Lipid-lowering treatment patterns among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with high cardiovascular disease risk

Prevalence of statin intolerance: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Statin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.26, P = 0.02), hypothyroidism (OR 1.37, P = 0.01), chronic liver, and renal failure (P < 0.05 for both) were significantly associated with SI in the meta-regression model. Antiarrhythmic agents, calcium channel blockers, alcohol use, and increased statin dose were also associated with a higher risk of SI.

CONCLUSION

Based on the present analysis of >4 million patients, the prevalence of SI is low when diagnosed according to international definitions. These results support the concept that the prevalence of complete SI might often be overestimated and highlight the need for the careful assessment of patients with potential symptoms related to SI.

A large remaining potential in lipid-lowering drug treatment in the type 2 diabetes population: A Danish nationwide cohort study

AIM

To assess lipid-lowering drug (LLD) use patterns during 1996-2017 and examine lipid levels in relation to the use of LLDs and prevalent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

METHODS

Using a nationwide diabetes register, 404 389 individuals with type 2 diabetes living in Denmark during 1996-2017 were identified. Individuals were followed from 1 January 1996 or date of type 2 diabetes diagnosis until date of emigration, death or 1 January 2017. Redemptions of prescribed LLDs were ascertained from the nationwide Register of Medicinal Products Statistics. Data on lipid levels were sourced from the National Laboratory Database since 2010. LLD coverage was calculated at any given time based on the redeemed amount and dose. Trends in lipid levels were estimated using an additive mixed-effect model. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment was assessed based on recommended targets by the 2011, 2016 and 2019 guidelines for management of dyslipidaemias.

RESULTS

LLD use has decreased since 2012 and only 55% of those with type 2 diabetes were LLD users in 2017. A decline in levels of total cholesterol and LDL-C, and an increase in triglycerides, was observed during 2010-2017. Annual mean levels of LDL-C were lower among LLD users compared with non-users (in 2017: 1.84 vs. 2.57 mmol/L). A greater fraction of LLD users achieved the LDL-C goal of less than 1.8 mmol/L compared with non-users (in 2017: 51.7% and 19%, respectively). Among LLD users with prevalent ASCVD, 26.9% and 55% had, as recommended by current 2019 European guidelines, an LDL-C level of less than 1.4 mmol/L and less than 1.8 mmol/L, respectively, in 2017.

CONCLUSIONS

LLD use and LDL-C levels are far from optimal in the Danish type 2 diabetes population and improvement in LLD use could reduce ASCVD events.

Real-World Data to Identify Hypercholesterolemia Patients on Suboptimal Statin Therapy

AIM

Statins are generally well-tolerated but some patients develop adverse events and down-titrate or discontinue statins. It is important to understand the frequency of dyslipidemia patients with the inability to continue statins. The aim of the present study was to identify the frequency of high-risk dyslipidemia patients who are unable to take or not taking statins for any reason using Japanese hospital claims database.

METHODS

2,527,405 dyslipidemia patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were investigated between April 2008 and September 2017. Definition 1 included statin discontinuation or down-titration with non-statin lipid modifying therapy (LMT) prescription, rhabdomyolysis or muscle-related symptoms with statin down-titration or discontinuation, or prescription for ≥3 statin types. Definition 2 included all components of Definition 1 in addition to statin down-titration or discontinuation for any reason. Patients never given statins but who started non-statin LMT were considered as Definition 3. The achievement rate of the target LDL-C level was investigated.

RESULTS

Among 54,296 patients with statin prescription, 2.32% and 48.38% patients were identified as Definition 1 and 2, respectively. Of eligible patients, 13.16% patients were identified as Definition 3. The achievement rate of target LDL-C level was lower in patients meeting each definition than not satisfying each definition.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a proportion of high-risk dyslipidemia patients unable to take or not taking statins for any reason, and it is associated with lower achievement rates of target LDL-C levels. Suboptimal management of LDL-C is directly associated with residual cardiovascular risk and implementation of alternative therapeutic options in addition to existing LMT is warranted.

Increased Post-procedural Non-gastrointestinal Adverse Events After Outpatient Colonoscopy in High-risk Patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The incidence and predictors of non-gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) after colonoscopy are not well-understood. We studied the effects of antithrombotic agents, cardiopulmonary comorbidities, and age on risk of non-GI AEs after colonoscopy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective longitudinal analysis to assess the diagnosis, procedure, and prescription drug codes in a United States commercial claims database (March 2010-March 2012). Data from patients at increased risk (n = 82,025; defined as patients with pulmonary comorbidities or cardiovascular disease requiring antithrombotic medications) were compared with data from 398,663 average-risk patients. In a 1:1 matched analysis, 51,932 patients at increased risk, examined by colonoscopy, were compared with 51,932 matched (on the basis of age, sex, and comorbidities) patients at increased risk who did not undergo colonoscopy. We tracked cardiac, pulmonary, and neurovascular events 1-30 days after colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Thirty days after outpatient colonoscopy, non-GI AEs were significantly higher in patients taking antithrombotic medications (7.3%; odds ratio [OR], 10.75; 95% confidence interval, 10.13-11.42) or those with pulmonary comorbidities (1.8%; OR, 2.44; 95% confidence interval, 2.27-2.62) vs average-risk patients (0.7%) and in patients 60-69 years old (OR, 2.21; 95% confidence interval, 2.01-2.42) or 70 years or older (OR, 6.45; 95% confidence interval, 5.89-7.06), compared with patients younger than 50 years. The 30-day incidence of non-GI AEs in patients at increased risk who underwent colonoscopy was also significantly higher than in matched patients at increased risk who did not undergo colonoscopy in the anticoagulant group (OR, 2.31; 95% confidence interval, 2.01-2.65) and in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease group (OR, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased number of comorbidities and older age (older than 60 years) are associated with increased risk of non-GI AEs after colonoscopy. These findings indicate the importance of determining comorbid risk and evaluating antithrombotic management before colonoscopy.

Lipid-lowering efficacy of the PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab (AMG 145) in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND

Patients with type 2 diabetes have increased cardiovascular risk. PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies have been shown to reduce LDL cholesterol and other lipids, but specific efficacy for patients with diabetes is unknown. We compared the effect of the PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab on lipid parameters in patients with and without type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We did a random-effects meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials comparing the efficacy of evolocumab, placebo, and ezetimibe to improve lipid parameters in adult patients (age 18-80 years) with or without type 2 diabetes. We searched MEDLINE and Embase to identify eligible 12-week, phase 3 trials published between Jan 1, 2012, and Feb 28, 2015. We excluded trials that included patients who had homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia. All analyses were based on individual participant data. We used DerSimonian and Laird random-effects meta-analyses to compare the mean changes from baseline in concentrations of LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, lipoprotein(a), and HDL cholesterol at 12 weeks for evolocumab, placebo, and ezetimibe. We also assessed the effect of evolocumab therapy compared with placebo across subgroups of patients based on glycaemia, insulin use, renal function, and cardiovascular disease status at baseline.

RESULTS

Three trials met our inclusion criteria, and included 413 patients with type 2 diabetes and 2119 patients without type 2 diabetes. In patients with type 2 diabetes evolocumab caused mean reductions in LDL cholesterol concentration that were 60% (95% CI 51-69) versus placebo and 39% (32-47) versus ezetimibe. In patients without type 2 diabetes, evolocumab caused mean reductions in LDL cholesterol that were 66% (62-70) versus placebo and 40% (36-45) versus ezetimibe. In patients with type 2 diabetes, evolocumab was associated with reductions in non-HDL cholesterol (55% [47-63] vs placebo and 34% [26-41] vs ezetimibe), total cholesterol (38% [32-44] vs placebo and 24% [16-31] vs ezetimibe), and lipoprotein(a) (31% [25-37] vs placebo and 26% [16-35] vs ezetimibe), and an increase in HDL cholesterol (7% [4-11] vs placebo and 8% [4-13] vs ezetimibe). Findings were similar across diabetes subgroups based on glycaemia, insulin use, renal function, and cardiovascular disease status.

INTERPRETATION

Evolocumab markedly reduces atherogenic lipoproteins in patients with type 2 diabetes, an effect that is consistent across subgroups and similar to that seen in patients without type 2 diabetes. Results from ongoing cardiovascular outcome trials of PCSK9 inhibitors will provide additional data to inform the use of these drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes.

FUNDING

Amgen.