no treatment Lipid-lowering agents may result in little to no difference in ipsilateral major or disabling stroke (atorvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, and rosuvastatin; RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.53; 5 studies, 2235 participants) stroke-related mortality (lovastatin and pravastatin; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.29; 2 studies, 1366 participants), and adverse events (fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, probucol, and rosuvastatin; RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to1.10; 7 studies, 3726 participants) compared to placebo or no treatment (all low-certainty evidence). The studies did not measure neurological impairment, major bleeding, progression of carotid stenosis, or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although there is no high-certainty evidence to support pharmacological intervention, this does not mean that pharmacological treatments are ineffective in preventing ischaemic cerebral events, morbidity, and mortality. High-quality RCTs are needed to better inform the best medical treatment that may reduce the burden of carotid stenosis. In the interim, clinicians will have to use other sources of information.

Ezetimibe plus moderate-intensity statin versus high-intensity statin

Overview of: Kim BK, Hong SJ, Lee YJ, et al Long-term efficacy and safety of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (RACING): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2022;400:380-390.

Pearls & Oy-sters: Managing Cholesterol in a Patient With Statin Intolerance Due to Anti-HMG-CoA Reductase-Associated Myopathy

Statins are the first line of treatment for hypercholesterolemia and of prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). It is estimated that 1 in 4 Americans over the age of 40 years use statins. In rare cases, patients may develop an autoimmune myopathy associated with antibodies against 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR). Anti-HMGCR-associated myopathy requires immediate discontinuation of statins plus initiation of immunosuppressive therapy. Suspension of statin treatment worsens low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) control, leading to an increased risk of ASCVD and necessitating commencement of another treatment for dyslipidemia. Unfortunately, the management of dyslipidemia in these patients is still unclear. In this study, we describe the case of a 65-year-old woman with dyslipidemia treated with atorvastatin, who consulted for long-standing muscle pain associated with symmetrical proximal weakness. Laboratory tests showed elevated levels of creatine kinase and anti-HMGCR antibodies. She was diagnosed with an anti-HMGCR-associated myopathy and was successfully treated with corticosteroids and azathioprine as immunosuppressive therapy, followed by ezetimibe for LDL-C reduction. We present key findings for early recognition and treatment of anti-HMGCR-associated myopathy and give recommendations on how to manage hypercholesterolemia in a patient with statin intolerance due to this disease.

Real-World Evidence Evaluation on the Lipid Profile, Therapeutic Goals, and Safety of the Fixed-Dose Combination of Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe (Trezete®) in Dyslipidemia Patients

Introduction

Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death worldwide. The combination of statins and cholesterol-absorption inhibitors promotes the decrease in risk factors, such as high concentrations of LDL (low-density lipoproteins). The aim of the study was to evaluate changes in the lipid profile and the effect on therapeutic goals, as well as the safety of dyslipidemia patients treated with Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe (Trezete®).

Materials and Methods

A real-world evidence study was conducted with retrospective data collection through a review of clinical records from dyslipidemia patients treated with Trezete® in routine medical practice. Clinical records included results of biochemical markers before treatment and at least one follow up between weeks 8 and 16.

Results

The study included 103 patients' clinical records (55.4% men) with a mean age of 56.0 ± 13.0 years. More than 57% of the patients had mixed dyslipidemia and a median disease progression of 3.1 (IQR, 1.5; 9.1) years. Regarding LDL concentrations, 72.8% of the patients achieved therapeutic goals according to cardiovascular risk (CVR), which was statistically significant. Similarly, 94.1% achieved goals for total cholesterol (<200 mg/dL) and 56.0% for triglycerides (<150 mg/dL), a p value <0.001. No cardiovascular events were observed.

Conclusion

Trezete® shows an important clinical impact on CVR-related target markers during the treatment of dyslipidemia patients. It is relevant to mention that a significant percentage of patients achieved therapeutic goals during the first months of treatment. Fixed-dose combination therapy has shown to be as safe as monotherapy treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04862962.

Newer and Emerging LDL-C Lowering Agents and Implications for ASCVD Residual Risk

Multiple lines of evidence demonstrate that low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol causes atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Thus, targeting and lowering low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol is the principal strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease risk in primary and secondary prevention. Statin therapy is the foundation of lipid-lowering treatment, but adherence rates are low, and many individuals do not attain target low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol values. Additionally, most statin-treated patients are still at considerable atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk, emphasizing the need for more aggressive low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol-lowering therapies. The purpose of this review is to discuss new and emerging approaches to further lower low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, including inhibition of ATP-citrate lyase, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9, angiopoietin-related protein 3, and cholesteryl ester transfer protein.

Implications of Ezetimibe in Combination with Low- to Moderate-Intensity Atorvastatin Adjuvant Aspirin Therapy for Cerebrovascular Disease

Objective

To analyze the significance of ezetimibe in combination with low- to moderate-intensity atorvastatin adjuvant aspirin therapy for cerebrovascular disease.

Methods

110 patients with cerebrovascular disease treated in our hospital from June 2020 to June 2021 were selected and divided into 55 patients in the control group and 55 patients in the study group according to the lottery method. After a comprehensive examination, patients in the two groups should be given aspirin for treatment; the control group was treated with conventional dose of atorvastatin on top of the above, and the study group was given ezetimibe and medium-low-dose atorvastatin on top of aspirin treatment, activities of daily living (ADL) score, carotid artery intima-media thickness, lipid level, coagulation level, clinical effect, and adverse rate of the two groups which were tested and compared.

Results

After treatment, ADL score, high-density leptin cholesterol (HDL-C), and ATIII levels increased, while carotid artery media thickness, triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density leptin cholesterol (LDL-C), DD, PC, and hs-CRP levels decreased (P < 0.05). After treatment, ADL score, HDL-C, and ATIII levels were higher in the study group. The levels of carotid media thickness, TG, TC, LDL-C, DD, PC, and hs-CRP were significantly lower (P < 0.05). The clinical effect of the study group was outstanding (P < 0.05). The defect rate of the study group was lower than that of the control group, but there was no difference (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Ezetimibe combined with medium- and low-intensity atorvastatin with aspirin in the treatment of cerebrovascular diseases can effectively improve the coagulation function of patients, reduce the level of inflammatory factors in patients, and improve the level of blood lipids in patients, with high safety and worthy of clinical application.

Cost-Effectiveness of Icosapent Ethyl, Evolocumab, Alirocumab, Ezetimibe, or Fenofibrate in Combination with Statins Compared to Statin Monotherapy

Background

Despite treatment with statins, dyslipidaemia patients with elevated cholesterol- and triglyceride-levels remain at high residual risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). New lipid-lowering drugs must prevent the occurrence of MACE and exhibit cost-effectiveness for their successful adoption to clinical practice.

Objective

To assess the cost effectiveness of icosapent ethyl, fenofibrate, ezetimibe, evolocumab, and alirocumab in combination with statins compared to statin monotherapy for cardiovascular prevention from the perspective of UK’s National Health Service.

Methods

A Markov model simulated the progression of cardiovascular disease and MACE, including myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, and coronary revascularisation, in dyslipidaemia patients. The model was populated with cardiovascular outcome trial data for each drug. Cost and utility data were extracted from peer-reviewed literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is reported per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained in 2021 Great Britain Pounds (£).

Results

For primary cardiovascular prevention, icosapent ethyl increased QALYs by 0.79 and costs by £15,421 compared to statin monotherapy (ICER = £19,485/QALY). Fenofibrate yielded 0.62 additional QALYs at cost-savings of − £6127 (ICER = − £9932/QALY). For secondary prevention, the omega-3 fatty acid icosapent ethyl extended QALYs by 0.98 at costs of £12,981 compared to statin monotherapy (ICER = £13,285/QALY). Fenofibrate added 0.85 QALYs whilst saving − £637 (ICER = − £7472/QALY). Ezetimibe increased QALYs by 0.60 at cost reductions of − £2529 (ICER = − £4231/QALY). PCSK9 inhibitors provided QALYs of 0.53 and 0.86 at costs of £45,279 and £46,375 for evolocumab (ICER = £85,193/QALY) and alirocumab (ICER = £54,211/QALY), respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £25,000/QALY, there is a probability of 100% for icosapent ethyl (98% in primary prevention) and 0% for PCSK9 inhibitors to be cost effective in secondary prevention.

Conclusions

Icosapent ethyl is cost effective for primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention at an annual price of £2064 in the UK. For PCSK9 inhibitors, price discounts or prescription restrictions are necessary to achieve cost effectiveness.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40261-022-01173-3.

Step-by-step diagnosis and management of the nocebo/drucebo effect in statin-associated muscle symptoms patients: a position paper from the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP)

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3-5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)-what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe with or without statin therapy for cardiovascular risk reduction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the impact of ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors on cardiovascular outcomes in adults taking maximally tolerated statin therapy or who are statin intolerant.

DESIGN

Network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library up to 31 December 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials of ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors with ≥500 patients and follow-up of ≥6 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We performed frequentist fixed-effects network meta-analysis and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation) to assess certainty of evidence. Results included relative risks (RR) and absolute risks per 1000 patients treated for five years for non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. We estimated absolute risk differences assuming constant RR (estimated from network meta-analysis) across different baseline therapies and cardiovascular risk thresholds; the PREDICT risk calculator estimated cardiovascular risk in primary and secondary prevention. Patients were categorised at low to very high cardiovascular risk. A guideline panel and systematic review authors established the minimal important differences (MID) of 12 per 1000 for MI and 10 per 1000 for stroke.

RESULTS

We identified 14 trials assessing ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors among 83 660 adults using statins. Adding ezetimibe to statins reduced MI (RR 0.87 (95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.94)) and stroke (RR 0.82 (0.71 to 0.96)) but not all-cause mortality (RR 0.99 (0.92 to 1.06)) or cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.97 (0.87 to 1.09)). Similarly, adding PCSK9 inhibitor to statins reduced MI (0.81 (0.76 to 0.87)) and stroke (0.74 (0.64 to 0.85)) but not all-cause (0.95 (0.87 to 1.03)) or cardiovascular mortality (0.95 (0.87 to 1.03)). Among adults with very high cardiovascular risk, adding PCSK9 inhibitor was likely to reduce MI (16 per 1000) and stroke (21 per 1000) (moderate to high certainty); whereas adding ezetimibe was likely to reduce stroke (14 per 1000), but the reduction of MI (11 per 1000) (moderate certainty) did not reach MID. Adding ezetimibe to PCSK9 inhibitor and statin may reduce stroke (11 per 1000), but the reduction of MI (9 per 1000) (low certainty) did not reach MID. Adding PCSK9 inhibitors to statins and ezetimibe may reduce MI (14 per 1000) and stroke (17 per 1000) (low certainty). Among adults with high cardiovascular risk, adding PCSK9 inhibitor probably reduced MI (12 per 1000) and stroke (16 per 1000) (moderate certainty); adding ezetimibe probably reduced stroke (11 per 1000), but the reduction in MI did not achieve MID (8 per 1000) (moderate certainty). Adding ezetimibe to PCSK9 inhibitor and statins did not reduce outcomes beyond MID, while adding PCSK9 inhibitor to ezetimibe and statins may reduce stroke (13 per 1000). These effects were consistent in statin-intolerant patients. Among moderate and low cardiovascular risk groups, adding PCSK9 inhibitor or ezetimibe to statins yielded little or no benefit for MI and stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors may reduce non-fatal MI and stroke in adults at very high or high cardiovascular risk who are receiving maximally tolerated statin therapy or are statin-intolerant, but not in those with moderate and low cardiovascular risk.

Etiology and Management of Dyslipidemia in Patients With Cancer

Patients with cancer are now living longer than ever before due to the growth and expansion of highly effective antineoplastic therapies. Many of these patients face additional health challenges, of which cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading contributor to morbidity and mortality. CVD and cancer share common biological mechanisms and risk factors, including lipid abnormalities. A better understanding of the relationship between lipid metabolism and cancer can reveal strategies for cancer prevention and CVD risk reduction. Several anticancer treatments adversely affect lipid levels, increasing triglycerides and/or LDL-cholesterol. The traditional CVD risk assessment tools do not include cancer-specific parameters and may underestimate the true long-term CVD risk in this patient population. Statins are the mainstay of therapy in both primary and secondary CVD prevention. The role of non-statin therapies, including ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, bempedoic acid and icosapent ethyl in the management of lipid disorders in patients with cancer remains largely unknown. A contemporary cancer patient needs a personalized comprehensive cardiovascular assessment, management of lipid abnormalities, and prevention of late CVD to achieve optimal overall outcomes.

Lipid-Targeted Atherosclerotic Risk Reduction in Older Adults: A Review

Aggressive lipid-lowering lifestyle modifications and pharmacologic therapies are the cornerstones of the primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events. While statins are highly effective, inexpensive, and generally well-tolerated medications, many clinicians and patients express uncertainty regarding the necessity of statin treatment in older adults. Citing concerns such as polypharmacy, muscle symptoms, and even potential cognitive changes with statins, many patients and health care providers elect to de-intensify or discontinue statin therapy during the process of aging. A lack of clear representation of older individuals in many clinical trials and practice guidelines may contribute to the ambiguity. However, the recently prevailing data and practice patterns supporting the benefits, safety, and tolerability of a variety of lipid-lowering therapeutics in older adults are discussed here, with particular mention of a potential protective effect from incident dementia among a statin-treated geriatric population and an admonishment of the historical concept of “too-low” low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels.

Guía de práctica clínica mexicana para el diagnóstico y tratamiento de las dislipidemias y enfermedad cardiovascular aterosclerótica

ANTECEDENTES

Las enfermedades cardiovasculares son la principal causa mundial de mortalidad y México no es la excepción. Los datos epidemiológicos obtenidos en 1990 mostraron que los padecimientos cardiovasculares representaron el 19.8% de todas las causas de muerte en nuestro país; esta cifra se incrementó de manera significativa a un 25.5% para 2015. Diversas encuestas nacionales sugieren que más del 60% de la población adulta tiene al menos un factor de riesgo para padecer enfermedades cardiovasculares (obesidad o sobrepeso, hipertensión, tabaquismo, diabetes, dislipidemias). Por otro lado, datos de la Organización Panamericana de la Salud han relacionado el proceso de aterosclerosis como la primer causa de muerte prematura, reduciendo la expectativa de vida de manera sensible, lo que tiene una enorme repercusión social.

OBJETIVO

Este documento constituye la guía de práctica clínica (GPC) elaborada por iniciativa de la Sociedad Mexicana de Cardiología en colaboración con la Sociedad Mexicana de Nutrición y Endocrinología, A.C., Asociación Nacional de Cardiólogos de México, A.C., Asociación Mexicana para la Prevención de la Aterosclerosis y sus Complicaciones, A.C., Comité Normativo Nacional de Medicina General, A.C., Colegio Nacional de Medicina Geriátrica, A.C., Colegio de Medicina Interna de México, A.C., Sociedad Mexicana de Angiología y Cirugía Vascular y Endovenosa, A.C., Instituto Mexicano de Investigaciones Nefrológicas, A.C. y la Academia Mexicana de Neurología, A.C.; con el apoyo metodológico de la Agencia Iberoamericana de Desarrollo y Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud, con la finalidad de establecer recomendaciones basadas en la mejor evidencia disponible y consensuadas por un grupo interdisciplinario de expertos. El objetivo de este documento es el de brindar recomendaciones basadas en evidencia para ayudar a los tomadores de decisión en el diagnóstico y tratamiento de las dislipidemias en nuestro país.

MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS

Este documento cumple con estándares internacionales de calidad, como los descritos por el Instituto de Medicina de EE.UU., el Instituto de Excelencia Clínica de Gran Bretaña, la Red Colegiada para el Desarrollo de Guías de Escocia y la Red Internacional de Guías de Práctica Clínica. Se integró un grupo multidisciplinario de expertos clínicos y metodólogos con experiencia en revisiones sistemáticas de la literatura y el desarrollo de guías de práctica clínica. Se consensuó un documento de alcances, se establecieron las preguntas clínicas relevantes, se identificó de manera exhaustiva la mejor evidencia disponible evaluada críticamente en revisiones sistemáticas de la literatura y se desarrollaron las recomendaciones clínicas. Se utilizó la metodología de Panel Delphi modificado para lograr un nivel de consenso adecuado en cada una de las recomendaciones contenidas en esta GPC.

RESULTADOS

Se consensuaron 23 preguntas clínicas que dieron origen a sus respectivas recomendaciones clínicas.

CONCLUSIONES

Esperamos que este documento contribuya a la mejor toma de decisiones clínicas y se convierta en un punto de referencia para los clínicos y pacientes en el manejo de las dislipidemias y esto contribuya a disminuir la morbilidad y mortalidad derivada de los eventos cardiovasculares ateroscleróticos en nuestro país.

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of mortality worldwide and Mexico is no exception. The epidemiological data obtained in 1990 showed that cardiovascular diseases represented 19.8% of all causes of death in our country. This figure increased significantly to 25.5% for 2015. Some national surveys suggest that more than 60% of the adult population has at least one risk factor for cardiovascular disease (obesity or overweight, hypertension, smoking, diabetes, dyslipidemias). On the other hand, data from the Pan American Health Organization have linked the process of atherosclerosis as the first cause of premature death, significantly reducing life expectancy, which has enormous social repercussions.

OBJECTIVE

This document constitutes the Clinical Practice Guide (CPG) prepared at the initiative of the Mexican Society of Cardiology in collaboration with the Mexican Society of Nutrition and Endocrinology, AC, National Association of Cardiologists of Mexico, AC, Mexican Association for the Prevention of Atherosclerosis and its Complications, AC, National Normative Committee of General Medicine, AC, National College of Geriatric Medicine, AC, College of Internal Medicine of Mexico, AC, Mexican Society of Angiology and Vascular and Endovenous Surgery, AC, Mexican Institute of Research Nephrological, AC and the Mexican Academy of Neurology, A.C.; with the methodological support of the Ibero-American Agency for the Development and Evaluation of Health Technologies, in order to establish recommendations based on the best available evidence and agreed upon by an interdisciplinary group of experts. The objective of this document is to provide evidence-based recommendations to help decision makers in the diagnosis and treatment of dyslipidemias in our country.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This document complies with international quality standards, such as those described by the Institute of Medicine of the USA, the Institute of Clinical Excellence of Great Britain, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network and the Guidelines International Network. A multidisciplinary group of clinical experts and methodologists with experience in systematic reviews of the literature and the development of clinical practice guidelines was formed. A scope document was agreed upon, relevant clinical questions were established, the best available evidence critically evaluated in systematic literature reviews was exhaustively identified, and clinical recommendations were developed. The modified Delphi Panel methodology was used to achieve an adequate level of consensus in each of the recommendations contained in this CPG.

RESULTS

23 clinical questions were agreed upon which gave rise to their respective clinical recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

We consider that this document contributes to better clinical decision-making and becomes a point of reference for clinicians and patients in the management of dyslipidemias and this contributes to reducing the morbidity and mortality derived from atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in our country.

Safety of ezetimibe in lipid-lowering treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and cohort studies

Objective

To determine the harms of ezetimibe in people who need lipid-lowering treatment.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources

Randomised controlled trials and cohort studies.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

Studies comparing ezetimibe with placebo, standard care, or other lipid-lowering agents in people who need lipid-lowering treatment with a follow-up duration of at least six months (or 24 weeks). The relative effects for potential harms of ezetimibe were pooled by use of random effect pairwise meta-analyses for randomised controlled trials and the evidence from observational studies was narratively summarised. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

Results

48 randomised controlled trials with 28 444 participants (median follow-up 34 weeks, range 24-312 weeks) and four observational studies with 1667 participants (median follow-up 282 weeks, range 72-400 weeks) were included. The meta-analyses of randomised trials showed moderate to high certainty that ezetimibe was not associated with cancer (relative risk 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.92 to 1.11), fractures (0.90; 0.74 to 1.10), discontinuation due to any adverse event (0.87; 0.74 to 1.03), gastrointestinal adverse events leading to discontinuation (1.34; 0.58 to 3.08), myalgia or muscular pain leading to discontinuation (0.82; 0.51 to 1.33), neurocognitive events (1.48; 0.58 to 3.81), or new-onset diabetes (0.88; 0.61 to 1.28). The narrative analysis of observational studies provided consistent findings. No credible subgroup effects were identified for the harm outcomes, including shorter versus longer follow-up duration of trials.

Conclusions

Ezetimibe results in little to no difference in adverse events or other undesirable effects compared with placebo, usual care or other lipid-lowering agents.

Review registration

PROSPERO CRD42020187437.

Drugs in secondary stroke prevention

After an ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack, patients have a high risk of having another stroke. Secondary stroke prevention includes antiplatelet therapy, statins and antihypertensives

Aspirin, clopidogrel, or a combination of aspirin with dipyridamole are first-line options for secondary stroke prevention in the absence of atrial fibrillation

Dual antiplatelet therapy has a benefit in the first three weeks after stroke, but patients should change to a single antiplatelet drug after this time

Anticoagulants are indicated if the patient has atrial fibrillation. Avoid combinations of anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs

Patients should be started on statins after an ischaemic stroke. High doses are recommended even if cholesterol concentrations are normal

Antihypertensive drugs are recommended for all patients with systolic blood pressures greater than 140/90 mmHg. ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers and diuretics are first-line options

Synthesis and Modeling of Ezetimibe Analogues

Ezetimibe is a well-known drug that lowers blood cholesterol levels by reducing its absorption in the small intestine when joining to Niemann-Pick C1-like protein (NPC1L1). A ligand-based study on ezetimibe analogues is reported, together with one-hit synthesis, highlighted in the study. A convenient asymmetric synthesis of (2S,3S)-N-α-(R)-methylbenzyl-3-methoxycarbonylethyl-4-methoxyphenyl β-lactam is described starting from Baylis-Hillman adducts. The route involves a domino process: allylic acetate rearrangement, stereoselective Ireland-Claisen rearrangement and asymmetric Michael addition, which provides a δ-amino acid derivative with full stereochemical control. A subsequent inversion of ester and acid functionality paves the way to the lactam core after monodebenzylation and lactam formation. It also shows interesting results when it comes to a pharmacophore study based on ezetimibe as the main ligand in lowering blood cholesterol levels, revealing which substituents on the azetidine-2-one ring are more similar to the ezetimibe skeleton and will more likely bind to NPC1L1 than ezetimibe.

Brown Algae Potential as a Functional Food against Hypercholesterolemia: Review

Brown algae have been part of the human diet for hundreds of years, however, in recent years, commercial and scientific interest in brown algae has increased due to the growing demand for healthier diet by the world population. Brown algae and its metabolites, such as carotenoids, polysaccharides, phlorotannins, and proteins, have been associated with multiple beneficial health effects for different diseases, such as cardiovascular diseases, one of the main causes of death in Europe. Since high blood cholesterol levels are one of the major cardiovascular risks, this review intends to provide an overview of current knowledge about the anti-hypercholesterolemic effect of different brown algae species and/or their isolated compounds.

Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors

Given rapid advancements in medical science, it is often challenging for the busy clinician to remain up-to-date on the fundamental and multifaceted aspects of preventive cardiology and maintain awareness of the latest guidelines applicable to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. The “American Society for Preventive Cardiology (ASPC) Top Ten CVD Risk Factors 2021 Update” is a summary document (updated yearly) regarding CVD risk factors. This “ASPC Top Ten CVD Risk Factors 2021 Update” summary document reflects the perspective of the section authors regarding ten things to know about ten sentinel CVD risk factors. It also includes quick access to sentinel references (applicable guidelines and select reviews) for each CVD risk factor section. The ten CVD risk factors include unhealthful nutrition, physical inactivity, dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia, high blood pressure, obesity, considerations of select populations (older age, race/ethnicity, and sex differences), thrombosis/smoking, kidney dysfunction and genetics/familial hypercholesterolemia. For the individual patient, other CVD risk factors may be relevant, beyond the CVD risk factors discussed here. However, it is the intent of the “ASPC Top Ten CVD Risk Factors 2021 Update” to provide a succinct overview of things to know about ten common CVD risk factors applicable to preventive cardiology.

Novel therapeutic targets and agents for pediatric dyslipidemia

Landmark studies have convincingly demonstrated that atherosclerosis begins in youth. While generally asymptomatic, an increasing number of youth with disorders of lipid and lipoprotein metabolism, such as familial hypercholesterolemia, are being identified through selective and universal screening. While a heart healthy lifestyle is the foundation of treatment for all youth with dyslipidemia, lipid-lowering therapy may be required by some to prevent morbidity and premature mortality, especially when initiated at a young age. When appropriate, use of statins has become standard of care for reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, while fibrates may be beneficial in helping to lower triglycerides. Many therapeutic options commonly used in adults are not yet approved for use in youth less than 18 years of age. Although currently available lipid-lowering therapy is well tolerated and safe when administered to youth, response to treatment may vary and some conditions lack an efficient therapeutic option. Thus, newer agents are needed to aid in management. Many are in development and clinical trials in youth are currently in progress but will require FDA approval before becoming commercially available. Many utilize novel approaches to favorably alter lipid and lipoprotein metabolism. In the absence of long-term outcome data of youth who were treated beginning at an early age, clinical registries may prove to be useful in monitoring safety and efficacy and help to inform clinical decision-making. In this manuscript, we review currently available and novel therapeutic agents in development for the treatment of elevated cholesterol and triglycerides.

Visceral Obesity and Its Shared Role in Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease: A Scoping Review of the Pathophysiology and Pharmacological Treatments

The association between obesity, cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been demonstrated in animal and epidemiological studies. However, the specific role of visceral obesity on cancer and CVD remains unclear. Visceral adipose tissue (VAT) is a complex and metabolically active tissue, that can produce different adipokines and hormones, responsible for endocrine-metabolic comorbidities. This review explores the potential mechanisms related to VAT that may also be involved in cancer and CVD. In addition, we discuss the shared pharmacological treatments which may reduce the risk of both diseases. This review highlights that chronic inflammation, molecular aspects, metabolic syndrome, secretion of hormones and adiponectin associated to VAT may have synergistic effects and should be further studied in relation to cancer and CVD. Reductions in abdominal and visceral adiposity improve insulin sensitivity, lipid profile and cytokines, which consequently reduce the risk of CVD and some cancers. Several medications have shown to reduce visceral and/or subcutaneous fat. Further research is needed to investigate the pathophysiological mechanisms by which visceral obesity may cause both cancer and CVD. The role of visceral fat in cancer and CVD is an important area to advance. Public health policies to increase public awareness about VAT's role and ways to manage or prevent it are needed.

Management of Dyslipidemia for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Reduction: Synopsis of the 2020 Updated U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline

DESCRIPTION

In June 2020, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) released a joint update of their clinical practice guideline for managing dyslipidemia to reduce cardiovascular disease risk in adults. This synopsis describes the major recommendations.

METHODS

On 6 August to 9 August 2019, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group (EBPWG) convened a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the Institute of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions, systematically searched and evaluated the literature (English-language publications from 1 December 2013 to 16 May 2019), and developed 27 recommendations and a simple 1-page algorithm. The recommendations were graded by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This synopsis summarizes key features of the guideline in 7 crucial areas: targeting of statin dose (not low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals), additional tests for risk prediction, primary and secondary prevention, laboratory testing, physical activity, and nutrition.

Efficacy of Statin/Ezetimibe for Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Asian Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Several clinical trials have investigated the effect of statin/ezetimibe combination therapy on secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in the Asian population.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to summarize study results regarding the effect of statin/ezetimibe combination therapy on lipid parameters and highly sensitive C-reactive protein (HsCRP) biomarkers in ASCVD patients from Asian countries.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for relevant papers published from 2008 to June 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that (1) were conducted in ASCVD patients in Asian countries; (2) examined the effects of statin/ezetimibe combination therapies compared with a control group; and (3) reported sufficient data on lipid parameters and HsCRP biomarkers. The results were reported as weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. Funnel plots and Egger's regression test were used to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-four RCTs were reviewed and 20 were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 4344 participants were included (n = 2197 in the intervention group and n = 2147 in the control group), and the intervention durations ranged from 6 weeks to 3.6 years. Ezetimibe coadministered with statin therapy, compared with control treatment, significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; n = 20 studies) [WMD  - 0.39 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.73 to - 0.05; p < 0.001], triglycerides (TG; n = 18 studies) [WMD - 0.23 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.33 to - 0.13; p < 0.001], and total cholesterol (TC; n = 17 studies) [WMD - 0.31 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.45 to - 0.17; p < 0.001). Although the effect of statin/ezetimibe combinations on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; n = 17 studies) [WMD 0.02 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.05 to 0.09; p < 0.001) was very minimal and no effect was observed on HsCRP levels (n = 11 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that statin/ezetimibe combinations reduced LDL-C, TC, and TG levels but had minimal effects on HDL-C and no effect HsCRP biomarkers in ASCVD patients. The statin/ezetimibe therapy enabled a more effective reduction in LDL-C levels; however, the duration of the treatment was suboptimal.

Cost-Effectiveness of Evolocumab Therapy for Myocardial Infarction: The Chinese Healthcare Perspective

PURPOSE

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors are an indispensable lipid-lowering treatment option, but their cost-effectiveness has been questioned. This study aimed to perform a health economic evaluation of evolocumab versus placebo in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) in China.

METHODS

A Markov cohort state-transition model was developed in decision analysis software to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved. The simulation subjects could undergo non-fatal MI and/or stroke, or vascular or non-vascular death event. We integrated the Chinese population-specific demographics and event rates with the risk reduction of evolocumab based on the FOURIER trial and/or lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Age-related change, event costs and utilities were included from published sources.

RESULTS

At its current list price [33,748 Chinese yuan (CNY) annually per person], the ICER for evolocumab therapy was 927,713 CNY per QALY gained when integrating the FOURIER trial with absolute reduction of LDL-C. The probability of cost-effectiveness of evolocumab versus placebo was 1.96%, with a generally accepted threshold of 212,676 CNY per QALY gained. A reduction in acquisition price by approximately 70% (to less than 10,255 CNY annually) was needed to be cost-effective. Alternative scenario analyses of therapeutic benefit showed that the ICER for evolocumab in MI patients with uncontrolled familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) was 187,736 CNY per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

Evolocumab in patients with MI was not cost-effective based on the price in 2019 in China; however, treatment with evolocumab was more favorable in MI patients with FH.

Efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bempedoic acid is a first-in-class lipid-lowering drug recommended by guidelines for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. Our objective was to estimate its average effect on plasma lipids in humans and its safety profile.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase II and III randomized controlled trials on bempedoic acid (PROSPERO: CRD42019129687). PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases were searched, with no language restriction, from inception to 5 August 2019. We included 10 RCTs (n = 3,788) comprising 26 arms (active arm [n = 2,460]; control arm [n = 1,328]). Effect sizes for changes in lipids and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) serum concentration were expressed as mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For safety analyses, odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Bempedoic acid significantly reduced total cholesterol (MD -14.94%; 95% CI -17.31%, -12.57%; p < 0.001), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD -18.17%; 95% CI -21.14%, -15.19%; p < 0.001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD -22.94%; 95% CI -26.63%, -19.25%; p < 0.001), low-density lipoprotein particle number (MD -20.67%; 95% CI -23.84%, -17.48%; p < 0.001), apolipoprotein B (MD -15.18%; 95% CI -17.41%, -12.95%; p < 0.001), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD -5.83%; 95% CI -6.14%, -5.52%; p < 0.001), high-density lipoprotein particle number (MD -3.21%; 95% CI -6.40%, -0.02%; p = 0.049), and hsCRP (MD -27.03%; 95% CI -31.42%, -22.64%; p < 0.001). Bempedoic acid did not significantly modify triglyceride level (MD -1.51%; 95% CI -3.75%, 0.74%; p = 0.189), very-low-density lipoprotein particle number (MD 3.79%; 95% CI -9.81%, 17.39%; p = 0.585), and apolipoprotein A-1 (MD -1.83%; 95% CI -5.23%, 1.56%; p = 0.290). Treatment with bempedoic acid was positively associated with an increased risk of discontinuation of treatment (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.06, 1.76; p = 0.015), elevated serum uric acid (OR 3.55; 95% CI 1.03, 12.27; p = 0.045), elevated liver enzymes (OR 4.28; 95% CI 1.34, 13.71; p = 0.014), and elevated creatine kinase (OR 3.79; 95% CI 1.06, 13.51; p = 0.04), though it was strongly associated with a decreased risk of new onset or worsening diabetes (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.39, 0.90; p = 0.01). The main limitation of this meta-analysis is related to the relatively small number of individuals involved in the studies, which were often short or middle term in length.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that bempedoic acid has favorable effects on lipid profile and hsCRP levels and an acceptable safety profile. Further well-designed studies are needed to explore its longer-term safety.

Statin Use Associates With Risk of Type 2 Diabetes via Epigenetic Patterns at ABCG1

Statin is the medication most widely prescribed to reduce plasma cholesterol levels. Yet, how the medication contributes to diabetes risk and impaired glucose metabolism is not clear. This study aims to examine the epigenetic mechanisms of ABCG1 through which statin use associates with risk of type 2 diabetes. We determined the association between the statin use, DNA methylation at ABCG1 and type 2 diabetes/glycemic traits in the Framingham Heart Study Offspring (FHS, n = 2741), with validation in the Women’s Health Initiative Study (WHI, n = 2020). The causal effect of statin use on the risk of type 2 diabetes was examined using a two-step Mendelian randomization approach. Next, based on transcriptome analysis, we determined the links between the medication-associated epigenetic status of ABCG1 and biological pathways on the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes. Our results showed that DNA methylation levels at cg06500161 of ABCG1 were positively associated with the use of statin, type 2 diabetes and related traits (fasting glucose and insulin) in FHS and WHI. Two-step Mendelian randomization suggested a causal effect of statin use on type 2 diabetes and related traits through epigenetic mechanisms, specifically, DNA methylation at cg06500161. Our results highlighted that gene expression of ABCG1, ABCA1 and ACSL3, involved in both cholesterol metabolism and glycemic pathways, was inversely associated with statin use, CpG methylation, and diabetic signatures. We concluded that DNA methylation site cg06500161 at ABCG1 is a mediator of the association between statins and risk of type 2 diabetes.

Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors ("ASPC Top Ten - 2020")

Preventive cardiology involves understanding and managing multiple cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. Given the rapid advancements in medical science, it may be challenging for the busy clinician to remain up-to-date on the multifaceted and fundamental aspects of CVD prevention, and maintain awareness of the newest applicable guidelines. The "American Society for Preventive Cardiology (ASPC) Top Ten 2020" summarizes ten essential things to know about ten important CVD risk factors, listed in tabular formats. The ten CVD risk factors include unhealthful nutrition, physical inactivity, dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia, high blood pressure, obesity, considerations of select populations (older age, race/ethnicity, and gender), thrombosis/smoking, kidney dysfunction and genetics/familial hypercholesterolemia. For the individual patient, other CVD risk factors may be relevant, beyond the CVD risk factors discussed here. However, it is the intent of the "ASPC Top Ten 2020" to provide a succinct overview of things to know about ten common CVD risk factors applicable to preventive cardiology.

Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: Updated review of contemporary guidance and literature

Cardiovascular disease remains a substantial concern in terms of global mortality and morbidity, while prevalence of cardiovascular disease is increasing as treatment modalities improve survival. With an ageing population and increasing costs of chronic medical care, primary prevention of cardiovascular disease is an important target for healthcare providers. Since the previous iteration of this paper, new international guidelines have been produced regarding hypertension and lipid lowering therapies, whilst there is a growing body of evidence and new therapies emerging in other areas of lifestyle and pharmacotherapeutic intervention. This review outlines emerging evidence in the field and compares and contrasts contemporary recommendations from European and American guidelines.