-
1.
Reported muscle symptoms during statin treatment amongst Italian dyslipidaemic patients in the real-life setting: the PROSISA Study.
Casula, M, Gazzotti, M, Bonaiti, F, OImastroni, E, Arca, M, Averna, M, Zambon, A, Catapano, AL, ,
Journal of internal medicine. 2021;(1):116-128
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIM: Statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS) are a major determinant of poor treatment adherence and/or discontinuation, but a definitive diagnosis of SAMS is challenging. The PROSISA study was an observational retrospective study aimed to assess the prevalence of reported SAMS in a cohort of dyslipidaemic patients. METHODS Demographic/anamnestic data, biochemical values and occurrence of SAMS were collected by 23 Italian Lipid Clinics. Adjusted logistic regression was performed to estimate odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals for association between probability of reporting SAMS and several factors. RESULTS Analyses were carried out on 16 717 statin-treated patients (mean ± SD, age 60.5 ± 12.0 years; 52.1% men). During statin therapy, 9.6% (N = 1599) of patients reported SAMS. Women and physically active subjects were more likely to report SAMS (OR 1.23 [1.10-1.37] and OR 1.35 [1.14-1.60], respectively), whist age ≥ 65 (OR 0.79 [0.70-0.89]), presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (OR 0.62 [0.51-0.74]), use of concomitant nonstatin lipid-lowering drugs (OR 0.87 [0.76-0.99]), use of high-intensity statins (OR 0.79 [0.69-0.90]) and use of potential interacting drugs (OR 0.63 [0.48-0.84]) were associated with lower probability of reporting SAMS. Amongst patients reporting SAMS, 82.2% underwent dechallenge (treatment interruption) and/or rechallenge (change or restart of statin therapy), with reappearance of muscular symptoms in 38.4% (3.01% of the whole cohort). CONCLUSIONS The reported prevalence of SAMS was 9.6% of the whole PROSISA cohort, but only a third of patients still reported SAMS after dechallenge/rechallenge. These results emphasize the need for a better management of SAMS to implement a more accurate diagnosis and treatment re-evaluation.
-
2.
Multiple risk factors for diabetes mellitus in patients with chronic pancreatitis: A multicentre study of 1117 cases.
Olesen, SS, Poulsen, JL, Novovic, S, Nøjgaard, C, Kalaitzakis, E, Jensen, NM, Engjom, T, Tjora, E, Waage, A, Hauge, T, et al
United European gastroenterology journal. 2020;(4):453-461
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diabetes mellitus is a common complication of chronic pancreatitis. It is traditionally considered to develop as a consequence of beta cell loss, but there might be additional factors. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of type 2 diabetes-related risk factors in this context and population-based studies show increased risk of diabetes following acute pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to explore multiple risk factors for diabetes in patients with chronic pancreatitis. METHODS We conducted a multicentre, cross-sectional study of patients with definitive chronic pancreatitis according to the M-ANNHEIM criteria. We used multivariable logistic regression models to determine risk factors independently associated with diabetes. RESULTS The study included 1117 patients of whom 457 (40.9 %) had diabetes. The mean age was 52.8 ± 14.2 years and 67% were men. On multivariate analysis, parameters indicative of beta cell loss (pancreatic calcification, exocrine insufficiency, pancreatic resection) were confirmed as independent risk factors for diabetes (all p ≤ 0.02). In addition, type 2 diabetes-related risk factors (dyslipidaemia and overweight/obesity) were associated with the presence of diabetes (all p ≤ 0.002). Patients with a history of pancreatic fluid collections (indicative of previous attacks of acute pancreatitis) had a marginally increased risk of diabetes (p = 0.07). CONCLUSION In patients with chronic pancreatitis the presence of diabetes is associated with multiple risk factors including type 2 diabetes-related factors. Our observations attest to the understanding of this entity and may have implications for treatment.
-
3.
Efficacy and Tolerability of Pitavastatin Versus Pitavastatin/Fenofibrate in High-risk Korean Patients with Mixed Dyslipidemia: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blinded, Parallel, Therapeutic Confirmatory Clinical Trial.
Ihm, SH, Chung, WB, Lee, JM, Hwang, BH, Yoo, KD, Her, SH, Song, WH, Chae, IH, Park, TH, Kim, JH, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2020;(10):2021-2035.e3
Abstract
PURPOSE Dyslipidemia is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Statins are known to effectively reduce not only low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level but also death and nonfatal myocardial infarction due to coronary heart disease. The risk for CVD from atherogenic dyslipidemia persists when elevated triglyceride (TG) and reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels are not controlled with statin therapy. Therefore, statin/fenofibrate combination therapy is more effective in reducing CVD risk. Here, we assessed the efficacy and tolerability of pitavastatin/fenofibrate combination therapy in patients with mixed dyslipidemia and a high risk for CVD. METHODS This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, therapeutic-confirmatory clinical trial evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of fixed-dose combination therapy with pitavastatin/fenofibrate 2/160 mg in Korean patients with a high risk for CVD and a controlled LDL-C level (<100 mg/dL) and a TG level of 150-500 mg/dL after a run-in period with pitavastatin 2 mg alone. In the 8-week main study, 347 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive pitavastatin 2 mg with or without fenofibrate 160 mg after a run-in period. In the extension study, patients with controlled LDL-C and non-HDL-C (<130 mg/dL) levels were included after the completion of the main study. All participants in the extension study received the pitavastatin/fenofibrate combination therapy for 16 weeks for the assessment of the tolerability of long-term treatment. FINDINGS The difference in the mean percentage change in non-HDL-C from baseline to week 8 between the combination therapy and monotherapy groups was -12.45% (95% CI, -17.18 to -7.72), and the combination therapy was associated with a greater reduction in non-HDL-C. The changes in lipid profile, including apolipoproteins, fibrinogen, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein from baseline to weeks 4 and 8 were statistically significant with combination therapy compared to monotherapy at all time points. Furthermore, the rates of achievement of non-HDL-C and apolipoprotein B targets at week 8 in the combination therapy and monotherapy groups were 88.30% versus 77.98% (P = 0.0110) and 78.94% versus 68.45% (P = 0.0021), respectively. The combination therapy was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that of statin monotherapy. IMPLICATIONS In these Korean patients with mixed dyslipidemia and a high risk for CVD, combination therapy with pitavastatin/fenofibrate was associated with a greater reduction in non-HDL-C compared with that with pitavastatin monotherapy, and a significantly improvement in other lipid levels. Moreover, the combination therapy was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that of statin monotherapy. Therefore, pitavastatin/fenofibrate combination therapy could be effective and well tolerated in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03618797.
-
4.
Dyslipidemia in pediatric CKD patients: results from KNOW-PedCKD (KoreaN cohort study for Outcomes in patients With Pediatric CKD).
Baek, HS, Kim, SH, Kang, HG, Choi, HJ, Cheong, HI, Ha, IS, Han, KH, Cho, HY, Shin, JI, Park, YS, et al
Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany). 2020;(8):1455-1461
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pediatric as well as adult patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are susceptible to cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, which increase their mortality. Dyslipidemia is thought to be one of the most important contributing risk factors for developing CVD. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of dyslipidemia and assess clinical and laboratory risk factors associated with dyslipidemia in East Asian pediatric patients with CKD. METHODS From April 2011 to April 2016, 469 patients with CKD aged < 20 years were enrolled in KNOW-PedCKD (the KoreaN cohort study for Outcomes in patients With Pediatric Chronic Kidney Disease); 356 patients were included in the final analysis. Using the baseline data of the cohort cross-sectionally, a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the risk factors for dyslipidemia; a subanalysis for each lipid abnormality was also done. RESULTS The prevalence of dyslipidemia was 61.5% (n = 219). For dyslipidemia, nephrotic range proteinuria and 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency significantly increased the adjusted odds ratio. In the subanalysis, glomerulonephropathy as the origin of CKD and nephrotic range proteinuria significantly increased the risks for high total cholesterol and high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Overweight or obese body mass index z-score, elevated proteinuria, hypocalcemia, and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D deficiency were significantly associated with low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Glomerular filtration rate stage 3b or higher and hyperphosphatemia significantly increased the risk for high triglycerides. CONCLUSIONS Long-term data accumulation and prospective analysis are needed to clarify the relationship between CKD progression and dyslipidemia and to find additional risk factors for dyslipidemia.
-
5.
Body fat indicators perform better than body mass index in identifying abnormal lipid profiles in boys but not in girls.
Li, H, Huang, T, Liu, J, Yan, Y, Zhao, X, Xiao, P, Mi, J, ,
Pediatric research. 2019;(5):617-624
Abstract
BACKGROUND BMI as a body weight indicator, may inadequately represent the biological effect of body fat on lipid profiles. This study aims to assess whether body fat indicators were superior to BMI for recognizing children with dyslipidemia. METHODS A nationwide cross-sectional study involving 8944 pediatric participants aged 6-18 years. Measures of fat mass index (FMI), fat mass percentage (FMP), BMI, and four lipid profiles were obtained. RESULTS Among boys, the standard multi-linear regression coefficients of FMI for TC, LDL-C, and TG were higher than those of BMI (P < 0.01), but not for HDL-C. Also, the prevalence ratios and area under curves (AUCs) of excess fat classified by FMI for specific abnormal lipid profiles (except for HDL-C) were greater than overweight classified by BMI. The AUCs for detecting children with abnormal TC, LDL-C, and TG of FMI-based excess fat were 3.9%, 5.6%, and 2.8% higher than those of BMI-based overweight, respectively, all P < 0.01. Among girls, the associations of BMI with lipid profiles were substantially similar to FMI. All these results were almost identical when FMP was used instead of FMI. CONCLUSIONS DXA measured body fat performs better than BMI in identifying abnormal lipid profiles in boys but not in girls.
-
6.
Prevalence of dyslipidemia among the diabetic patients in southern Bangladesh: A cross-sectional study.
Das, H, Banik, S
Diabetes & metabolic syndrome. 2019;(1):252-257
Abstract
AIM: Diabetic dyslipidemia is one of the major risk factors for cardiovascular disease which has a vast mortality rate throughout the world. Early detection and treatment of dyslipidemia can avoid risk for cardiovascular disorder in diabetic patients. This study was conducted to determine the prevalence of and pattern of dyslipidemia in diabetic patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS This cross sectional study was performed in several specialized diabetic hospital of Noakhali, a southern district of Bangladesh. All known cases of diabetes mellitus were evaluated for their lipid profile. A total number of 1008 patients were included in the study having 683 (67.8%) female and 325 (32.2%) male subjects. RESULTS The prevalence of dyslipidemia among the male subjects was 73% while among female subjects 71%. Among diabetic males the percentage of high serum Cholesterol, high serum TG (Triglyceride), low HDL (High density cholesterol) and high LDL (Low density cholesterol) was 35.69%, 44.31%, 50.15% and 72.92% respectively, whereas the female had the percentage at 35.29%, 40.85%, 49.49% and 70.57% respectively. CONCLUSION Majority portion of the study subjects were dyslipidemic. The most prevalent pattern among both male and female was high level of LDL and low level of HDL. The prevalence of dyslipidemia in Bangladesh is significantly high, which indicates the urgency of lifestyle intervention strategies to prevent and manage this important health problem and risk factor.
-
7.
Efficacy and Safety of Triple Therapy With Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin in Patients With Dyslipidemia and Hypertension: The Jeil Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin Randomized Clinical Trial.
Hong, SJ, Jeong, HS, Cho, JM, Chang, K, Pyun, WB, Ahn, Y, Hyon, MS, Kang, WC, Lee, JH, Kim, HS
Clinical therapeutics. 2019;(2):233-248.e9
Abstract
PURPOSE Fixed-dose combination therapy with telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin is needed in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia for better adherence and cost-effectiveness than free-equivalent combination therapies. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin versus telmisartan plus amlodipine or telmisartan plus rosuvastatin in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. METHODS The Jeil Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin Randomized Clinical Trial (J-TAROS-RCT) was an 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel, Phase III clinical trial conducted at 9 hospitals in Korea. After a run-in period of >4 weeks, patients who fulfilled the criteria of the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines were eligible for randomization to receive 1 of 3 treatments for 8 weeks: (1) telmisartan/amlodipine 80 mg/10 mg plus rosuvastatin 20 mg, (2) telmisartan/amlodipine 80 mg/10 mg, or (3) telmisartan 80 mg plus rosuvastatin 20 mg. The primary end point was efficacy evaluation of combination therapy with telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin by comparing the change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) and mean percentage change in LDL-C from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment. Adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory data, and vital signs were assessed in all patients. FINDINGS Among 148 patients, the changes in msSBP from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment were a mean (SD) of -24.41 (2.38) versus -9.31 (2.36) mm Hg in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin and telmisartan/rosuvastatin groups, respectively. Significantly more participants achieved the target BP at week 8 in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin group (41 patients [87.2%]) than in the telmisartan/rosuvastatin group (24 [50.0%], P < 0.001). The changes in mean (SD) LDL-C at 8 weeks compared with baseline values were -57.59% (11.59%) versus 6.08% (20.98%) in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin and telmisartan/amlodipine groups, respectively. The percentages of patients who achieved the target LDL-C according to their risk factors after 8 weeks of treatment were 97.87% vs 6.12% in the telmisartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin and the telmisartan/amlodipine groups (P < 0.0001), respectively. No significant differences were found in the incidence of overall AEs and adverse drug reactions, and serious AEs were comparable among 3 groups. IMPLICATIONS Fixed-dose combinations of telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin decreased BP and LDL-C in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. The safety and tolerability profiles of fixed-dose telmisartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin combination therapy were comparable with those of telmisartan plus amlodipine or telmisartan plus rosuvastatin. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03088254.
-
8.
Alirocumab vs usual lipid-lowering care as add-on to statin therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes and mixed dyslipidaemia: The ODYSSEY DM-DYSLIPIDEMIA randomized trial.
Ray, KK, Leiter, LA, Müller-Wieland, D, Cariou, B, Colhoun, HM, Henry, RR, Tinahones, FJ, Bujas-Bobanovic, M, Domenger, C, Letierce, A, et al
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(6):1479-1489
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIM: To compare alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitor, with usual care (UC) in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and mixed dyslipidaemia not optimally managed by maximally tolerated statins in the ODYSSEY DM-DYSLIPIDEMIA trial (NCT02642159). MATERIALS AND METHODS The UC options (no additional lipid-lowering therapy; fenofibrate; ezetimibe; omega-3 fatty acid; nicotinic acid) were selected prior to stratified randomization to open-label alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks (with increase to 150 mg every 2 weeks at week 12 if week 8 non-HDL cholesterol concentration was ≥2.59 mmol/L [100 mg/dL]) or UC for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change in non-HDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24. RESULTS The randomized population comprised 413 individuals (intention-to-treat population, n = 409; safety population, n = 412). At week 24, the mean non-HDL cholesterol reductions were superior with alirocumab (-32.5% difference vs UC, 97.5% confidence interval -38.1 to -27.0; P < .0001). Overall, 63.6% of alirocumab-treated individuals were maintained on 75 mg every 2 weeks. Alirocumab also reduced LDL cholesterol (-43.0%), apolipoprotein B (-32.3%), total cholesterol (-24.6%) and LDL particle number (-37.8%) at week 24 vs UC (all P < .0001). Consistent with the overall trial comparison, alirocumab reduced non-HDL cholesterol to a greater degree within each UC stratum at week 24. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 68.4% (alirocumab) and 66.4% (UC). No clinically meaningful effect on glycated haemoglobin, or change in number of glucose-lowering agents, was seen. CONCLUSIONS In individuals with T2DM and mixed dyslipidaemia on maximally tolerated statin, alirocumab showed superiority to UC in non-HDL cholesterol reduction and was generally well tolerated.
-
9.
Efficacy and safety of pemafibrate (K-877), a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α modulator, in patients with dyslipidemia: Results from a 24-week, randomized, double blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.
Ishibashi, S, Arai, H, Yokote, K, Araki, E, Suganami, H, Yamashita, S, ,
Journal of clinical lipidology. 2018;(1):173-184
Abstract
BACKGROUND To overcome the concerns associated with the use of fibrates, pemafibrate (K-877), a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor modulator, was developed. In a previous phase 2 trial, we showed excellent efficacy and safety of pemafibrate in patients with dyslipidemia. OBJECTIVE The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pemafibrate over 24 weeks in adults with dyslipidemia in comparison with fenofibrate. METHODS In this multicenter, 24-week, double-blind, clinical study, 225 patients with high triglyceride (TG; ≥150 mg/dL [1.7 mmol/L] and <500 mg/dL [5.7 mmol/L]) and relatively low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (<50 mg/dL [1.3 mmol/L] in men or 55 mg/dL [1.4 mmol/L] in women) levels were randomized to receive either pemafibrate at 0.2 or 0.4 mg/d or fenofibrate 106.6 mg/d. RESULTS Pemafibrate 0.2, 0.4 mg/d and fenofibrate significantly reduced TG levels from baseline by -46.2%, -45.9%, and -39.7%, respectively. As compared with fenofibrate, the least squares mean differences (95% confidence intervals) in TG were -6.5% (-12.0, -1.1) and -6.2% (-11.6, -0.8) in pemafibrate 0.2 and 0.4 mg/d respectively, which showed the superiority of these doses of pemafibrate to 106.6 mg/d of fenofibrate. The incidence rates of adverse drug reactions in pemafibrate groups (2.7% and 6.8%) were significantly lower than that in the fenofibrate group (23.7%). Pemafibrate significantly decreased alanine aminotransferase and gamma-glutamyltransferase levels, whereas fenofibrate increased both of them. The increments of serum creatinine and cystatin C were smaller in pemafibrate than those in fenofibrate. CONCLUSIONS Pemafibrate was superior to fenofibrate in terms of serum TG-lowering effect and hepatic and renal safety.
-
10.
Efficacy and Safety of Fixed-dose Combination Therapy With Telmisartan and Rosuvastatin in Korean Patients With Hypertension and Dyslipidemia: TELSTA-YU (TELmisartan-rosuvaSTAtin from YUhan), a Multicenter, Randomized, 4-arm, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase III Study.
Oh, GC, Han, JK, Han, KH, Hyon, MS, Doh, JH, Kim, MH, Jeong, JO, Bae, JH, Kim, SH, Yoo, BS, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2018;(5):676-691.e1
Abstract
PURPOSE Hypertension and dyslipidemia are 2 risk factors of cardiovascular disease that often present simultaneously. Traditionally, treatment of these multiple conditions required separate medications for each disease, which may result in poor compliance and thus lead to possible treatment failure. Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy with a single pill may be a solution in these situations. METHODS This multicenter, 8-week, randomized, double-blind, Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of FDC treatment with telmisartan (80 mg) and rosuvastatin calcium (20 mg) in Korean patients with mild to moderate hypertension and dyslipidemia. Patients were randomly assigned to 4 groups: (1) FDC drug (80 mg of telmisartan and 20 mg of rosuvastatin); (2) 80 mg of telmisartan; (3) 20 mg of rosuvastatin; or (4) placebo. After 8 weeks of treatment, the change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) and mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (MSDBP) between the FDC group and the rosuvastatin group, and the percent change in LDL-C between the FDC group and the telmisartan group, were compared. FINDINGS A total of 210 patients were enrolled in the study (84 in the FDC group, 42 in the rosuvastatin group, 43 in the telmisartan group, and 41 in the placebo group). The reduction in blood pressure was significantly greater in the FDC group than in the rosuvastatin group after 8 weeks of treatment (least squares mean change from baseline, -16.1 [1.6] mm Hg vs -1.7 [2.2] mm Hg [P < 0.001] for MSSBP; -8.8 [1.0] mm Hg vs -1.6 [1.4] mm Hg [P < 0.001] for MSDBP). Least squares mean percent change in LDL-C from baseline was also significantly greater in the FDC group compared with the telmisartan group (-49.3% [2.2%] vs 1.5% [3.0%]; P < 0.001). FDC therapy also had a higher rate of achieving the treatment goal in both blood pressure (60% vs 45%; P = 0.024) and LDL-C (88.8% vs 16.3%; P < 0.001) compared with rosuvastatin or telmisartan alone, respectively. In regression analysis, higher baseline MSSBP, female sex, and lower body mass index were associated with increased reductions in MSSBP, whereas higher baseline LDL-C level and lower body mass index were associated with greater reductions in LDL-C. There were 48 adverse events in 36 patients (17.3% [36 of 208]), and 17 adverse drug reactions in 12 patients (5.8% [12 of 208]), indicating no significant differences in short-term safety among study groups. IMPLICATIONS Treatment with an FDC drug containing telmisartan and rosuvastatin showed similar efficacy in lowering blood pressure and LDL-C levels compared with that of each single drug. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01914432.