The clinical relevance of the reversal of coronary atherosclerotic plaque

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains a leading cause of death globally despite advances in preventive therapies. Understanding of the initiation and progression of atherosclerosis, the interplay between lipoproteins, endothelial dysfunction, inflammation, and immune responses is critical to treating this disease. The development of vulnerable coronary plaques prone to thrombosis, can lead to acute coronary syndromes, for these reasons, the potential plaque stabilization and regression through pharmacological interventions, particularly lipid-lowering agents like statins and PCSK9 inhibitors is crucial. The imaging techniques such as intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), and optical coherence tomography (OCT) play a key role in assessing plaque composition and guiding interventional therapeutic strategies. Clinical evidence supports the efficacy of intensive lipid-lowering therapy in inducing plaque regression, with studies demonstrating reductions in plaque volume and improvements in plaque morphology assessed by IVUS, OCT and NIRS. While pharmacological interventions show promise in promoting plaque regression and stabilization, their impact on long-term cardiovascular events requires further investigation. Multimodality imaging and comprehensive outcome trials are proposed as essential tools for elucidating the relationship between plaque modification and clinical benefit in coronary atherosclerosis. The stabilization or regression of atherosclerotic plaque might serve as the phenomenon linking the reduction in LDL-C levels to the decrease in cardiovascular events. Overall, this review emphasizes the ongoing efforts to advance our understanding of ASCVD pathophysiology and optimize therapeutic approaches for improving patient outcomes.

Benefits and Risks of Antihyperlipidemic Medication in Adults with Different Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Based on the Number Needed to Treat

PURPOSE

The objective of this investigation is to examine the benefits and potential risks of these drugs in individuals by varying baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) values, utilizing the concept of the number needed to treat (NNT).

METHODS

We extensively searched electronic databases, such as PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science, up to 6 August 2023. Baseline LDL-C values were stratified into four categories: < 100, 100-129, 130-159, and ≥ 160 mg/dL. Risk ratios (RRs) and NNT values were computed.

RESULTS

This analysis incorporated data from 46 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), encompassing a total of 237,870 participants. The meta-regression analysis demonstrated an incremental diminishing risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with increasing baseline LDL-C values. Statins exhibited a significant reduction in MACE [number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 25-37], but this effect was observed only in individuals with baseline LDL-C values of 100 mg/dL or higher. Ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors also were effective in reducing MACE (NNTB 18, 95% CI 11-41, and NNTB 18, 95% CI 16-24). Notably, the safety outcomes of statins and ezetimibe did not reach statistical significance, while the incidence of injection-site reactions with PCSK9 inhibitors was statistically significant [number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 41, 95% CI 80-26].

CONCLUSION

Statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors demonstrated a substantial capacity to reduce MACE, particularly among individuals whose baseline LDL-C values were relatively higher. The NNT visually demonstrates the gradient between baseline LDL-C and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Registration: PROSPERO identifier number: CRD42023458630.

Atherosclerotic plaque stabilization and regression: a review of clinical evidence

Atherosclerotic plaque results from a complex interplay between lipid deposition, inflammatory changes, cell migration and arterial wall injury. Over the past two decades, clinical trials utilizing invasive arterial imaging modalities, such as intravascular ultrasonography, have shown that reducing levels of atherogenic lipoproteins, mainly serum LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C), to very low levels can safely reduce overall atherosclerotic plaque burden and favourably modify plaque composition. Classically, this outcome has been achieved with intensive statin therapy. Since 2016, newer and potent lipid-lowering strategies, such as proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibition, have shown incremental effects on plaque regression and risk of clinical events. Despite maximal reduction in plasma LDL-C levels, considerable residual cardiovascular risk remains in some patients. Therefore, there is a need to study therapeutic approaches that address residual risk beyond LDL-C reduction to promote plaque stabilization or regression. Contemporary imaging modalities, such as coronary computed tomography angiography, enable non-invasive assessment of the overall atherosclerotic plaque burden as well as of certain local plaque characteristics. This technology could allow further study of plaque stabilization and regression using novel therapeutic approaches. Non-invasive plaque assessment might also offer the potential to guide personalized management strategies if validated for this purpose.

Management of Coronary Vulnerable Plaque With Medical Therapy or Local Preventive Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) often result from the rupture or erosion of high-risk coronary atherosclerotic plaques (ie, vulnerable plaques). Advances in intracoronary imaging such as intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, or near-infrared spectroscopy have improved the identification of vulnerable plaques, characterized by large plaque burden, small minimal luminal area, thin fibrous cap, and large lipid content. Although pharmacology, including lipid-lowering agents, and intensive risk-factor control are pivotal for management of vulnerable plaques and secondary prevention, recurrent events tend to accrue despite intensive pharmacotherapy. Therefore, it has been hypothesized that local preventive percutaneous coronary intervention may passivate these vulnerable plaques, preventing the occurrence of plaque-related ACS. However, solid evidence is lacking on its use for treatment of non-flow-limiting vulnerable plaques. As such, the optimal management of vulnerable plaques has not been established. Herein, we have reviewed the diagnosis and management of vulnerable plaques, focusing on systematic pharmacology and focal treatments.

Impact of early initiation of ezetimibe in patients with acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Scant data is available on the efficacy and safety of adding ezetimibe to high-intensity statin therapy for early and rapid reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) within 4-12 weeks of an acute-event in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We undertook this meta-analysis to address this knowledge-gap.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for RCTs involving patients with ACS receiving ezetimibe in intervention arm, and placebo/active comparator in control arm. Primary outcome was to evaluate changes in LDL-C levels post-ACS. Secondary outcomes were to evaluate alterations in other lipid parameters and adverse events.

RESULTS

From initially screened 4561 articles, data from 11 studies (20,291 patients) were analyzed. Compared to controls, patients receiving ezetimibe had significantly lower LDL-C at 7-days [MD -19.55 mg/dl(95 %CI:-36.46 to -2.63);P = 0.02;I2 = 91 %], 1-month [MD-24.67 mg/dl (95 %CI:-34.59 to -14.76);P < 0.001;I2 = 81 %], 3-months [MD -18.01 mg/dl(95 %CI:-24.11 to -11.90);P < 0.001;I2 = 92 %] and 10-12 months [MD -16.90 mg/dl (95 % CI: -17.67 to -16.12); P < 0.001; I2 = 0 %] of treatment. Compared to controls, patients receiving ezetimibe had significantly lower total cholesterol at 7-days [MD-21.05 mg/dl(95 %CI:-26.73 to -15.37);P < 0.001;I2 = 0 %], 1-month [MD-25.56 mg/dl(95 %CI:-38.29 to -12.83);P < 0.001;I2 = 85 %], 3-months [MD-22.54 mg/dl(95 %CI:-36.90 to -8.19);P = 0.002;I2 = 22 %] and 12-months [MD-19.68 mg/dl(95 %CI:-20.78 to -18.59);P < 0.001;I2 = 0 %] of treatment. Death from any cause, ACS and non-fatal stroke [OR0.89(95 %CI:0.83-0.96);P = 0.002;I2 = 0 %], non-fatal myocardial infarction [OR0.86(95 %CI:0.79-0.94);P = 0.001;I2 = 0 %] and ischemic stroke [OR0.80(95 %CI:0.68-0.94);P = 0.009;I2 = 0 %] was significantly reduced in patients receiving ezetimibe.

CONCLUSION

Addition of ezetimibe to high-intensity statin therapy at the time of ACS event is associated with significantly better cholesterol reduction at day-7,1-month, 3- months and 1-year of follow-up, which translates into a significantly lower recurrent cardiovascular events post an index event of ACS.

CONCISE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Addition of ezetimibe to high-intensity statin therapy at the time of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) index event is associated with significantly better low density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol reduction at day-7, 1-month, 3-months and 1-year of follow-up, which translates into a significantly lower recurrent cardiovascular events (death from any cause, major ACS, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke) post an index event of ACS.

Effect of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy vs. statin monotherapy on coronary atheroma phenotype and lumen stenosis in patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Background

Evidence indicates that the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy reduces cardiovascular events. However, the impact of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy on coronary plaque regression, plaque stabilization, and diameter stenosis remains a matter of controversy.

Methods

We performed electronic searches in PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify eligible trials assessing the effects of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy versus statin monotherapy reporting at least one outcome among total atheroma volume (TAV), minimum fibrous cap thickness (FCT), lumen volume (LV), and lumen area (LA) derived from intravascular imaging modalities of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT). We used the random-effects model and performed trial sequential analysis (TSA) during this meta-analysis.

Results

Eleven articles with a total of 926 individuals (460 in the dual-lipid-lowering therapy group and 466 in the statin monotherapy group) were included in the final meta-analysis. Compared to statin monotherapy, ezetimibe-statin combination therapy was associated with significantly decreased TAV [WMD = -3.17, 95% CI (-5.42 to -0.92), and p = 0.006], with no effect on the LV of the coronary artery [WMD = -0.52, 95% CI (-2.24 to 1.21), and p = 0.56], the LA of the coronary artery [WMD = 0.16, 95% CI (-0.10-0.42), and p = 0.22], or minimum FCT thickness [WMD = 19.11, 95%CI (-12.76-50.97)].

Conclusion

In patients with coronary artery disease, ezetimibe-statin combination therapy resulted in a significant regression in TAV compared to statin monotherapy, whereas no overall improvements of minimum FCT or lumenal stenosis were observed.

Multifunctional nanoparticle-mediated combining therapy for human diseases

Combining existing drug therapy is essential in developing new therapeutic agents in disease prevention and treatment. In preclinical investigations, combined effect of certain known drugs has been well established in treating extensive human diseases. Attributed to synergistic effects by targeting various disease pathways and advantages, such as reduced administration dose, decreased toxicity, and alleviated drug resistance, combinatorial treatment is now being pursued by delivering therapeutic agents to combat major clinical illnesses, such as cancer, atherosclerosis, pulmonary hypertension, myocarditis, rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, metabolic disorders and neurodegenerative diseases. Combinatorial therapy involves combining or co-delivering two or more drugs for treating a specific disease. Nanoparticle (NP)-mediated drug delivery systems, i.e., liposomal NPs, polymeric NPs and nanocrystals, are of great interest in combinatorial therapy for a wide range of disorders due to targeted drug delivery, extended drug release, and higher drug stability to avoid rapid clearance at infected areas. This review summarizes various targets of diseases, preclinical or clinically approved drug combinations and the development of multifunctional NPs for combining therapy and emphasizes combinatorial therapeutic strategies based on drug delivery for treating severe clinical diseases. Ultimately, we discuss the challenging of developing NP-codelivery and translation and provide potential approaches to address the limitations. This review offers a comprehensive overview for recent cutting-edge and challenging in developing NP-mediated combination therapy for human diseases.

Effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy on mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can quickly restore myocardial perfusion after acute coronary syndrome. Whether and which lipid-lowering regimens are effective in reducing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and mortality risk after PCI remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the benefits of different lipid-lowering regimens on the risk of MACEs and mortality in the post-PCI population by network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Public databases, including PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library, were searched from inception to August 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on lipid-lowering regimens in post-PCI populations were included and analysed. The outcomes were the incidence of all-cause mortality and MACEs, whether reported as dichotomous variables or as HRs.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine RCTs were included. For MACEs, alirocumab plus rosuvastatin (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.44), evolocumab plus ezetimibe and statins (OR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.59), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) plus pitavastatin (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.96) and icosapent ethyl plus statins (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.86) had significant advantages and relatively high rankings. For mortality, rosuvastatin (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.84), ezetimibe plus statins (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.89) and icosapent ethyl plus statins (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.96) had significant advantages compared with the control.

CONCLUSION

EPA, especially icosapent ethyl, plus statins had a beneficial effect on reducing the risk of MACEs and mortality in post-PCI patients. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type-9 inhibitors plus statins were able to reduce the risk of MACEs, but the risk of mortality remained unclear.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018099600.

Efficacy and Safety of Pitavastatin/Ezetimibe Fixed-Dose Combination vs. Pitavastatin: Phase III, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

AIM

We compared the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin/ezetimibe fixed-dose combination with those of pitavastatin monotherapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

This trial was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group trial. A total of 293 patients were randomly assigned into four groups receiving 2 mg pitavastatin, 4 mg pitavastatin, 2 mg pitavastatin/10 mg ezetimibe (K-924 LD), and 4 mg pitavastatin/10 mg ezetimibe (K-924 HD) once daily for 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The percentage changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), the primary endpoint, were -39.5% for 2 mg pitavastatin, -45.2% for 4 mg pitavastatin, -51.4% for K-924 LD, and -57.8% for K-924 HD. Compared with pitavastatin monotherapy, the pitavastatin/ezetimibe fixed-dose combination significantly reduced LDL-C, total cholesterol, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Meanwhile, the cholesterol synthesis marker, lathosterol, was significantly decreased with pitavastatin monotherapy and the pitavastatin/ezetimibe fixed-dose combination, although the decrease was attenuated in the latter. On the other hand, the cholesterol absorption markers, beta-sitosterol and campesterol, were reduced with the fixed-dose combination but not with pitavastatin monotherapy. The incidence of adverse events and adverse drug reactions was not significantly different between the two groups receiving the fixed-dose combination and monotherapy. The mean values of laboratory tests that are related to liver function and myopathy increased but remained within the reference range in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The pitavastatin/ezetimibe fixed-dose combination showed an excellent LDL-C-reducing effect by the complementary pharmacological action of each component, and its safety profile was similar to that of pitavastatin monotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04289649).

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

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

Atherosclerotic Coronary Plaque Regression and Risk of Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Regression Analysis

Importance

The association between changes in atherosclerotic plaque induced by lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) and reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) remains controversial.

Objective

To evaluate the association between coronary plaque regression assessed by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and MACEs.

Data Sources

A comprehensive, systematic search of publications in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science was performed.

Study Selection

Clinical prospective studies of LLTs reporting change in percent atheroma volume (PAV) assessed by IVUS and describing MACE components were selected.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Reporting was performed in compliance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The association between mean change in PAV and MACEs was analyzed by meta-regression using mixed-effects, 2-level binomial logistic regression models, unadjusted and adjusted for clinical covariates, including mean age, baseline PAV, baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, and study duration.

Main Outcome and Measures

Mean PAV change and MACE in intervention and comparator arms were assessed in an updated systematic review and meta-regression analysis of IVUS trials of LLTs that also reported MACEs.

Results

This meta-analysis included 23 studies published between July 2001 and July 2022, including 7407 patients and trial durations ranging from 11 to 104 weeks. Mean (SD) patient age ranged from 55.8 (9.8) to 70.2 (7.6) years, and the number of male patients from 245 of 507 (48.3%) to 24 of 26 (92.3%). Change in PAV across 46 study arms ranged from -5.6% to 3.1%. The number of MACEs ranged from 0 to 72 per study arm (17 groups [37%] reported no events, 9 [20%] reported 1-2 events, and 20 [43%] reported ≥3 events). In unadjusted analysis, a 1% decrease in mean PAV was associated with 17% reduced odds of MACEs (unadjusted OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98; P = .03), and with a 14% reduction in MACEs in adjusted analysis (adjusted OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-1.00; P = .050). Further adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors showed a 19% reduced risk (adjusted OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.96; P = .01) per 1% decrease in PAV. A 1% reduction of PAV change between intervention and comparator arms within studies was also associated with a significant 25% reduction in MACEs (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56-1.00; P = .046).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this meta-analysis, regression of atherosclerotic plaque by 1% was associated with a 25% reduction in the odds of MACEs. These findings suggest that change in PAV could be a surrogate marker for MACEs, but given the heterogeneity in the outcomes, additional data are needed.

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

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

Intravascular Ultrasound in Vulnerable Plaque and Acute Coronary Syndrome

Vulnerable plaque plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), being responsible for most ACS. The concept of vulnerable plaque has evolved with advancements in basic and clinical investigations along with developments and rapid expansion of coronary imaging modalities. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is the first widely applied clinical technology with sufficient tissue penetration and enables us to identify vulnerable plaque and comprehensively understand the pathophysiology of ACS. In this review, we summarize current clinical evidence established by IVUS and the recent advancements in our understanding of vulnerable plaque and its role in ACS management.

Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of ezetimibe for coronary atherosclerotic plaque compositions

Background: Lipid aggregation, inflammatory cell infiltration, fibrous cap formation, and disruption are the major causes of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and the pathologic features of atherosclerotic plaques. Although ezetimibe’s role in decreasing blood lipids is widely known, there are insufficient data to determine which part of the drug has an effect on atherosclerotic plaque compositions.

Objective: The study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy of ezetimibe for coronary atherosclerotic plaque compositions.

Methods: Two researchers independently searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of ezetimibe for coronary atherosclerotic plaques from inception until 22 January 2023. The meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed using Stata 14.0 and TSA 0.9.5.10 Beta software, respectively.

Results: Four RCTs were finally included this study, which comprised 349 coronary artery disease patients. Meta-analysis findings showed that, compared with the control group, intervention measures could effectively reduce the fibro-fatty plaque (FFP) volume [WMD = −2.90, 95% CI (−4.79 and −1.00), and p = 0.003 &lt; 0.05]; there were no significant difference in the reduction of fibrous plaque (FP) volume [WMD = −4.92, 95% CI (−11.57 and 1.74), and p = 0.15 &gt; 0.05], necrotic core (NC) volume [WMD = −2.26, 95% CI (−6.99 and 2.46), and p = 0.35 &gt; 0.05], and change dense calcification (change DC) volume [WMD = −0.07, 95% CI (−0.34 and 0.20), and p = 0.62 &gt; 0.05] between the treatment group and the control group. TSA findings showed more studies are still required to confirm the efficacy of ezetimibe for FP and NC in the future.

Conclusion: Compared to the control group, ezetimibe significantly decreased FFP, but it had no statistically significant difference on FP, NC, or change DC. According to TSA, further research will be required to confirm the efficacy of ezetimibe for FP and NC in the future.

Phytosterols and Cardiovascular Risk Evaluated against the Background of Phytosterolemia Cases-A German Expert Panel Statement

Phytosterols (PSs) have been proposed as dietary means to lower plasma LDL-C. However, concerns are raised that PSs may exert atherogenic effects, which would offset this benefit. Phytosterolemia was thought to mimic increased plasma PSs observed after the consumption of PS-enriched foods. This expert statement examines the possibility of specific atherogenicity of PSs based on sterol metabolism, experimental, animal, and human data. Observational studies show no evidence that plasma PS concentrations would be associated with an increased risk of atherosclerosis or cardiovascular (CV) events. Since variants of the ABCG5/8 transporter affect the absorption of cholesterol and non-cholesterol sterols, Mendelian randomization studies examining the effects of ABCG5/8 polymorphisms cannot support or refute the potential atherogenic effects of PSs due to pleiotropy. In homozygous patients with phytosterolemia, total PS concentrations are ~4000% higher than under physiological conditions. The prevalence of atherosclerosis in these individuals is variable and may mainly relate to concomitant elevated LDL-C. Consuming PS-enriched foods increases PS concentrations by ~35%. Hence, PSs, on a molar basis, would need to have 20-40 times higher atherogenicity than cholesterol to offset their cholesterol reduction benefit. Based on their LDL-C lowering and absence of adverse safety signals, PSs offer a dietary approach to cholesterol management. However, their clinical benefits have not been established in long-term CV endpoint studies.

Lowering of Blood Lipid Levels with a Combination of Pitavastatin and Ezetimibe in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: A Meta-Analysis

Objectives: According to the findings of randomized controlled trials, blood lipid levels in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) can be significantly decreased through a combination of pitavastatin and ezetimibe; however, the effects and clinical applications of this treatment remain controversial. This meta-analysis was aimed at objectively assessing the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin and ezetimibe in lowering blood lipid levels.

Design: Relevant studies were retrieved from electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, and WanFang Data, from database inception to June 8, 2022. The levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients’ serum after treatment were the primary endpoint.

Results: Nine randomized controlled trials (2586 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis indicated that pitavastatin plus ezetimibe resulted in significantly lower levels of LDL-C [standardized mean difference (SMD)=−0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) (−1.15 to −0.58), P<0.01], TC [SMD=−0.84, 95% CI (−1.10 to −0.59), P<0.01], and TG [SMD=−0.59, 95% CI (−0.89 to −0.28), P<0.01] than pitavastatin alone.

Conclusions: Pitavastatin plus ezetimibe significantly decreased serum LDL-C, TC, and TG levels in patients with CHD.

Additive effects of ezetimibe, evolocumab, and alirocumab on plaque burden and lipid content as assessed by intravascular ultrasound: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The additive effects of ezetimibe, evolocumab or alirocumab on lipid level, plaque volume, and plaque composition using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) remain unclear.

METHODS

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials assessing the effects of ezetimibe, evolocumab, and alirocumab on coronary atherosclerosis using IVUS. The primary outcome was change in total atheroma volume (TAV), and the secondary outcomes were changes and differences in plaque composition and lipid content.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 9 trials, involving 917 patients who received ezetimibe, evolocumab or alirocumab in addition to a statin and 919 patients who received statins alone. The pooled estimate demonstrated a significant reduction in TAV with the addition of ezetimibe and favorable effects of evolocumab and alirocumab on TAV. Subgroup analysis also supported favorable effects of evolocumab and alirocumab on TAV, according to baseline TAV, gender, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and prior stain use. Addition of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor to statin therapy resulted in significant reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TG), but not in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). The pooled estimate also showed significant favorable effects of ezetimibe on LDL-C, TC, and TG, but an insignificant effect on HDL-C. Patients who received ezetimibe showed similar changes in the necrotic core, fibro-fatty plaque, fibrous plaque, and dense calcification compared with patients not treated with ezetimibe.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy may further reduce plaque and lipid burdens but may not modify plaque composition. Although current evidence supports a similar impact from the addition of PCSK9 inhibitors to statin therapy, more evidence is needed to confirm such an effect.

Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque Regression: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Over the last 3 decades there have been substantial improvements in treatments aimed at reducing cardiovascular (CV) events. As these treatments have been developed, there have been parallel improvements in coronary imaging modalities that can assess plaque volumes and composition, using both invasive and noninvasive techniques. Plaque progression can be seen to precede CV events, and therefore, many studies have longitudinally assessed changes in plaque characteristics in response to various treatments, aiming to demonstrate plaque regression and improvements in high-risk features, with the rationale being that this will reduce CV events. In the past, decisions surrounding treatments for atherosclerosis have been informed by population-based risk scores for initiation in primary prevention and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels for titration in secondary prevention. If outcome data linking plaque regression to reduced CV events emerge, it may become possible to directly image plaque treatment response to guide management decisions.

Effect of More Intensive LDL-C-Lowering Therapy on Long-term Cardiovascular Outcomes in Early-Phase Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The effect of more intensive LDL-C-lowering therapy (ILLT) on long-term cardiovascular outcomes during the early phase of acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) remains uncertain. We aimed to explore the influence of more intensive LDL-C-lowering therapyduring the early disease phase on long-term cardiovascular events among patients with ACSs.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials that focused on the effect of more ILLT during early-phase ACSs on long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were searched in electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases) from database inception until November 23, 2019. The end points included the incidence of MACEs, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, heart failure, and death events. Study risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tools. Fixed- or random-effects models and meta-regression were performed to evaluate the association between baseline/proportional reduction of LDL-C levels during early-phase disease and the risk of end points using risk ratios with 95% CIs.

FINDINGS

A total of 53,199 participants were involved from 19 studies. The risk of MACEs decreased by 17% (95% CI, 0.76-0.90; P = 0.0012) for more intensive versus control therapy but varied by baseline and proportional reduction of LDL-C levels during early disease phase. The risk reduction of MACEs for more intensive versus control therapy among different subgroups was 26% (95% CI, 0.57-0.95; P = 0.06) with a baseline level >130 mg/dL, 23% (95% CI, 0.63-0.94; P = 0.02) with a baseline level of 100 to 130 mg/dL, and 10% (95% CI, 0.83-0.99; P = 0.07) with a baseline level <100 mg/dL. A significant difference of risk reduction for MACEs existed between patients treated with statin plus ezetimibe versus statin alone in the subgroup with a baseline level >130 mg/dL and proportional reduction >50%. Patients treated with more intensive therapy benefited from reduced risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and heart failure compared with control therapy.

IMPLICATIONS

More ILLT during early disease phase could significantly reduce the risk of long-term cardiovascular outcome in patients with ACSs. This benefit was most pronounced in patients with higher baseline and larger reduction of LDL-C levels in MACEs.

Intensive statin versus low-dose statin + ezetimibe treatment for fibrous cap thickness of coronary vulnerable plaques

BACKGROUND

Acute coronary syndromes mainly result from abrupt thrombotic occlusion caused by atherosclerotic vulnerable plaques (VPs) that suddenly rupture or erosion. Fibrous cap thickness (FCT) is a major determinant of the propensity of a VP to rupture and is recognized as a key factor. The intensive use of statins is known to have the ability to increase FCT; however, there is a risk of additional adverse effects. However, lower dose statin with ezetimibe is known to be tolerable by patients. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of intensive statin vs. low-dose stain + ezetimibe therapy on FCT, as evaluated using optical coherence tomography.

METHOD

Patients who had VPs (minimum FCT <65 μm and lipid core >90°) and deferred from intervention in our single center from January 2014 to December 2018 were included in the trial. They were divided into the following two groups: intensive statin group (rosuvastatin 15-20 mg or atorvastatin 30-40 mg) and combination therapy group (rosuvastatin 5-10 mg or atorvastatin 10-20 mg + ezetimibe 10 mg). At the 12-month follow-up, we compared the change in the FCT (ΔFCT%) between the two groups and analyzed the association of ΔFCT% with risk factors. Fisher exact test was used for all categorical variables. Student's t test or Mann-Whitney U-test was used for analyzing the continuous data. The relationship between ΔFCT% and risk factors was analyzed using linear regression analysis.

RESULT

Total 53 patients were finally enrolled, including 26 patients who were in the intensive statin group and 27 who were in the combination therapy group. At the 12-month follow-up, the serum levels of total cholesterol (TC), total triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C), hypersensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) levels were reduced in both the groups. The ΔTC%, ΔLDL-C%, and ΔLp-PLA2% were decreased further in the combination therapy group. FCT was increased in both the groups (combination treatment group vs. intensive statin group: 128.89 ± 7.64 vs. 110.19 ± 7.00 μm, t = -9.282, P < 0.001) at the 12-month follow-up. The increase in ΔFCT% was more in the combination therapy group (123.46% ± 14.05% vs. 91.14% ± 11.68%, t = -9.085, P < 0.001). Based on the multivariate linear regression analysis, only the serum Lp-PLA2 at the 12-month follow-up (B = -0.203, t = -2.701, P = 0.010), ΔTC% (B = -0.573, t = -2.048, P = 0.046), and Δhs-CRP% (B = -0.302, t = -2.963, P = 0.005) showed an independent association with ΔFCT%.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose statin combined with ezetimibe therapy maybe provide a profound and significant increase in FCT as compared to intensive statin monotherapy. The reductions in Lp-PLA2, ΔTC%, and Δhs-CRP% are independently associated with an increase in FCT.

The effects of lipid-lowering therapy on coronary plaque regression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To assess the influence of lipid-lowering therapy on coronary plaque volume, and to identify the LDL and HDL targets for plaque regression to provide a comprehensive overview. The databases searched (from inception to 15 July 2020) to identify prospective studies investigating the impact of lipid-lowering therapy on coronary plaque volume and including quantitative measurement of plaque volume by intravascular ultrasound after treatment. Thirty-one studies that included 4997 patients were selected in the final analysis. Patients had significantly lower TAV (SMD: 0.123 mm³; 95% CI 0.059, 0.187; P = 0.000) and PAV (SMD: 0.123%; 95% CI 0.035, 0.212; P = 0.006) at follow-up. According to the subgroup analyses, TAV was significantly reduced in the LDL < 80 mg/dL and HDL > 45 mg/dL group (SMD: 0.163 mm³; 95% CI 0.092, 0.234; P = 0.000), and PAV was significantly reduced in the LDL < 90 mg/dL and HDL > 45 mg/dL group (SMD: 0.186%; 95% CI 0.081, 0.291; P = 0.001).Thirty-one studies that included 4997 patients were selected in the final analysis. Patients had significantly lower TAV (SMD: 0.123 mm³; 95% CI 0.059, 0.187; P = 0.000) and PAV (SMD: 0.123%; 95% CI 0.035, 0.212; P = 0.006) at follow-up. According to the subgroup analyses, TAV was significantly reduced in the LDL < 80 mg/dL and HDL > 45 mg/dL group (SMD: 0.163 mm³; 95% CI 0.092, 0.234; P = 0.000), and PAV was significantly reduced in the LDL < 90 mg/dL and HDL > 45 mg/dL group (SMD: 0.186%; 95% CI 0.081, 0.291; P = 0.001). Our meta-analysis suggests that not only should LDL be reduced to a target level of < 80 mg/dL, but HDL should be increased to a target level of > 45 mg/dL to regress coronary plaques.

Trial Registration PROSPERO identifier: CRD42019146170.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Lipid-Lowering Efficacy of Ezetimibe in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

INTRODUCTION

Patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), especially those with recent (< 1 year) acute coronary syndrome (ACS), are at high risk for recurrent cardiovascular events. This risk can be reduced by lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. A comprehensive meta-analysis on the LDL-C-lowering efficacy of ezetimibe is lacking. This study attempts to address this gap.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials evaluating the LDL-C-lowering efficacy of ezetimibe in the ASCVD population was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for publications from database inception to August 2018 and for conference abstracts from 2015 to August 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted to evaluate the LDL-C-lowering efficacy of ezetimibe in the ASCVD population and the recent ACS subgroup.

RESULTS

In total, 12 studies were eligible for the meta-analyses. Treatment with combination ezetimibe plus statin therapy showed greater absolute LDL-C reduction than statin monotherapy (mean difference - 21.86 mg/dL; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 26.56 to - 17.17; p < 0.0001) after 6 months of treatment (or at a timepoint closest to 6 months). Similarly, in patients with recent ACS, combination ezetimibe plus statin therapy was favorable compared with statin monotherapy (mean treatment difference - 19.19 mg/dL; 95% CI - 25.22 to - 13.16; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ezetimibe, when added to statin therapy, provided a modest additional reduction in LDL-C compared with statin monotherapy. However, this may not be sufficient for some patients with ASCVD who have especially high LDL-C levels despite optimal statin therapy.

Role of non-statin lipid-lowering therapy in coronary atherosclerosis regression: a meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Several studies have investigated the association between non-statin lipid-lowering therapy and regression of atherosclerosis. However, these studies were mostly small and their results were not always robust. The objectives were: (1) to define if a dual lipid-lowering therapy (statin + non-statin drugs) is associated with coronary atherosclerosis regression, estimated by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS); (2) to assess the association between dual lipid-lowering-induced changes in low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels and atherosclerosis regression.

METHODS

A meta-analysis including trials of non-statin lipid-lowering therapy, reporting LDL-C, non-HDL-C and total atheroma volume (TAV) with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up was performed. The primary endpoint was defined as the change in TAV measured from baseline to follow-up, comparing groups of subjects on statins alone versus combination of statin and non-statin drugs. The random-effects model and meta-regression were performed.

RESULTS

Eight eligible trials of non-statin lipid-lowering drugs (1759 patients) were included. Overall, the dual lipid-lowering therapy was associated with a significant reduction in TAV [- 4.0 mm3 (CI 95% -5.4 to - 2.6)]; I2 = 0%]. The findings were similar in the stratified analysis according to the lipid-lowering drug class (ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors). In the meta-regression, a 10% decrease in LDL-C or non-HDL-C levels, was associated, respectively, with 1.0 mm3 and 1.1 mm3 regressions in TAV.

CONCLUSION

These data suggests the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors to statin therapy results in a significant regression of TAV. Reduction of coronary atherosclerosis observed with non-statin lipid-lowering therapy is associated to the degree of LDL-C and non-HDL-C lowering. Therefore, it seems reasonable to achieve lipid goals according to cardiovascular risk and regardless of the lipid-lowering strategy used (statin monotherapy or dual treatment).

Effects of Non-statin Lipid-Modifying Agents on Cardiovascular Morbidity and Mortality Among Statin-Treated Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Currently, there is a lack of information on the comparative efficacy and safety of non-statin lipid-lowering agents (NST) in cardiovascular (CV) disease risk reduction when added to background statin therapy (ST). This study determine the relative treatment effects of NST on fatal and non-fatal CV events among statin-treated patients.

Methods: A network meta-analysis based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing non-statin lipid-modifying agents among statin-treated patients was performed. PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Clinicaltrial.gov were searched up to April 10, 2018. The primary outcomes were CV and all-cause mortalities. Secondary CV outcomes were coronary heart disease (CHD) death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), any stroke, and coronary revascularization. Risks of discontinuations were secondary safety outcomes.

Results: Sixty-seven RCTs including 259,429 participants with eight interventions were analyzed. No intervention had significant effects on the primary outcomes (CV mortality and all-cause mortality). For secondary endpoints, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor (PCSK) plus statin (PCSK/ST) significantly reduced the risk of non-fatal MI (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72–0.93, p = 0.003), stroke (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.65–0.85, p < 0.001), coronary revascularization (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75–0.94, p = 0.003) compared to ST. Combinations of ST and all NST except PCSK and ezetimibe showed higher rate of discontinuation due to adverse events compared to ST.

Conclusions: None of NST significantly reduced CV or all-cause death when added to ST. PCSKs and to a lesser extent, ezetimibe may help reduce cardiovascular events with acceptable tolerability profile among broad range of patients.

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

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains an important cause of mortality and morbidity, and high levels of blood cholesterol are thought to be the major modifiable risk factors for CVD. The use of statins is the preferred treatment strategy for the prevention of CVD, but some people at high-risk for CVD are intolerant to statin therapy or unable to achieve their treatment goals with the maximal recommended doses of statin. Ezetimibe is a selective cholesterol absorption inhibitor, whether it has a positive effect on CVD events remains uncertain. Results from clinical studies are inconsistent and a thorough evaluation of its efficacy and safety for the prevention of CVD and mortality is necessary.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe for the prevention of CVD and all-cause mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science on 27 June 2018, and two clinical trial registry platforms on 11 July 2018. We checked reference lists from primary studies and review articles for additional studies. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ezetimibe versus placebo or ezetimibe plus other lipid-modifying drugs versus other lipid-modifying drugs alone in adults, with or without CVD, and which had a follow-up of at least 12 months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and contacted trialists to obtain missing data. We performed statistical analyses according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and used the GRADE to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 RCTs randomising 23,499 participants. All included studies assessed effects of ezetimibe plus other lipid-modifying drugs compared with other lipid-modifying drugs alone or plus placebo. Our findings were driven by the largest study (IMPROVE-IT), which had weights ranging from 41.5% to 98.4% in the different meta-analyses.Ezetimibe with statins probably reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with statins alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 0.98; a decrease from 284/1000 to 267/1000, 95% CI 256 to 278; 21,727 participants; 10 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Trials reporting all-cause mortality used ezetimibe with statin or fenofibrate and found they have little or no effect on this outcome (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.05; 21,222 participants; 8 studies; high-quality evidence). Adding ezetimibe to statins probably reduces the risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95; a decrease from 105/1000 to 92/1000, 95% CI 85 to 100; 21,145 participants; 6 studies; moderate-quality evidence) and non-fatal stroke (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.97; a decrease 32/1000 to 27/1000, 95% CI 23 to 31; 21,205 participants; 6 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Trials reporting cardiovascular mortality added ezetimibe to statin or fenofibrate, probably having little or no effect on this outcome (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.12; 19457 participants; 6 studies; moderate-quality evidence). The need for coronary revascularisation might be reduced by adding ezetimibe to statin (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.99; a decrease from 196/1000 to 184/1000, 95% 175 to 194; 21,323 participants; 7 studies); however, no difference in coronary revascularisation rate was observed when a sensitivity analysis was limited to studies with a low risk of bias.In terms of safety, adding ezetimibe to statins may make little or no difference in the risk of hepatopathy (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.35; 20,687 participants; 4 studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether ezetimibe increase or decrease the risk of myopathy (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.38; 20,581 participants; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence) and rhabdomyolysis, given the wide CIs and low event rate. Little or no difference in the risk of cancer, gallbladder-related disease and discontinuation due to adverse events were observed between treatment groups. For serum lipids, adding ezetimibe to statin or fenofibrate might further reduce the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol and triglyceride levels and likely increase the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels; however, substantial heterogeneity was detected in most analyses.None of the included studies reported on health-related quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate- to high-quality evidence suggests that ezetimibe has modest beneficial effects on the risk of CVD endpoints, primarily driven by a reduction in non-fatal MI and non-fatal stroke, but it has little or no effect on clinical fatal endpoints. The cardiovascular benefit of ezetimibe might involve the reduction of LDL-C, total cholesterol and triglycerides. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether ezetimibe increases the risk of adverse events due to the low and very low quality of the evidence. The evidence for beneficial effects was mainly obtained from individuals with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD, predominantly with acute coronary syndrome) administered ezetimibe plus statins. However, there is limited evidence regarding the role of ezetimibe in primary prevention and the effects of ezetimibe monotherapy in the prevention of CVD, and these topics thus requires further investigation.

The effect of combined ezetimibe and statin therapy versus statin therapy alone on coronary plaque volume assessed by intravascular ultrasound: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend an intensive lipid-lowering therapy to achieve the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target in patients with high risk of cardiovascular disease. Former studies suggested adding ezetimibe to statin therapy in the above setting may promote plaque changes; however, this effect has not been consistently reported.

METHODS

Electronic searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library on November 30, 2017 to identify prospective trials assessing the effects of combined ezetimibe and statin therapy versus statin therapy alone on atheroma volume using intravascular ultrasound. The effect size between treatment groups within individual studies was assessed by weighted mean difference (MD) using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Eight studies were obtained for systematic review and 6 of them compromising total of 583 subjects that meet the criteria were meta-analyzed. There was a significant reduction from baseline to follow-up in total atheroma volume with an MD of -3.71 mm³ (95% confidence interval: -5.98 to -1.44, P < .001), whereas analysis for percent atheroma volume demonstrated weighted MD of - 0.77% (-1.68 to 0.14, P = .10). A substantial decrease in LDL-C was observed with MD -16.75 mg/dL (-20.89 to -12.60, P < .00001).

CONCLUSION

The addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy is effective in reducing total atheroma volume assessed by intravascular ultrasound and also resulted in effective reduction of plasma LDL-C levels.