Efficacy of Colesevelam on Lowering Glycemia and Lipids:

Different Effects of Once-weekly and Once-daily Administered GLP-1RA Semaglutide and Liraglutide on Bile Acid Diarrhea

Bile acid diarrhea (BAD) is a socially debilitating disease. Typical symptoms include loose stools, urgency, and high stool frequency. Recently, we reported the superior efficacy of the glucagon like-peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) liraglutide (administered subcutaneously once daily) in reducing daily bowel movements compared with the traditionally used bile acid sequestrant colesevelam (considered the standard of care). This has generated proposals of testing longer acting and more potent GLP-1RAs for treating BAD. Here, we present a patient with severe BAD who experienced minimal effect of the once-weekly administered GLP-1RA semaglutide, but total remission of BAD symptoms during treatment with liraglutide.

Lipid Management in Patients with Endocrine Disorders: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

OBJECTIVE

This guideline will provide the practicing endocrinologist with an approach to the assessment and treatment of dyslipidemia in patients with endocrine diseases, with the objective of preventing cardiovascular (CV) events and triglyceride-induced pancreatitis. The guideline reviews data on dyslipidemia and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk in patients with endocrine disorders and discusses the evidence for the correction of dyslipidemia by treatment of the endocrine disease. The guideline also addresses whether treatment of the endocrine disease reduces ASCVD risk.

CONCLUSION

This guideline focuses on lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities associated with endocrine diseases, including diabetes mellitus, and whether treatment of the endocrine disorder improves not only the lipid abnormalities, but also CV outcomes. Based on the available evidence, recommendations are made for the assessment and management of dyslipidemia in patients with endocrine diseases.

Lipid-lowering Therapies in Myositis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of lipid-lowering therapies in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) is complicated and there are no guidelines for diagnosing, monitoring, or treating atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in this group of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The use of lipid-lowering therapies, especially statins, is recommended in patients with increased risk for ASCVD, which includes patients with inflammatory diseases, based on recent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for ASCVD management. There is accumulating evidence that patients with IIM are at increased risk for ASCVD, similar to other inflammatory diseases. Lipid-lowering therapies have side effects that may be pronounced or confounding in myositis patients, potentially limiting their use. Statins are specifically contraindicated in patients with anti 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase (HMGCR) antibodies. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors have been shown to be safe and potentially beneficial in patients with IIM. Here, we propose a framework for (1) ASCVD risk assessment and treatment based on ACC/AHA ASCVD primary prevention guidelines; (2) myositis disease monitoring while undergoing lipid-lowering therapy; and (3) management of statin intolerance, including, indications for the use of PCSK9 inhibitors.

Towards more specific treatment for diabetic dyslipidemia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia is necessary because of its impact on cardiovascular disease, which is the leading cause of death in patients with diabetes. In the past, standard treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia focused only on correcting lipids. Although this remains the mainstay of treatment, because new antihyperglycemic treatments reduce cardiovascular events with minimal effect on dyslipidemia, a new approach is both timely and relevant.

RECENT FINDINGS

LDL-lowering remains the focus of treatment for diabetic dyslipidemia, especially in patients with both diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Higher intensity statin therapy or lower LDL cholesterol goals are recommended in these patients. Combination therapy, especially with ezetimibe, fibrates, bile acid sequestrants, PCSK9 inhibitors and omega 3 fatty acids should be considered along with selected new agents to reduce glycemia.

SUMMARY

As diabetic dyslipidemia plays a key role in CVD, aggressive treatment is indicated. New research targets include apo-CIII and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]. In addition, new antihyperglycemic therapy is changing diabetes care and altering treatment guidelines. The most recent American Diabetes Association Standards of Care has expanded its recommendations for people with CVD and diabetes, suggesting that medications validated to improve cardiac health should be strongly considered.

Role of Non-Statins, LDL-C Thresholds, and Special Population Considerations: A Look at the Updated 2016 ACC Consensus Committee Recommendations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The 2013 ACC/AHA Cholesterol guidelines was a major paradigm shift in the management and treatment of dyslipidemia. The new guidelines outlined "statin benefit groups," highlighted weighing the benefit versus risks of statin therapy ("net benefit"), and discussed the importance of shared decision making between patients and providers in primary prevention. While there was widespread agreement on the main groups benefiting from statin therapy, there was significant controversy regarding LDL-C goals and thresholds, the role of non-statin therapy, and the use of statins in specific populations. The goal of this review is to understand the rationale for the updated 2016 ACC Expert Consensus on Non-Statins and to contrast it with the 2015 NLA Recommendations on the Management of Dyslipidemia.

RECENT FINDINGS

The findings of the ACC Expert Consensus Panel were largely influenced by the results of several new clinical trials using non-statin therapy in combination with moderate to high intensity statin therapy. The IMPROVE-IT trial demonstrated that ezetimibe on top of statin therapy lowered ASCVD risk in patients with acute coronary syndromes whose LDL was driven below the previous LDL-C target of <70 mg/dL. In addition, preliminary data assessing the safety of evolocumab and alirocumab on top of statin therapy suggested possible large reductions in ASCVD risk in post hoc analysis. Both the 2016 ACC Consensus Recommendations and the 2015 NLA Recommendations emphasize the importance of maximally tolerated statin therapy, the use of adjunctive non-statin LDL lowering therapy, and the use of LDL-C goals and thresholds to guide intensification of LDL lowering therapy. Although there are some important differences between the ACC Consensus and NLA recommendations in terms of treatment of special populations (i.e., CHF) and on the use of non-HDL-C goals and thresholds, both guidelines support a role for ezetimibe, bile acid sequestrants, and PCSK-9 inhibitors in patients on maximum tolerated statin therapy. The recent positive results of the FOURIER trial gives additional support to the non-statin recommendations of both the ACC and NLA.

2017 Focused Update of the 2016 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on the Role of Non-Statin Therapies for LDL-Cholesterol Lowering in the Management of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Expert Consensus Decision Pathways

In 2016, the American College of Cardiology published the first expert consensus decision pathway (ECDP) on the role of non-statin therapies for low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol lowering in the management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Since the publication of that document, additional evidence and perspectives have emerged from randomized clinical trials and other sources, particularly considering the longer-term efficacy and safety of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors in secondary prevention of ASCVD. Most notably, the FOURIER (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects with Elevated Risk) trial and SPIRE-1 and -2 (Studies of PCSK9 Inhibition and the Reduction of Vascular Events), assessing evolocumab and bococizumab, respectively, have published final results of cardiovascular outcomes trials in patients with clinical ASCVD and in a smaller number of high-risk primary prevention patients. In addition, further evidence on the types of patients most likely to benefit from the use of ezetimibe in addition to statin therapy after acute coronary syndrome has been published. Based on results from these important analyses, the ECDP writing committee judged that it would be desirable to provide a focused update to help guide clinicians more clearly on decision making regarding the use of ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with clinical ASCVD with or without comorbidities. In the following summary table, changes from the 2016 ECDP to the 2017 ECDP Focused Update are highlighted, and a brief rationale is provided. The content of the full document has been changed accordingly, with more extensive and detailed guidance regarding decision making provided both in the text and in the updated algorithms. Revised recommendations are provided for patients with clinical ASCVD with or without comorbidities on statin therapy for secondary prevention. The ECDP writing committee judged that these new data did not warrant changes to the decision pathways and algorithms regarding the use of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors in primary prevention patients with LDL-C <190 mg/dL with or without diabetes mellitus or patients without ASCVD and LDL-C ≥190 mg/dL not due to secondary causes. Based on feedback and further deliberation, the ECDP writing committee down-graded recommendations regarding bile acid sequestrant use, recommending bile acid sequestrants only as optional secondary agents for consideration in patients intolerant to ezetimibe. For clarification, the writing committee has also included new information on diagnostic categories of heterozygous and homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, based on clinical criteria with and without genetic testing. Other changes to the original document were kept to a minimum to provide consistent guidance to clinicians, unless there was a compelling reason or new evidence, in which case justification is provided.

Implementation of a New Clinic-Based, Pharmacist-Managed PCSK9 Inhibitor Consultation Service

BACKGROUND

The proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors alirocumab and evolocumab were approved by the FDA in 2015. In anticipation of provider interest and a potential increase in referrals to the on-site specialty pharmacy, we created a pharmacist-managed consultation service.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The development of a clinic-based pharmacist-managed consultation service for the management of the PCSK9 inhibitor agents alirocumab and evolocumab is described. Key implementation steps included (a) creation of a pharmacy team and collaboration with cardiology; (b) completion of a needs assessment; (c) service creation; (d) collaboration with the on-site specialty pharmacy; (e) development of an electronic consult order and consult pool; (f) personnel training; and (g) service approval and marketing. The service development occurred over 9 months (July 2015-April 2016) and was implemented hospital-wide in May 2016.

OBSERVATIONS

The University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System PCSK9 inhibitor consultation service successfully integrated the benefits of a clinical review process, information technology capabilities of an electronic medical record system, and collaboration with the on-site specialty pharmacy to provide a comprehensive service that aimed to facilitate appropriate medication management from prescribing to patient administration and provide monitoring for this class of specialty medications.

IMPLICATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

The PCSK9 pharmacist-managed consultation service provides a method for complex therapies to be managed comprehensively through the collaboration of ambulatory care clinics and outpatient specialty pharmacies.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. Groo reports speaker bureau fees from Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb. The other authors have nothing to disclose. All the authors contributed to study concept and design. Atande took the lead in data collection, and data interpretation was performed by Groo and Atanda. The manuscript was written by Atanda and revised by all the authors.

Oral antihyperglycemic treatment options for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Table 3 provides an overview of the oral antihyperglycemic drugs reviewed in this article. A 2011 meta-analysis by Bennett and colleagues found low or insufficient quality of evidence favoring an initial choice of metformin, SUs, glinides, TZDs, or (table see text) DPP-4 inhibitors (alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, bromocriptine mesylate, and SGLT2 inhibitors were not included in this meta-analysis) with regard to the outcomes measures of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events and mortality, and incidence of microvascular disease (retinopathy, nephropathy, and neuropathy) in previously healthy individuals with newly diagnosed T2DM. Likewise, the Bennett and colleagues meta-analysis judged these drugs to be of roughly equal efficacy with regard to reduction of HbA1c (1%–1.6%) from the pretreatment baseline. The ADOPT clinical trial of 3 different and, at the time, popular, oral monotherapies for T2DM provides support for the consensus recommendation of metformin as first-line therapy. The ADOPT trial showed slightly superior HbA1c reduction for rosiglitazone compared with metformin, which was in turn superior to glyburide. However, significant adverse events, including edema, weight gain, and fractures, were more common in the rosiglitazone-treated patients. The implication of this trial is that the combination of low cost, low risk, minimal adverse effects, and efficacy of metformin justifies use of this agent as the cornerstone of oral drug treatment of T2DM. Judicious use of metformin in groups formerly thought to be at high risk for lactic acidosis (ie, those with CHF, chronic kidney disease [eGFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m2], and the elderly) may be associated with mortality benefit rather than increased risk. Secondary and tertiary add-on drug therapy should be individualized based on cost, personal preferences, and overall treatment goals, taking into account the wishes and priorities of the patient.

Comparative evaluation of in vitro efficacy of colesevelam hydrochloride tablets

CONTEXT

Colesevelam hydrochloride is used as an adjunct to diet and exercise to reduce elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in patients with primary hyperlipidemia as well as to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. This is likely to result in submission of abbreviated new drug applications (ANDA).

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of two tablet products of colesevelam hydrochloride based on the in vitro binding of bile acid sodium salts of glycocholic acid (GC), glycochenodeoxycholic acid (GCDA) and taurodeoxycholic acid (TDCA).

METHODS

Kinetic binding study was carried out with constant initial bile salt concentrations as a function of time. Equilibrium binding studies were conducted under conditions of constant incubation time and varying initial concentrations of bile acid sodium salts. The unbound concentration of bile salts was determined in the samples of these studies. Langmuir equation was utilized to calculate the binding constants k1 and k2.

RESULTS

The amount of the three bile salts bound to both the products reached equilibrium at 3 h. The similarity factor (f2) was 99.5 based on the binding profile of total bile salts to the test and reference colesevelam tablets as a function of time. The 90% confidence interval for the test to reference ratio of k2 values were 96.06-112.07 which is within the acceptance criteria of 80-120%.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded from the results that the test and reference tablets of colesevelam hydrochloride showed a similar in vitro binding profile and capacity to bile salts.

Diet1 functions in the FGF15/19 enterohepatic signaling axis to modulate bile acid and lipid levels

We identified a mutation in the Diet1 gene in a mouse strain that is resistant to hyperlipidemia and atherosclerosis. Diet1 encodes a 236 kD protein consisting of tandem low-density lipoprotein receptor and MAM (meprin-A5-protein tyrosine phosphatase mu) domains and is expressed in the enterocytes of the small intestine. Diet1-deficient mice exhibited an elevated bile acid pool size and impaired feedback regulation of hepatic Cyp7a1, which encodes the rate-limiting enzyme in bile acid synthesis. In mouse intestine and in cultured human intestinal cells, Diet1 expression levels influenced the production of fibroblast growth factor 15/19 (FGF15/19), a hormone that signals from the intestine to liver to regulate Cyp7a1. Transgenic expression of Diet1, or adenoviral-mediated Fgf15 expression, restored normal Cyp7a1 regulation in Diet-1-deficient mice. Diet1 and FGF19 proteins exhibited overlapping subcellular localization in cultured intestinal cells. These results establish Diet1 as a control point in enterohepatic bile acid signaling and lipid homeostasis.