Should we lower cholesterol as much as possible?

Dyslipidemia and rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms-a systematic review

Dyslipidemia is a well-established risk factor for coronary artery disease. However, the effect on cerebral artery disease, and more specifically the rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms, is unclear and has not yet been reviewed. We therefore performed a systematic review to investigate associations between different types of dyslipidemia and incidence of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). We used the MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify clinical trials that compared the rupture risk among SAH patients with or without dyslipidemia. The risk of bias in each included study was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). Of 149 unique citations from the initial literature search, five clinical trials with a case-control design met our eligibility criteria. These studies compared aSAH patients to patients with unruptured aneurysms and found an overall inverse relationship between hypercholesterolemia and rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms. The quality assessment classified all included studies as high risk of bias. The evidence indicates that hypercholesterolemia is associated with a reduced rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms. However, it is not clear whether this relation is due to the dyslipidemic condition itself or the use of antihyperlipidemic medication.

In vivo evaluation of hypolipidemic and antioxidative effect of 'Ajwa' (Phoenix dactylifera L.) date seed-extract in high-fat diet-induced hyperlipidemic rat model

In the present study, we investigated the hypolipidemic and hepatoprotective potential of the commercially available crushed Ajwa date seed-extract on the toxicity caused by the atorvastatin in high-fat diet (HFD)-induced hyperlipidemic rats. Male albino rats were divided into two main groups, Group I (normal control) and Group II (HFD); Group II was further divided into four subgroups: Group IIa (HFD control), Group IIb (Atorvastatin: A10)-6 rats were administered with 10 mg/kg atorvastatin daily for 30 days, Group IIc (Ajwa seed extract: AJ)-6 rats were given 1000 mg/kg Ajwa seed extract daily for 30 days, Group IId (AJ + A10)-6 rats were given Ajwa seed extract 1000 mg/kg and Atorvastatin 10 mg/kg daily for 30 days. The data obtained suggested that Ajwa seed extract lowered the serum cholesterol level in HFD rats and demonstrated the hepatoprotective effect in combination with atorvastatin by reducing the levels of ALT and AST. In conclusion, it protected the tissues from the detrimental effects of hyperglycemia and enhanced antioxidant activity. Furthermore, the dose-limiting toxicity of atorvastatin may be reduced if the Ajwa seed extract is incorporated in the current treatment regimens to treat hyperlipidemia in hypercholesteremic individuals.

The efficacy advantage of evolocumab (AMG 145) dosed at 140mg every 2weeks versus 420mg every 4weeks in patients with hypercholesterolemia: Evidence from a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evolocumab (AMG 145), a PCSK9 inhibitor, has been shown to decrease low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Doses of 140mg administered every 2weeks (Q2W) and 420mg administered every 4weeks (Q4W) are widely used, and both dosing schedules were effective in clinical trials. However, some researchers have speculated that 140mg Q2W administration has equal or even greater efficacy. This meta-analysis was performed to assess the differences in efficacy and safety between the two doses.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant clinical trials published before January 2016. A total of 2403 patients from 8 randomized controlled trials were identified and included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Evolocumab administered at 140mg Q2W resulted in a greater percent change from baseline in LDL-C concentration (-7.27; 95% confidence interval (CI), -10.36 to -4.18) and had greater efficacy in achieving the treatment goal of LDL-C ≤1.8mmol/L with an relative risk (RR) of 1.09 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.18) compared with 420mg Q4W in patients who were concomitantly treated with statins. These findings were not significantly different between the 140mg Q2W and 420mg Q4W groups when evolocumab was administered as monotherapy. There was no difference in the rate of occurrence of the main treatment-related adverse events between the two doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Evolocumab administered at 140mg Q2W was more effective than the 420mg Q4W dosage at lowering lipid concentrations, especially in patients who concomitantly received stable statin therapy.

Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) greater than 100 mg/dL as a quality indicator: locating risk in person, place and time

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Achieving control over elevated lipid parameters, particularly low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, is an acknowledged quality indicator in primary care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s model for investigation of outbreaks (person-place-time) can be applied to the analysis of quality indicators.

METHODS

A sample of 322 family medicine patients for whom lipid levels were ordered was extracted. LDL > 100 mg/dL was cross-tabulated by personal characteristics [age group, gender, body mass index (BMI), diagnoses], month (time) and ordering department (place).

RESULTS

Age (except one age category), gender, time and location were not related to LDL > 100 mg/dL after adjustment for covariates. All levels of BMI above normal elevated the risk of LDL > 100 mg/dL [BMI 25-29.9: odds ratio (OR) = 3.41, confidence interval (CI) = 1.61-7.23, P = 0.0014; BMI 30-34.9: OR = 2.93, CI = 1.28-6.70, P = 0.0109; BMI ≥ 35: OR = 2.75, CI = 1.19-6.37, P = 0.0181]. Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and diabetes mellitus (DM) were at reduced risk for LDL > 100 mg/dL (CAD: OR = 0.47, CI = 0.24-0.91, P = 0.0254; DM: OR = 0.28, CI = 0.14-0.55, P = 0.0002).

CONCLUSION

An outbreak investigation model is useful for analysing variations in this quality indicator. Patients with higher BMI and those not diagnosed with CAD or DM type I/II may be considered for intensified lipid lowering using quality improvement efforts. These might include counselling for lifestyle changes or medication therapy depending upon their calculated cardiac risk.

Dietary carbohydrate restriction as the first approach in diabetes management: critical review and evidence base

The inability of current recommendations to control the epidemic of diabetes, the specific failure of the prevailing low-fat diets to improve obesity, cardiovascular risk, or general health and the persistent reports of some serious side effects of commonly prescribed diabetic medications, in combination with the continued success of low-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome without significant side effects, point to the need for a reappraisal of dietary guidelines. The benefits of carbohydrate restriction in diabetes are immediate and well documented. Concerns about the efficacy and safety are long term and conjectural rather than data driven. Dietary carbohydrate restriction reliably reduces high blood glucose, does not require weight loss (although is still best for weight loss), and leads to the reduction or elimination of medication. It has never shown side effects comparable with those seen in many drugs. Here we present 12 points of evidence supporting the use of low-carbohydrate diets as the first approach to treating type 2 diabetes and as the most effective adjunct to pharmacology in type 1. They represent the best-documented, least controversial results. The insistence on long-term randomized controlled trials as the only kind of data that will be accepted is without precedent in science. The seriousness of diabetes requires that we evaluate all of the evidence that is available. The 12 points are sufficiently compelling that we feel that the burden of proof rests with those who are opposed.

Safety profile of high-dose statin therapy in geriatric patients with stroke

OBJECTIVES

Use of high-dose statin therapy (HDST) in patients with stroke became standard clinical practice after the Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL) study, in which the mean age of the study population was approximately 63 years. Little data are available on the adverse effects of statins when used in high doses in adults older than 65 years. The objective of this study was to assess the magnitude of adverse effects of HDST in geriatric patients.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective, case-control study was conducted at Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York. All patients older than 65 years admitted between 2008 and 2011 to the hospital's Upstate Stroke Center with acute stroke were eligible. Electronic medical records of 200 eligible patients were reviewed to collect demographic, clinical, and laboratory data. Patients on HDST (cases) were compared with those on low doses (controls) using the χ, Fisher exact (two-sided), and Student t tests.

RESULTS

One hundred cases (mean age 80.5 ± 7.7 years) were compared with 100 controls (mean age 78.9 ± 6.4 years). Sixty-seven percent were taking simvastatin. Ninety percent of the cases compared with 81% of the controls had ischemic stroke. The prevalence of elevated alanine aminotransferase (13%) and myositis (4%) was significantly higher in the cases than in the controls. Fourteen percent of the cases reported myalgias, 9% had nausea, and 6% had diarrhea. Seventy-three cases had low-density lipoprotein levels <100 mg% and 41% of the cases had mean glycated hemoglobin levels ≥ 6.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of HDST in older adult patients with acute stroke is associated with a significantly increased burden of liver enzyme elevation and myalgias.

A review of statin use in patients with acute coronary syndrome in Western and Japanese populations

Early high-dose statin therapy to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes in Western patients with stable coronary heart disease or acute coronary syndromes (ACS), but many patients remain undertreated and do not attain LDL-C treatment goals. Early statin therapy has also been shown to improve cardiovascular outcomes in Japanese patients with ACS, and pretreatment with high-dose statin prior to percutaneous coronary intervention has been shown to reduce cardiovascular events in these patients. As is the case in Western populations, many Japanese patients may be undertreated and a residual cardiovascular risk remains. While differences in treatment practice, dosing and genetic factors exist between Japan and Western countries, similarities are also evident when Japanese statin studies are compared with those performed in Western populations. With the increasing prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in Japan, aggressive statin treatment may be beneficial in achieving optimal cardiovascular outcomes.

Dietary cholesterol: from physiology to cardiovascular risk

Dietary cholesterol comes exclusively from animal sources, thus it is naturally present in our diet and tissues. It is an important component of cell membranes and a precursor of bile acids, steroid hormones and vitamin D. Contrary to phytosterols (originated from plants), cholesterol is synthesised in the human body in order to maintain a stable pool when dietary intake is low. Given the necessity for cholesterol, very effective intestinal uptake mechanisms and enterohepatic bile acid and cholesterol reabsorption cycles exist; conversely, phytosterols are poorly absorbed and, indeed, rapidly excreted. Dietary cholesterol content does not significantly influence plasma cholesterol values, which are regulated by different genetic and nutritional factors that influence cholesterol absorption or synthesis. Some subjects are hyper-absorbers and others are hyper-responders, which implies new therapeutic issues. Epidemiological data do not support a link between dietary cholesterol and CVD. Recent biological data concerning the effect of dietary cholesterol on LDL receptor-related protein may explain the complexity of the effect of cholesterol on CVD risk.

[The REALIST (REsiduAl risk, LIpids and Standard Therapies) study: an analysis of residual risk attributable to lipid profile in acute coronary syndrome]

The R3i Foundation (Residual Risk Reduction Initiative), an independent, multinational and academic organization, is conducting the REALIST (Residual Risk, Lipids and Standard Therapies) study in 40 centers in different countries. This is a retrospective epidemiological study, designed to provide new data on the residual risk of major coronary events attributable to lipid abnormalities in patients receiving the current standard treatment. The initial results are expected in mid 2010, and the overall results at the end of 2010.

Combination statin-fibrate therapy: safety aspects

Patients with type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome remain at high residual risk of cardiovascular events even after intensive statin therapy. While treatment guidelines recommend the addition of a fibrate to statin therapy in this setting, concerns about the potential for myopathy may limit the use of this combination in clinical practice. These concerns are certainly justified for gemfibrozil, which interferes with statin glucuronidation, leading to elevation in statin plasma concentrations and an increased risk of myotoxicity in combination with a range of commonly prescribed statins. However, the available evidence refutes suggestions that this is a class effect for fibrates. Fenofibrate does not adversely influence the metabolism or pharmacokinetics of any of the commonly prescribed statins. This in turn translates to a reduced potential for myotoxicity in combination with a statin. Data are awaited from the ongoing Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate plus simvastatin combination therapy in type 2 diabetes patients.

The fallacies of the lipid hypothesis

Most researchers to-day consider that a high intake of saturated fat and elevated LDL cholesterol are the most important causes of atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease. The lipid hypothesis has dominated cardiovascular research and prevention for almost half a century although the number of contradictory studies may exceed those that are supportive. The harmful influence of a campaign that ignores much of the science extends to medical research, health care, food production and human life. There is an urgent need to draw attention to the most striking contradictions, many of which may be unknown to most doctors and researchers.

Effect of statins on a wide range of health outcomes: a cohort study validated by comparison with randomized trials

AIMS

To assess the effect of statins on a range of health outcomes.

METHODS

We undertook a population-based cohort study to assess the effect of statins on a range of health outcomes using a propensity score-based method to control for differences between people prescribed and not prescribed statins. We validated our design by comparing our results for vascular outcomes with the effects established in large randomized trials. The study was based on the United Kingdom Health Improvement Network database that includes the computerized medical records of over four and a half million patients.

RESULTS

People who initiated treatment with a statin (n = 129,288) were compared with a matched sample of 600,241 people who did not initiate treatment, with a median follow-up period of 4.4 years. Statin use was not associated with an effect on a wide range of outcomes, including infections, fractures, venous thromboembolism, gastrointestinal haemorrhage, or on specific eye, neurological or autoimmune diseases. A protective effect against dementia was observed (hazard ratio 0.80, 99% confidence interval 0.68, 0.95). There was no effect on the risk of cancer even after > or =8 years of follow-up. The effect sizes for statins on vascular end-points and mortality were comparable to those observed in large randomized trials, suggesting bias and confounding had been well controlled for.

CONCLUSIONS

We found little evidence to support wide-ranging effects of statins on health outcomes beyond their established beneficial effect on vascular disease.

Coenzyme Q10: is there a clinical role and a case for measurement?

Coenzyme Q(10) (CoQ(10)) is an essential cofactor in the mitochondrial electron transport pathway, and is also a lipid-soluble antioxidant. It is endogenously synthesised via the mevalonate pathway, and some is obtained from the diet. CoQ(10) supplements are available over the counter from health food shops and pharmacies. CoQ(10) deficiency has been implicated in several clinical disorders, including but not confined to heart failure, hypertension, Parkinson's disease and malignancy. Statin, 3-hydroxy-3- methyl-glutaryl (HMG)-CoA reductase inhibitor therapy inhibits conversion of HMG-CoA to mevalonate and lowers plasma CoQ(10) concentrations. The case for measurement of plasma CoQ(10) is based on the relationship between levels and outcomes, as in chronic heart failure, where it may identify individuals most likely to benefit from supplementation therapy. During CoQ(10) supplementation plasma CoQ(10) levels should be monitored to ensure efficacy, given that there is variable bioavailability between commercial formulations, and known inter-individual variation in CoQ(10) absorption. Knowledge of biological variation and reference change values is important to determine whether a significant change in plasma CoQ(10) has occurred, whether a reduction for example following statin therapy or an increase following supplementation. Emerging evidence will determine whether CoQ(10) does indeed have an important clinical role and in particular, whether there is a case for measurement.

Strategies for prescribing statins

Evidence supports prescribing a standard dose without further testing or dose adjustment

Effect of coenzyme Q(10) supplementation on simvastatin-induced myalgia

Myalgia is the most frequently reported adverse side effect associated with statin therapy and often necessitates reduction in dose, or the cessation of therapy, compromising cardiovascular risk management. One postulated mechanism for statin-related myalgia is mitochondrial dysfunction through the depletion of coenzyme Q(10), a key component of the mitochondrial electron transport chain. This pilot study evaluated the effect of coenzyme Q(10) supplementation on statin tolerance and myalgia in patients with previous statin-related myalgia. Forty-four patients were randomized to coenzyme Q(10) (200 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks in combination with upward dose titration of simvastatin from 10 mg/day, doubling every 4 weeks if tolerated to a maximum of 40 mg/day. Patients experiencing significant myalgia reduced their statin dose or discontinued treatment. Myalgia was assessed using a visual analogue scale. There was no difference between combined therapy and statin alone in the myalgia score change (median 6.0 [interquartile range 2.1 to 8.8] vs 2.3 [0 to 12.8], p = 0.63), in the number of patients tolerating simvastatin 40 mg/day (16 of 22 [73%] with coenzyme Q(10) vs 13 of 22 [59%] with placebo, p = 0.34), or in the number of patients remaining on therapy (16 of 22 [73%] with coenzyme Q(10) vs 18 of 22 [82%] with placebo, p = 0.47). In conclusion, coenzyme Q(10) supplementation did not improve statin tolerance or myalgia, although further studies are warranted.

A Concise Asymmetric Synthesis of Torcetrapib

Optically active torcetrapib was synthesized in seven steps from achiral precursors without the need for protecting groups, utilizing an enantioselective aza-Michael reaction to achieve asymmetry.

Statins and risk of cancer: a systematic review and metaanalysis

We conducted a systematic review of the association between HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) use and cancer risk. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, ISI Proceedings and BIOSIS Previews bibliographic databases, electronic trials registers and reference lists for potentially eligible randomized trials and observational studies. Thirty-eight individual studies (26 randomized trials involving 103,573 participants and 12 observational studies with 826,854 participants) were included. Median follow-up was 3.6 and 6.2 years for trials and observational studies, respectively. In metaanalyses of randomized trials, there was no evidence that statin therapy was associated with incidence of all-cancers (26 trials; pooled risk ratio = 1.00; 95% CI 0.95-1.05; I(2) = 0%) or the following site-specific cancers: breast (7 trials; risk ratio = 1.01; 0.79-1.30; I(2) = 43%), prostate (4 trials; risk ratio = 1.00; 0.85-1.17; I(2) = 0%), colorectum (9 trials; risk ratio = 1.02; 0.89-1.16; I(2) = 0%), lung (9 trials; risk ratio = 0.96; 0.84-1.09; I(2) = 0%), genito-urinary (5 trials; risk ratio = 0.95; 0.83-1.09; I(2) = 0%), melanoma (4 trials; risk ratio = 0.86; 0.62-1.20; I(2) = 17%) or gastric (1 trial; risk ratio = 1.00; 0.35-2.85). There was no evidence of differential effects by length of follow-up, statin type (lipophilic vs. lipophobic) or potency. Trial results were generally consistent with observational studies. We conclude that statin use is not associated with short-term cancer risk, but longer-latency effects remain possible.

Impact of high dose statin trials on hospital prescribers

BACKGROUND

The PROVE-IT and REVERSAL studies established that an intensive 80 mg/day dose of atorvastatin was superior to pravastatin 40 mg/day for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) following acute coronary syndromes and in limiting the progression of coronary atherosclerosis. We have evaluated the impact of the results from these studies on statin prescribing by hospital doctors in the 2 years following their publication.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using a nationwide database, 18,894 patients receiving a total of 23,750 hospital discharge prescriptions for atorvastatin were identified between September 2002 and December 2005. From this cohort, patients newly commenced on, switched to, or dose titrated on atorvastatin by a hospital prescriber were identified. The mean daily atorvastatin dose on discharge was calculated for each month and the results were analysed using a segmented regression analysis. There was a significant and sustained increase in the mean atorvastatin dose used by hospital prescribers. This resulted in an increase of 12 mg, (95% CI 10.6, 13.4) in the mean dose prescribed by December 2005. This was attributable largely to a 16.4% (95% CI 13.5, 19.3), 17.2% (95% CI 14.0, 20.5) and 8.8% (95% CI 7.4, 10.2) increase in the prescribing of the 20 mg, 40 mg and 80 mg/day dosages, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The PROVE-IT and REVERSAL studies have had a significant impact on hospital prescribers' choice of atorvastatin dose. It is likely that this has been the result of both the publication and effective promotion of results from these trials.