Impact of atorvastatin and omega-3 ethyl esters 90 on plasma plant sterol concentrations and cholesterol synthesis in type 2 diabetes: A randomised placebo controlled factorial trial

Association Between Omega-3 Fatty Acid Intake and Dyslipidemia: A Continuous Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background Previous results provide supportive but not conclusive evidence for the use of omega-3 fatty acids to reduce blood lipids and prevent events of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, but the strength and shape of dose-response relationships remain elusive. Methods and Results This study included 90 randomized controlled trials, reported an overall sample size of 72 598 participants, and examined the association between omega-3 fatty acid (docosahexaenoic acid, eicosapentaenoic acid, or both) intake and blood lipid changes. Random-effects 1-stage cubic spline regression models were used to study the mean dose-response association between daily omega-3 fatty acid intake and changes in blood lipids. Nonlinear associations were found in general and in most subgroups, depicted as J-shaped dose-response curves for low-/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. However, we found evidence of an approximately linear dose-response relationship for triglyceride and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol among the general population and more evidently in populations with hyperlipidemia and overweight/obesity who were given medium to high doses (>2 g/d). Conclusions This dose-response meta-analysis demonstrates that combined intake of omega-3 fatty acids near linearly lowers triglyceride and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Triglyceride-lowering effects might provide supportive evidence for omega-3 fatty acid intake to prevent cardiovascular events.

Effects of statin therapy on glycemic control and insulin resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To update the evidence about the diabetogenic effect of statins.

METHODS

We searched for randomized-controlled trials reporting the effects of statin therapy on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and/or homeostatic model insulin resistance (i.e., HOMA-IR) as indexes of diabetes. Studies were classified between the ones testing normal vs individuals with already altered glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 6.5%; and HOMA-IR ≥ 2.15). Furthermore, studies were separated by statin type and dosage prescribed. Data are presented as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 67 studies were included in the analysis (>25,000 individuals). In individuals with altered glycemic control, statins increased HbA1c levels (MD 0.21%, 95% CI 0.16-to-0.25) and HOMA-IR index (MD 0.31, 95% CI 0.24-to-0.38). In individuals with normal glycemic control, statin increased HbA1c (MD 1.33%, 95% CI 1.31-to-1.35) and HOMA-IR (MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.41-to-0.58) in comparison to the placebo groups. The dose or type of statins did not modulate the diabetogenic effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Statins, slightly but significantly raise indexes of diabetes in individuals with adequate or altered glycemic control. The diabetogenic effect does not seem to be influenced by the type or dosage of statin prescribed.

Could nutrient supplements provide additional glycemic control in diabetes management? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of as an add-on nutritional supplementation therapy

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the antidiabetic effect of pharmaconutrients as an add-on in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients by pooling data from currently available randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data sources included the PubMed and EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. RCTs reporting changes in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), or homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) levels following add-on pharmaconutritional therapies for T2DM patients consuming antidiabetic drugs were targeted. Using random-effects meta-analyses, we identified pharmaconutrients with effects on glycemic outcomes. Heterogeneity among studies was presented using I² values. Among 9537 articles, 119 RCTs with nine pharmaconutrients (chromium; coenzyme Q10; omega-3 fatty acids; vitamins C, D, and E; alpha-lipoic acid; selenium; and zinc) were included. Chromium (HbA1c, FBG, and HOMA-IR), coenzyme Q10 (HbA1c and FBG), vitamin C (HbA1c and FBG), and vitamin E (HbA1c and HOMA-IR) significantly improved glycemic control. Baseline HbA1c level and study duration influenced the effects of chromium and vitamin E on HbA1c level. Sensitivity analyses did not modify the pooled effects of pharmaconutrients on glycemic control. Administration of chromium, coenzyme Q10, and vitamins C and E for T2DM significantly improved glycemic control. This study has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018115229).

Effect of atorvastatin on testosterone levels

BACKGROUND

Statins are one of the most prescribed classes of drugs worldwide. Atorvastatin, the most prescribed statin, is currently used to treat conditions such as hypercholesterolaemia and dyslipidaemia. By reducing the level of cholesterol, which is the precursor of the steroidogenesis pathway, atorvastatin may cause a reduction in levels of testosterone and other androgens. Testosterone and other androgens play important roles in biological functions. A potential reduction in androgen levels, caused by atorvastatin might cause negative effects in most settings. In contrast, in the setting of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), reducing excessive levels of androgens with atorvastatin could be beneficial.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the magnitude of the effect of atorvastatin on total testosterone in both males and females, compared to placebo or no treatment. Secondary objectives To quantify the magnitude of the effects of atorvastatin on free testosterone, sex hormone binding globin (SHBG), androstenedione, dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate (DHEAS) concentrations, free androgen index (FAI), and withdrawal due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in both males and females, compared to placebo or no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to 9 November 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase; ;two international trials registries, and the websites of the US Food and Drug Administration, the European Patent Office and the Pfizer pharmaceutical corporation. These searches had no language restrictions. We also contacted authors of relevant articles regarding further published and unpublished work.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of daily atorvastatin for at least three weeks, compared with placebo or no treatment, and assessing change in testosterone levels in males or females.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the citations, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We used the mean difference (MD) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) to report the effect size of continuous outcomes,and the risk ratio (RR) to report effect sizes of the sole dichotomous outcome (WDAEs). We used a fixed-effect meta-analytic model to combine effect estimates across studies, and risk ratio to report effect size of the dichotomous outcomes. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs involving 265 participants who completed the study and their data was reported. Participants in two of the studies were male with normal lipid profile or mild dyslipidaemia (N = 140); the mean age of participants was 68 years. Participants in four of the studies were female with PCOS (N = 125); the mean age of participants was 32 years. We found no significant difference in testosterone levels in males between atorvastatin and placebo, MD -0.20 nmol/L (95% CI -0.77 to 0.37). In females, atorvastatin may reduce total testosterone by -0.27 nmol/L (95% CI -0.50 to -0.04), FAI by -2.59 nmol/L (95% CI -3.62 to -1.57), androstenedione by -1.37 nmol/L (95% CI -2.26 to -0.49), and DHEAS by -0.63 μmol/l (95% CI -1.12 to -0.15). Furthermore, compared to placebo, atorvastatin increased SHBG concentrations in females by 3.11 nmol/L (95% CI 0.23 to 5.99). We identified no studies in healthy females (i.e. females with normal testosterone levels) or children (under age 18). Importantly, no study reported on free testosterone levels.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant difference between atorvastatin and placebo on the levels of total testosterone in males. In females with PCOS, atorvastatin lowered the total testosterone, FAI, androstenedione, and DHEAS. The certainty of evidence ranged from low to very low for both comparisons. More RCTs studying the effect of atorvastatin on testosterone are needed.

The ratio of eicosapentaenoic acid to docosahexaenoic acid as a modulator for the cardio-metabolic effects of omega-3 supplements: A meta-regression of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

A large number of studies have demonstrated the effects of omega- 3 supplements containing mixtures of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), known to favorably affect many modifiable risk factors of coronary heart disease (CHD). These studies have used diverse ratios and doses of EPA and DHA. However, it is not known whether the ratio of EPA to DHA in omega-3 supplements affect their efficacy as modulators for cardiovascular risk factors. This meta-regression aimed to investigate the effect of different ratios of EPA to DHA on risk factors associated with CHD including lipid profile, blood pressure, heart rate, and inflammation.

METHOD

A regression analysis was carried out on 92 clinical trials with acceptable quality (Jadad score ≥ 3) that were previously identified from two databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library).

RESULTS

Data from studies that met the inclusion criteria for this analysis showed that the ratio of EPA to DHA was not associated with lipid profile, diastolic blood pressure, or heart rate. With all studies, the ratio of EPA to DHA was associated with C-reactive protein (CRP) (β = -1.3121 (95 % CI: -1.6610 to -0.9543), that is, the higher the EPA to DHA ratio, the greater the reduction. Using only studies that supplied EPA and DHA in the range of 2 g-6 g, the ratio of EPA to DHA was also associated with CRP (β = -2.10429 and 95 % CI: -3.89963 to -0.30895); that is, an even more pronounced reduction in CRP with a higher EPA to DHA ratio. Systolic blood pressure was only associated with an increasing EPA to DHA ratio in the 2 g-6 g range (β = 5.47129 and 95 % CI: 0.40677-10.53580), that is, a higher EPA to DHA ratio within this dose range, the greater the increase in SBP.

CONCLUSION

Current data suggest that the EPA to DHA ratio only correlates to the modulation of CRP by omega-3 supplementation of EPA and DHA, and SBP in studies that supplemented EPA and DHA in the range of 2 g-6 g, shedding light on potential differential effects of EPA vs. DHA on inflammation and systolic blood pressure.

Omega-3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids from oily fish (long-chain omega-3 (LCn3)), including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)), as well as from plants (alpha-linolenic acid (ALA)) may benefit cardiovascular health. Guidelines recommend increasing omega-3-rich foods, and sometimes supplementation, but recent trials have not confirmed this.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of increased intake of fish- and plant-based omega-3 fats for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, adiposity and lipids.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to February 2019, plus ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry to August 2019, with no language restrictions. We handsearched systematic review references and bibliographies and contacted trial authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that lasted at least 12 months and compared supplementation or advice to increase LCn3 or ALA intake, or both, versus usual or lower intake.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed validity. We performed separate random-effects meta-analysis for ALA and LCn3 interventions, and assessed dose-response relationships through meta-regression.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 86 RCTs (162,796 participants) in this review update and found that 28 were at low summary risk of bias. Trials were of 12 to 88 months' duration and included adults at varying cardiovascular risk, mainly in high-income countries. Most trials assessed LCn3 supplementation with capsules, but some used LCn3- or ALA-rich or enriched foods or dietary advice compared to placebo or usual diet. LCn3 doses ranged from 0.5 g a day to more than 5 g a day (19 RCTs gave at least 3 g LCn3 daily). Meta-analysis and sensitivity analyses suggested little or no effect of increasing LCn3 on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.01; 143,693 participants; 11,297 deaths in 45 RCTs; high-certainty evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.99; 117,837 participants; 5658 deaths in 29 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence), cardiovascular events (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.01; 140,482 participants; 17,619 people experienced events in 43 RCTs; high-certainty evidence), stroke (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.12; 138,888 participants; 2850 strokes in 31 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence) or arrhythmia (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.06; 77,990 participants; 4586 people experienced arrhythmia in 30 RCTs; low-certainty evidence). Increasing LCn3 may slightly reduce coronary heart disease mortality (number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 334, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.00; 127,378 participants; 3598 coronary heart disease deaths in 24 RCTs, low-certainty evidence) and coronary heart disease events (NNTB 167, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97; 134,116 participants; 8791 people experienced coronary heart disease events in 32 RCTs, low-certainty evidence). Overall, effects did not differ by trial duration or LCn3 dose in pre-planned subgrouping or meta-regression. There is little evidence of effects of eating fish. Increasing ALA intake probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20; 19,327 participants; 459 deaths in 5 RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence),cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25; 18,619 participants; 219 cardiovascular deaths in 4 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence), coronary heart disease mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26; 18,353 participants; 193 coronary heart disease deaths in 3 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence) and coronary heart disease events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.22; 19,061 participants; 397 coronary heart disease events in 4 RCTs; low-certainty evidence). However, increased ALA may slightly reduce risk of cardiovascular disease events (NNTB 500, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07; but RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.04 in RCTs at low summary risk of bias; 19,327 participants; 884 cardiovascular disease events in 5 RCTs; low-certainty evidence), and probably slightly reduces risk of arrhythmia (NNTB 91, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.97; 4912 participants; 173 events in 2 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence). Effects on stroke are unclear. Increasing LCn3 and ALA had little or no effect on serious adverse events, adiposity, lipids and blood pressure, except increasing LCn3 reduced triglycerides by ˜15% in a dose-dependent way (high-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This is the most extensive systematic assessment of effects of omega-3 fats on cardiovascular health to date. Moderate- and low-certainty evidence suggests that increasing LCn3 slightly reduces risk of coronary heart disease mortality and events, and reduces serum triglycerides (evidence mainly from supplement trials). Increasing ALA slightly reduces risk of cardiovascular events and arrhythmia.

The statins effects on HbA1c control among diabetic patients: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies and clinical trials

Statins have impacts on the metabolism of glucose that might influence the progress of diabetes in non-diabetics or affect glycemic control in patients with existing diabetes. Experimental proof has been contradictory about whether some statins display beneficial properties while others indicate harmful impressions. Some systematic reviews of statins had stated conflicting findings on the concern of glucose metabolism. The current study investigates the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses to combine their results and give a clear situation regarding the influence of statins therapy on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). This study has valuable strength points; long follow-up period and big sample size.

A combination of omega-3 and plant sterols regulate glucose and lipid metabolism in individuals with impaired glucose regulation: a randomized and controlled clinical trial

Background

Lipid metabolism imbalance has been recognized as one of the major drivers of impaired glucose metabolism in the context of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the rates of which are steadily increasing worldwide. Impaired glucose regulation (IGR) plays a vital role in the prevention and treatment of T2DM. The goal of this study was to further clarify whether the combination of plant sterols (PS) and omega-3 fatty acids yields any synergistic effect that enhances the prevention and treatment of IGR.

Methods

A total of 200 participants were randomized to receive PS and omega-3 fatty acids (n = 50), PS alone (n = 50), omega-3 fatty acids alone (n = 50), or placebo soy bean powder plus placebo capsules (n = 50) for 12 weeks. Patient characteristics including body composition, blood pressure, glucose metabolism (Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting insulin (FINS), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR)), lipid metabolism (TG, TC, HDL-C, LDL-C) and inflammatory factors (Hs-CRP, IL-6) were all monitored in these IGR individuals.

Results

Compared to the placebo group, the group receiving the combined intervention exhibited significantly decreased TG, HDL-C, FBG, HOMA-IR and HbA1c. Omega-3 fatty acids alone were associated with significant reductions in waistline, TG, FBG, HOMA-IR and Hs-CRP. PS alone was only associated with decreased TG and Hs-CRP. No interventions produced significant changes in body weight, BMI, blood pressure, FINS, body fat percentage, visceral fat rating, TC, LDL-C or IL-6.

Conclusions

In summary, this study has demonstrated for the first time that PS, omega-3 fatty acids or the combination thereof significantly improved inflammation, insulin resistance, as well as glucose and lipid metabolism in IGR individuals. These findings may provide a scientific basis for the development of nutritional products incorporating PS and omega-3 fatty acids, and also for the development of nutritional supplement strategies aimed at preventing the development of disease in the IGR population.

Glycation and HMG-CoA Reductase Inhibitors: Implication in Diabetes and Associated Complications

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes Mellitus (DM) acts as an absolute mediator of cardiovascular risk, prompting the prolonged occurrence, size and intricacy of atherosclerotic plaques via enhanced Advanced Glycation Endproducts (AGEs) formation. Moreover, hyperglycemia is associated with enhanced glyco-oxidized and oxidized Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL) possessing greater atherogenicity and decreased the ability to regulate HMG-CoA reductase (HMG-R). Although aminoguanidine (AG) prevents the AGE-induced protein cross-linking due to its anti-glycation potential, it exerts several unusual pharmaco-toxicological effects thus restraining its desirable therapeutic effects. HMG-R inhibitors/ statins exhibit a variety of beneficial impacts in addition to the cholesterol-lowering effects.

OBJECTIVE

Inhibition of AGEs interaction with receptor for AGEs (RAGE) and glyco-oxidized-LDL by HMG-R inhibitors could decrease LDL uptake by LDL-receptor (LDL-R), regulate cholesterol synthesis via HMG-R, decrease oxidative and inflammatory stress to improve the diabetes-associated complications.

CONCLUSION

Current article appraises the pathological AGE-RAGE concerns in diabetes and its associated complications, mainly focusing on the phenomenon of both circulatory AGEs and those accumulating in tissues in diabetic nephropathy, diabetic neuropathy, and diabetic retinopathy, discussing the potential protective role of HMG-R inhibitors against diabetic complications.

Omega-3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Researchers have suggested that omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids from oily fish (long-chain omega-3 (LCn3), including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)), as well as from plants (alpha-linolenic acid (ALA)) benefit cardiovascular health. Guidelines recommend increasing omega-3-rich foods, and sometimes supplementation, but recent trials have not confirmed this.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of increased intake of fish- and plant-based omega-3 for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CVD) events, adiposity and lipids.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017, plus ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry to September 2016, with no language restrictions. We handsearched systematic review references and bibliographies and contacted authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that lasted at least 12 months and compared supplementation and/or advice to increase LCn3 or ALA intake versus usual or lower intake.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed validity. We performed separate random-effects meta-analysis for ALA and LCn3 interventions, and assessed dose-response relationships through meta-regression.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 79 RCTs (112,059 participants) in this review update and found that 25 were at low summary risk of bias. Trials were of 12 to 72 months' duration and included adults at varying cardiovascular risk, mainly in high-income countries. Most studies assessed LCn3 supplementation with capsules, but some used LCn3- or ALA-rich or enriched foods or dietary advice compared to placebo or usual diet. LCn3 doses ranged from 0.5g/d LCn3 to > 5 g/d (16 RCTs gave at least 3g/d LCn3).Meta-analysis and sensitivity analyses suggested little or no effect of increasing LCn3 on all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03, 92,653 participants; 8189 deaths in 39 trials, high-quality evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03, 67,772 participants; 4544 CVD deaths in 25 RCTs), cardiovascular events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.04, 90,378 participants; 14,737 people experienced events in 38 trials, high-quality evidence), coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.09, 73,491 participants; 1596 CHD deaths in 21 RCTs), stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, 89,358 participants; 1822 strokes in 28 trials) or arrhythmia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05, 53,796 participants; 3788 people experienced arrhythmia in 28 RCTs). There was a suggestion that LCn3 reduced CHD events (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97, 84,301 participants; 5469 people experienced CHD events in 28 RCTs); however, this was not maintained in sensitivity analyses - LCn3 probably makes little or no difference to CHD event risk. All evidence was of moderate GRADE quality, except as noted.Increasing ALA intake probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20, 19,327 participants; 459 deaths, 5 RCTs),cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25, 18,619 participants; 219 cardiovascular deaths, 4 RCTs), and CHD mortality (1.1% to 1.0%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26, 18,353 participants; 193 CHD deaths, 3 RCTs) and ALA may make little or no difference to CHD events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22, 19,061 participants, 397 CHD events, 4 RCTs, low-quality evidence). However, increased ALA may slightly reduce risk of cardiovascular events (from 4.8% to 4.7%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07, 19,327 participants; 884 CVD events, 5 RCTs, low-quality evidence with greater effects in trials at low summary risk of bias), and probably reduces risk of arrhythmia (3.3% to 2.6%, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.10, 4,837 participants; 141 events, 1 RCT). Effects on stroke are unclear.Sensitivity analysis retaining only trials at low summary risk of bias moved effect sizes towards the null (RR 1.0) for all LCn3 primary outcomes except arrhythmias, but for most ALA outcomes, effect sizes moved to suggest protection. LCn3 funnel plots suggested that adding in missing studies/results would move effect sizes towards null for most primary outcomes. There were no dose or duration effects in subgrouping or meta-regression.There was no evidence that increasing LCn3 or ALA altered serious adverse events, adiposity or lipids, except LCn3 reduced triglycerides by ˜15% in a dose-dependant way (high-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This is the most extensive systematic assessment of effects of omega-3 fats on cardiovascular health to date. Moderate- and high-quality evidence suggests that increasing EPA and DHA has little or no effect on mortality or cardiovascular health (evidence mainly from supplement trials). Previous suggestions of benefits from EPA and DHA supplements appear to spring from trials with higher risk of bias. Low-quality evidence suggests ALA may slightly reduce CVD event and arrhythmia risk.

Polyunsaturated fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the health effects of total polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) is equivocal. Fish oils are rich in omega-3 PUFA and plant oils in omega-6 PUFA. Evidence suggests that increasing PUFA-rich foods, supplements or supplemented foods can reduce serum cholesterol, but may increase body weight, so overall cardiovascular effects are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of increasing total PUFA intake on cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality, lipids and adiposity in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017 and clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to September 2016, without language restrictions. We checked trials included in relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing higher with lower PUFA intakes in adults with or without cardiovascular disease that assessed effects over 12 months or longer. We included full texts, abstracts, trials registry entries and unpublished data. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease mortality and events, risk factors (blood lipids, adiposity, blood pressure), and adverse events. We excluded trials where we could not separate effects of PUFA intake from other dietary, lifestyle or medication interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts, assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We wrote to authors of included trials for further data. Meta-analyses used random-effects analysis, sensitivity analyses included fixed-effects and limiting to low summary risk of bias. We assessed GRADE quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 RCTs randomising 24,272 participants, with duration of one to eight years. Eleven included trials were at low summary risk of bias, 33 recruited participants without cardiovascular disease. Baseline PUFA intake was unclear in most trials, but 3.9% to 8% of total energy intake where reported. Most trials gave supplemental capsules, but eight gave dietary advice, eight gave supplemental foods such as nuts or margarine, and three used a combination of methods to increase PUFA.Increasing PUFA intake probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (risk 7.8% vs 7.6%, risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.07, 19,290 participants in 24 trials), but probably slightly reduces risk of coronary heart disease events from 14.2% to 12.3% (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.06, 15 trials, 10,076 participants) and cardiovascular disease events from 14.6% to 13.0% (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.01, 17,799 participants in 21 trials), all moderate-quality evidence. Increasing PUFA may slightly reduce risk of coronary heart disease death (6.6% to 6.1%, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06, 9 trials, 8810 participants) andstroke (1.2% to 1.1%, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.44, 11 trials, 14,742 participants, though confidence intervals include important harms), but has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26, 16 trials, 15,107 participants) all low-quality evidence. Effects of increasing PUFA on major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and atrial fibrillation are unclear as evidence is of very low quality.Increasing PUFA intake probably slightly decreases triglycerides (by 15%, MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.04, 20 trials, 3905 participants), but has little or no effect on total cholesterol (mean difference (MD) -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.02, 26 trials, 8072 participants), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, 18 trials, 4674 participants) or low-density lipoprotein (LDL) (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.06, 15 trials, 3362 participants). Increasing PUFA probably has little or no effect on adiposity (body weight MD 0.76 kg, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.19, 12 trials, 7100 participants).Effects of increasing PUFA on serious adverse events such as pulmonary embolism and bleeding are unclear as the evidence is of very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This is the most extensive systematic review of RCTs conducted to date to assess effects of increasing PUFA on cardiovascular disease, mortality, lipids or adiposity. Increasing PUFA intake probably slightly reduces risk of coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease events, may slightly reduce risk of coronary heart disease mortality and stroke (though not ruling out harms), but has little or no effect on all-cause or cardiovascular disease mortality. The mechanism may be via TG reduction.

Polyunsaturated fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the health effects of total polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) is equivocal. Fish oils are rich in omega-3 PUFA and plant oils in omega-6 PUFA. Evidence suggests that increasing PUFA-rich foods, supplements or supplemented foods can reduce serum cholesterol, but may increase body weight, so overall cardiovascular effects are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of increasing total PUFA intake on cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality, lipids and adiposity in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017 and clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to September 2016, without language restrictions. We checked trials included in relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing higher with lower PUFA intakes in adults with or without cardiovascular disease that assessed effects over 12 months or longer. We included full texts, abstracts, trials registry entries and unpublished data. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease mortality and events, risk factors (blood lipids, adiposity, blood pressure), and adverse events. We excluded trials where we could not separate effects of PUFA intake from other dietary, lifestyle or medication interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts, assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We wrote to authors of included trials for further data. Meta-analyses used random-effects analysis, sensitivity analyses included fixed-effects and limiting to low summary risk of bias. We assessed GRADE quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 RCTs randomising 24,272 participants, with duration of one to eight years. Eleven included trials were at low summary risk of bias, 33 recruited participants without cardiovascular disease. Baseline PUFA intake was unclear in most trials, but 3.9% to 8% of total energy intake where reported. Most trials gave supplemental capsules, but eight gave dietary advice, eight gave supplemental foods such as nuts or margarine, and three used a combination of methods to increase PUFA.Increasing PUFA intake probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (risk 7.8% vs 7.6%, risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.07, 19,290 participants in 24 trials), but probably slightly reduces risk of coronary heart disease events from 14.2% to 12.3% (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.06, 15 trials, 10,076 participants) and cardiovascular disease events from 14.6% to 13.0% (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.01, 17,799 participants in 21 trials), all moderate-quality evidence. Increasing PUFA may slightly reduce risk of coronary heart disease death (6.6% to 6.1%, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06, 9 trials, 8810 participants) andstroke (1.2% to 1.1%, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.44, 11 trials, 14,742 participants, though confidence intervals include important harms), but has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26, 16 trials, 15,107 participants) all low-quality evidence. Effects of increasing PUFA on major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and atrial fibrillation are unclear as evidence is of very low quality.Increasing PUFA intake slightly reduces total cholesterol (mean difference (MD) -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.02, 26 trials, 8072 participants) and probably slightly decreases triglycerides (MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.04, 20 trials, 3905 participants), but has little or no effect on high-density lipoprotein (HDL) (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01, 18 trials, 4674 participants) or low-density lipoprotein (LDL) (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.06, 15 trials, 3362 participants). Increasing PUFA probably causes slight weight gain (MD 0.76 kg, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.19, 12 trials, 7100 participants).Effects of increasing PUFA on serious adverse events such as pulmonary embolism and bleeding are unclear as the evidence is of very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This is the most extensive systematic review of RCTs conducted to date to assess effects of increasing PUFA on cardiovascular disease, mortality, lipids or adiposity. Increasing PUFA intake probably slightly reduces risk of coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease events, may slightly reduce risk of coronary heart disease mortality and stroke (though not ruling out harms), but has little or no effect on all-cause or cardiovascular disease mortality. The mechanism may be via lipid reduction, but increasing PUFA probably slightly increases weight.

Omega-3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Researchers have suggested that omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids from oily fish (long-chain omega-3 (LCn3), including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)), as well as from plants (alpha-linolenic acid (ALA)) benefit cardiovascular health. Guidelines recommend increasing omega-3-rich foods, and sometimes supplementation, but recent trials have not confirmed this.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of increased intake of fish- and plant-based omega-3 for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CVD) events, adiposity and lipids.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017, plus ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry to September 2016, with no language restrictions. We handsearched systematic review references and bibliographies and contacted authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that lasted at least 12 months and compared supplementation and/or advice to increase LCn3 or ALA intake versus usual or lower intake.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed validity. We performed separate random-effects meta-analysis for ALA and LCn3 interventions, and assessed dose-response relationships through meta-regression.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 79 RCTs (112,059 participants) in this review update and found that 25 were at low summary risk of bias. Trials were of 12 to 72 months' duration and included adults at varying cardiovascular risk, mainly in high-income countries. Most studies assessed LCn3 supplementation with capsules, but some used LCn3- or ALA-rich or enriched foods or dietary advice compared to placebo or usual diet.Meta-analysis and sensitivity analyses suggested little or no effect of increasing LCn3 on all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03, 92,653 participants; 8189 deaths in 39 trials, high-quality evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03, 67,772 participants; 4544 CVD deaths in 25 RCTs), cardiovascular events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.04, 90,378 participants; 14,737 people experienced events in 38 trials, high-quality evidence), coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.09, 73,491 participants; 1596 CHD deaths in 21 RCTs), stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, 89,358 participants; 1822 strokes in 28 trials) or arrhythmia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05, 53,796 participants; 3788 people experienced arrhythmia in 28 RCTs). There was a suggestion that LCn3 reduced CHD events (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97, 84,301 participants; 5469 people experienced CHD events in 28 RCTs); however, this was not maintained in sensitivity analyses - LCn3 probably makes little or no difference to CHD event risk. All evidence was of moderate GRADE quality, except as noted.Increasing ALA intake probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20, 19,327 participants; 459 deaths, 5 RCTs),cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25, 18,619 participants; 219 cardiovascular deaths, 4 RCTs), and it may make little or no difference to CHD events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22, 19,061 participants, 397 CHD events, 4 RCTs, low-quality evidence). However, increased ALA may slightly reduce risk of cardiovascular events (from 4.8% to 4.7%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07, 19,327 participants; 884 CVD events, 5 RCTs, low-quality evidence), and probably reduces risk of CHD mortality (1.1% to 1.0%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26, 18,353 participants; 193 CHD deaths, 3 RCTs), and arrhythmia (3.3% to 2.6%, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.10, 4,837 participants; 141 events, 1 RCT). Effects on stroke are unclear.Sensitivity analysis retaining only trials at low summary risk of bias moved effect sizes towards the null (RR 1.0) for all LCn3 primary outcomes except arrhythmias, but for most ALA outcomes, effect sizes moved to suggest protection. LCn3 funnel plots suggested that adding in missing studies/results would move effect sizes towards null for most primary outcomes. There were no dose or duration effects in subgrouping or meta-regression.There was no evidence that increasing LCn3 or ALA altered serious adverse events, adiposity or lipids, although LCn3 slightly reduced triglycerides and increased HDL. ALA probably reduces HDL (high- or moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This is the most extensive systematic assessment of effects of omega-3 fats on cardiovascular health to date. Moderate- and high-quality evidence suggests that increasing EPA and DHA has little or no effect on mortality or cardiovascular health (evidence mainly from supplement trials). Previous suggestions of benefits from EPA and DHA supplements appear to spring from trials with higher risk of bias. Low-quality evidence suggests ALA may slightly reduce CVD event risk, CHD mortality and arrhythmia.

Eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid containing supplements modulate risk factors for cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis of randomised placebo-control human clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Over 200 clinical trials have examined the effect of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplements on risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease. However, an updated analysis of the evidence is lacking. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to quantify the effect of supplements containing EPA and DHA on risk factors for cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

An analysis was carried on 171 clinical trials with acceptable quality (Jadad score ≥3) that were identified from a comprehensive electronic search strategy of two databases (Pubmed and Cochrane Library). A random effect model was used to obtain an overall estimate on outcomes of interest. Heterogeneity between trial results was tested for using a standard chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Compared with control, EPA and DHA supplements produced significant reductions of triglycerides of 0.368 mmol L^-1 [95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.427 to -0.309], systolic blood pressure of 2.195 mmHg (95% CI = -3.172 to -1.217), diastolic blood pressure of 1.08 mmHg (95% CI = -1.716 to -0.444), heart rate of 1.37 bpm (95% CI = -2.41 to -0.325) and C-reactive protein of 0.343 mg L^-1 (95% CI = -0.454 to -0.232). This analysis indicates an increase in both low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mean difference = 0.150 mmol L^-1 ; 95% CI = 0.058-0.243) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (mean difference = 0.039 mmol L^-1 ; 95% CI = 0.024-0.054). The triglyceride-lowering effect was dose-dependent.

CONCLUSIONS

The lipid-lowering, hypotensive, anti-arrhythmic and anti-inflammatory actions of EPA and DHA supplements were confirmed in this analysis of randomised placebo-control blinded clinical trials.

The effect of a brief action planning intervention on adherence to double-blind study medication, compared to a standard trial protocol, in the Atorvastatin in Factorial with Omega EE90 Risk Reduction in Diabetes (AFORRD) clinical trial: A cluster randomised sub-study

AIMS

Clinical trial patients are highly motivated but may encounter difficulty in taking study medication regularly when treatment burden is substantial. We assessed a brief behavioural intervention, given in addition to a standard trial protocol.

METHODS

We performed a two-arm adherence sub-study within a twelve-month randomised controlled drug trial evaluating the impact of statin and/or omega-3 EE90 treatment in 800 patients with type 2 diabetes. Fifty-nine United Kingdom general practices were cluster-randomised to action-planning or control groups. The former delivered an initial written exercise prompting participants to formulate action-plans to take study medication regularly, with brief nurse encouragement to use action-plans at later visits, whilst the latter followed the standard trial protocol. The primary outcome was proportion of days on which study medication were taken as intended measured by electronic medication containers.

RESULTS

Adjusted mean (95% CI) proportion of days with medication taken as intended was 79.3% (76.3-82.3%)for the 30 action-planning practices (321 participants), compared with 78.5% (75.8-81.1%) for 27 control group practices (426 participants, with a mean intervention effect of 0.9%, 95% CI -3.1% to +4.9%, p=0.67). Adjusted odds ratios for ⩾80% trial medication adherence for action-planning compared with control practices were 1.29 (0.90-1.84) and 1.38 (0.96-1.99) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-intensity action-planning interventions used alone are unlikely to have a clinically important impact on medication adherence, particularly in a clinical trial setting. These findings, do not exclude their contribution, as part of a multifactorial intervention, to improving treatment adherence. ISRCTN number 76737502.

Effects of Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation on Glucose Control and Lipid Levels in Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Many studies assessed the impact of marine omega-3 fatty acids on glycemic homeostasis and lipid profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), but reported controversial results. Our goal was to systematically evaluate the effects of omega-3 on glucose control and lipid levels.

Methods

Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, the National Research Register, and SIGLE were searched to identify eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Extracted data from RCTs were analyzed using STATA 11.0 statistical software with fixed or random effects model. Effect sizes were presented as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi-square test with significance level set at p < 0.1.

Results

20 RCT trials were included into this meta-analysis. Among patients with omega-3 supplementation, triglyceride (TG) levels were significantly decreased by 0.24 mmol/L. No marked change in total cholesterol (TC), HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, BMI or body weight was observed. High ratio of EPA/DHA contributed to a greater decreasing tendency in plasma insulin, HbAc1, TC, TG, and BMI measures, although no statistical significance was identified (except TG). FPG levels were increased by 0.42 mmol/L in Asians. No evidence of publication bias was observed in this meta-analysis.

Conclusions

The ratio of EPA/DHA and early intervention with omega 3 fatty acids may affect their effects on glucose control and lipid levels, which may serve as a dietary reference for clinicians or nutritionists who manage diabetic patients.

Statins and glycaemic control in individuals with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS/HYPOTHESES

Current evidence indicates that statins increase the risk of incident diabetes; however, the relationship between statins and glycaemic control in people with established diabetes has not been well characterised. To address this question, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of statins in patients with diabetes for whom there was available data on glycaemic control.

METHODS

We identified studies published between January 1970 and November 2013 by searching electronic databases and reference lists. We included RCTs in which the intervention group received statins and the control group received placebo or standard treatment, with >200 participants enrolled, with the intervention lasting >12 weeks and with pre- and post-intervention HbA1c reported. We combined study-specific estimates using random-effects model meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In a pooled analysis of nine trials involving 9,696 participants (4,980 statin, 4,716 control) and an average follow-up of 3.6 years, the mean HbA1c of participants randomised to statins was higher than those randomised to the control group: mean difference (95% CI) was 0.12% (0.04, 0.20) or 1.3 mmol/mol (0.4, 2.2); p = 0.003. There was moderate heterogeneity across the studies (I (2) = 54%, p = 0.014) not explained by available study-level characteristics. This review was limited by the small number of studies, available data on only three statins and sparse reporting on changes in use of glucose-lowering medications.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Statin treatment is associated with a modest increase in HbA1c in patients with diabetes.

Statin therapy on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that statin therapy has cardiovascular benefit among patients with type 2 diabetes. Recently, statins were reported to increase risk of diabetes by 9%. The aim was to investigate by a meta-analysis whether statins deteriorate glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1966 to 2012 were searched for RCTs of statins. Included were only trials with type 2 diabetes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The I(2) statistic was used to measure heterogeneity between trials and calculated mean differences for glycaemic parameters with random-effect meta-analysis.

RESULTS

26 eligible studies were identified with 3232 participants. Statin therapy had no remarkable influence on HbA1c (WMD 0.04%, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.16, I² = 45.7%, n = 3070), FPG (2.25 mg/dl, 95% CI -3.50 to 7.99, I² = 46%, n = 1176), BMI, fasting insulin or HOMA-IR. However, subgroup analysis showed significant, detrimental effect of atorvastatin on HbA1c, whereas simvastatin presented an ameliorative effect. Meta-regression presented that neither baseline age nor relative reduction in LDL-cholesterol concentrations accounted for residual heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Statin therapy showed non-significant effect on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes. Statin therapy need not change among them with moderate or high cardiovascular risk or existing cardiovascular disease.

Interactions of commonly used dietary supplements with cardiovascular drugs: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The objective of this systematic review was to examine the benefits, harms and pharmacokinetic interactions arising from the co-administration of commonly used dietary supplements with cardiovascular drugs. Many patients on cardiovascular drugs take dietary supplements for presumed benefits and may be at risk for adverse supplement-drug interactions.

METHODS

The Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, International Bibliographic Information on Dietary Supplements and MEDLINE were searched from the inception of the review to October 2011. Grey literature was also reviewed.Two reviewers independently screened records to identify studies comparing a supplement plus cardiovascular drug(s) with the drug(s) alone. Reviewers extracted data using standardized forms, assessed the study risk of bias, graded the strength of evidence and reported applicability.

RESULTS

Evidence was obtained from 65 randomized clinical trials, 2 controlled clinical trials and 1 observational study. With only a few small studies available per supplement, evidence was insufficient for all predefined gradable clinical efficacy and harms outcomes, such as mortality and serious adverse events. One long-term pragmatic trial showed no benefit from co-administering vitamin E with aspirin on a composite cardiovascular outcome. Evidence for most intermediate outcomes was insufficient or of low strength, suggesting no effect. Incremental benefits were noted for triglyceridemia with omega-3 fatty acid added to statins; and there was an improvement in levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol with garlic supplementation when people also consumed nitrates

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of low-strength indicates benefits of omega-3 fatty acids (plus statin, or calcium channel blockers and antiplatelets) and garlic (plus nitrates or warfarin) on triglycerides and HDL-C, respectively. Safety concerns, however, persist.

Treatment of lipid disorders in obesity

Obesity is the most common cause of secondary hyperlipidemia. Atherogenic dyslipidemia refers to elevated triglycerides, low HDL-cholesterol and small dense LDL associated with visceral obesity and metabolic syndrome. Obesity may also be associated with isolated low HDL-cholesterol or high triglycerides and postprandial hyperlipidemia. While some obese patients have high LDL cholesterol concentrations, obesity has a more pronounced effect on other atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins. Obesity may aggravate familial lipid disorders. Lipid disorders in obesity are responsive to weight loss, pharmacotherapy and weight loss surgery. Statins are the lipid-lowering drug of choice, together with lifestyle change. Hard clinical end point data to support combinations of statins with other drugs is lacking. After weight loss surgery, the absolute risk of cardiovascular disease should be reassessed, but tools to facilitate risk assessment need to be developed.