-
1.
The Role of Statins in Current Guidelines.
Rached, F, Santos, RD
Current atherosclerosis reports. 2020;(9):50
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The causal association of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) has been demonstrated in robust experimental, epidemiological, genetic, and interventional randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The goal of this review is to show how the knowledge acquired from statin RCTs influenced and was recommended on guidelines for prevention of ASCVD during the last three decades. RECENT FINDINGS Guideline recommendations have evolved with accruing information derived mostly from statin RCTs, and as decades passed, more intensive LDL-C lowering was recommended according to a given ASCVD risk. Recent guidelines are unanimous in recommending intensive LDL-C lowering for the highest-risk individuals; however, they differ regarding risk stratification tools, use of specific LDL-C targets, management of primary prevention individuals, and thresholds to start non-statin lipid-lowering therapies. Even considering the advent of non-statin therapies like ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors, due to their efficacy, safety, and low cost, guidelines state that statins persist as the main component of ASCVD preventive strategies and should be prescribed in adequate doses to attain evidence-based LDL-C lowering.
-
2.
Mediterranean-Style Diet for the Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Cochrane Review.
Rees, K, Takeda, A, Martin, N, Ellis, L, Wijesekara, D, Vepa, A, Das, A, Hartley, L, Stranges, S
Global heart. 2020;(1):56
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diet plays a major role in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. OBJECTIVES To determine the effectiveness of a Mediterranean-style diet for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD. METHODS We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of Mediterranean-style diets in healthy adults and those at increased risk of CVD (primary prevention) and with established CVD (secondary prevention). RESULTS Thirty RCTs were included, 22 in primary prevention and eight in secondary prevention. Clinical endpoints were reported in two trials where there was moderate quality evidence for a reduction in strokes for primary prevention, and low quality evidence for a reduction in total and CVD mortality in secondary prevention. We found moderate quality evidence of improvement in CVD risk factors for primary prevention and low quality evidence of little or no effect in secondary prevention. CONCLUSIONS There is still some uncertainty regarding the effects of a Mediterranean-style diet in CVD prevention.
-
3.
Effects of strawberry intervention on cardiovascular risk factors: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Gao, Q, Qin, LQ, Arafa, A, Eshak, ES, Dong, JY
The British journal of nutrition. 2020;(3):241-246
Abstract
We conducted a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT) to examine the effects of strawberry interventions on cardiovascular risk factors. We searched multiple databases including PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus to identify eligible studies published before 19 May 2019. The endpoints were blood pressure, total cholesterol (TC), HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, TAG, fasting blood glucose, endothelial function and inflammatory factors. Pooled analyses were performed using random- or fixed-effects models according to a heterogeneity test. We also conducted sub-group analyses by baseline endpoint levels. We included eleven RCT in this meta-analysis (six for blood pressure, seven for lipid profile, seven for fasting blood glucose and six for C-reactive protein (CRP)). Overall, the strawberry interventions significantly reduced CRP levels by 0·63 (95 % CI -1·04, -0·22) mg/l but did not affect blood pressure, lipid profile or fasting blood glucose in the main analyses. Our analysis stratified by baseline endpoint levels showed the strawberry interventions significantly reduced TC among people with baseline levels >5 mmol/l (-0·52 (95 % CI -0·88, -0·15) mmol/l) and reduced LDL-cholesterol among people with baseline levels >3 mmol/l (-0·31 (95 % CI -0·60, -0·02) mmol/l). There was little evidence of heterogeneity in the analysis and no evidence of publication bias. In summary, strawberry interventions significantly reduced CRP levels and may improve TC and LDL-cholesterol in individuals with high baseline levels.
-
4.
Can phytotherapy with polyphenols serve as a powerful approach for the prevention and therapy tool of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?
Levy, E, Delvin, E, Marcil, V, Spahis, S
American journal of physiology. Endocrinology and metabolism. 2020;(4):E689-E708
Abstract
Much more serious than the previous severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus (CoV) outbreaks, the novel SARS-CoV-2 infection has spread speedily, affecting 213 countries and causing ∼17,300,000 cases and ∼672,000 (∼+1,500/day) deaths globally (as of July 31, 2020). The potentially fatal coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by air droplets and airborne as the main transmission modes, clearly induces a spectrum of respiratory clinical manifestations, but it also affects the immune, gastrointestinal, hematological, nervous, and renal systems. The dramatic scale of disorders and complications arises from the inadequacy of current treatments and absence of a vaccine and specific anti-COVID-19 drugs to suppress viral replication, inflammation, and additional pathogenic conditions. This highlights the importance of understanding the SARS-CoV-2 mechanisms of actions and the urgent need of prospecting for new or alternative treatment options. The main objective of the present review is to discuss the challenging issue relative to the clinical utility of plants-derived polyphenols in fighting viral infections. Not only is the strong capacity of polyphenols highlighted in magnifying health benefits, but the underlying mechanisms are also stressed. Finally, emphasis is placed on the potential ability of polyphenols to combat SARS-CoV-2 infection via the regulation of its molecular targets of human cellular binding and replication, as well as through the resulting host inflammation, oxidative stress, and signaling pathways.
-
5.
Aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus: A new perspective.
Rocca, B, Patrono, C
Diabetes research and clinical practice. 2020;:108008
Abstract
Although the improved control of hyperglycaemia and other cardiovascular risk factors was associated with a parallel decline of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and death in both type 1 (T1) and type 2 (T2) diabetes mellitus (DM), the burden of death and hospitalization for ASCVD remains significantly higher by about 2-fold versus the matched non-DM population. Life style interventions, such as physical activity and healthy diet, and drugs, such as statins and low-dose aspirin, may have beneficial effects by targeting one or multiple pathways responsible for accelerated atherosclerosis and its thrombotic complications. The debate on the benefit-risk balance of primary cardiovascular prevention with aspirin has been especially vivacious over the past two years, following the publication of three large randomized, placebo-controlled, primary prevention trials in different settings, spanning from healthy elderly to DM subjects. The aim of this review is to discuss the pathophysiological, pharmacological and clinical evidence supporting the appropriate use of low-dose aspirin in DM, within the context of the current multifactorial approach to primary cardiovascular prevention.
-
6.
Summary of Updated Recommendations for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Women: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.
Cho, L, Davis, M, Elgendy, I, Epps, K, Lindley, KJ, Mehta, PK, Michos, ED, Minissian, M, Pepine, C, Vaccarino, V, et al
Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2020;(20):2602-2618
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality for women in the United States and worldwide. There has been no American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association guideline update specifically for the prevention of CVD in women since 2011. Since then, the body of sex-specific data has grown, in addition to updated hypertension, cholesterol, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, and primary prevention guidelines. The ACC CVD in Women Committee undertook a review of the recent guidelines and major studies to summarize recommendations pertinent to women. In this update, the authors address special topics, particularly the risk factors and treatments that have led to some controversies and confusion. Specifically, sex-related risk factors, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, use of aspirin, perimenopausal hormone therapy, and psychosocial issues are highlighted.
-
7.
Effectiveness of the Ready to Reduce Risk (3R) complex intervention for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.
Byrne, JL, Dallosso, HM, Rogers, S, Gray, LJ, Waheed, G, Patel, P, Gupta, P, Doherty, Y, Davies, MJ, Khunti, K
BMC medicine. 2020;(1):198
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cardiovascular disease is responsible for 31% of all global deaths. Primary prevention strategies are needed to improve longer-term adherence to statins and healthy lifestyle behaviours to reduce risk in people at risk of cardiovascular disease. METHODS Pragmatic randomised controlled trial recruited between May 2016 and March 2017 from primary care practices, England. Participants (n = 212) prescribed statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with total cholesterol level ≥ 5 mmol/l were randomised: 105 to the intervention group and 107 to the control group, stratified by age and sex. The 3R intervention involved two facilitated, structured group education sessions focusing on medication adherence to statins, lifestyle behaviours and cardiovascular risk, with 44 weeks of medication reminders and motivational text messages and two supportive, coaching phone calls (at approximately 2 weeks and 6 months). The control group continued with usual clinical care. Both groups received a basic information leaflet. The primary outcome was medication adherence to statins objectively measured by a biochemical urine test. Self-reported adherence and practice prescription data provided additional measures. Secondary outcomes included cholesterol profile, blood pressure, anthropometric data, cardiovascular risk score, and self-reported lifestyle behaviours and psychological measures (health/medication beliefs, quality of life, health status). All outcomes were assessed at 12 months. RESULTS Baseline adherence to statins was 47% (control) and 62% (intervention). No significant difference between the groups found for medication adherence to statins using either the urine test (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.06, P = 0.968) or other measures. This may have been due to the higher than expected adherence levels at baseline. The adjusted mean difference between the groups (in favour of the intervention group) for diastolic blood pressure (- 4.28 mmHg (95% CI - 0.98 to - 1.58, P = 0.002)) and waist circumference (- 2.55 cm (95% CI - 4.55 to - 0.55, P = 0.012)). The intervention group also showed greater perceived control of treatment and more coherent understanding of the condition. CONCLUSIONS The 3R programme successfully led to longer-term improvements in important clinical lifestyle indicators but no improvement in medication adherence, raising questions about the suitability of such a broad, multiple risk factor approach for improving medication adherence for primary prevention of CVD. TRIAL REGISTRATION International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN16863160), March 11, 2006.
-
8.
Primary versus secondary cardiorenal prevention in type 2 diabetes: Which newer anti-hyperglycaemic drug matters?
Giugliano, D, Ceriello, A, De Nicola, L, Perrone-Filardi, P, Cosentino, F, Esposito, K
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2020;(2):149-157
Abstract
We are observing a resurgence of major diabetic vascular complications after a period of dramatic decrease during the period 1990 to 2010. The classical division of cardiovascular prevention into primary (with an event) and secondary (without an event) is largely used to describe cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes (T2D); however, there is evidence that the cardiovascular risk in diabetes may range from highest in patients who experienced a previous cardiovascular event to mild in patients with the main risk factors at target. Herein, we present details of the 14 cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) published to date, including the total population investigated, and their separation into primary (T2D + multiple risk factors) and secondary prevention (T2D + established cardiovascular disease [CVD]) populations as detailed within the trials. We also summarize evidence for the effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA) and sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) versus placebo on the risk of major cardiovascular events (MACE), heart failure (HF) and diabetic kidney disease (DKD). In primary prevention, SGLT-2i reduce both the risk of hospitalization for HF and progression of DKD; in secondary prevention, SGLT-2i are effective on the three endpoints, DPP-4i are neutral, while GLP1-RA show mixed results.
-
9.
Text messages for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: the TextMe2 randomised controlled trial protocol.
Klimis, H, Thiagalingam, A, Chow, CK
BMJ open. 2020;(4):e036767
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Mobile health may be an effective means of delivering customised individually directed health promotion interventions for cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a lifestyle-focused text messaging programme for primary CVD prevention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Single-blind randomised controlled trial with 6 months' follow-up in 246 patients with moderate-high absolute cardiovascular risk and without coronary heart disease recruited from a rapid access cardiology clinic. Participants will be randomised to receive either usual care or TextMe2 (text message-based prevention programme). The TextMe2 programme provides support, motivation and education on five topics: diet, physical activity, smoking, general cardiovascular health and medication adherence, and is delivered in four text messages per week over 6 months. The primary outcome is change in the proportion of patients who have three or more of five key modifiable risk factors that are uncontrolled (low-density lipoprotein >2.0 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure >140 mm Hg, body mass index >24.9 kg/m2, physical activity (less than the equivalent of 150 min of moderate intensity each week), current smoker). Secondary outcomes are changes in single biomedical risk factors, behavioural risk factors, quality of life, depression/anxiety scores, medication adherence, cardiovascular health literacy and hospital readmissions/representations. Analysis will be according to the intention-to-treat principle and full statistical analysis plan developed prior to data lock. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study has been approved by the Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee at Westmead (AU/RED/HREC/17/WMEAD/186). Results will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ACTRN12618001153202.
-
10.
Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.
Rutjes, AW, Porreca, E, Candeloro, M, Valeriani, E, Di Nisio, M
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;(12):CD008500
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Venous thromboembolism (VTE) often complicates the clinical course of cancer. The risk is further increased by chemotherapy, but the trade-off between safety and efficacy of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy is uncertain. This is the third update of a review first published in February 2012. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis for VTE in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, or an active control intervention. SEARCH METHODS For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 3 August 2020. We also searched the reference lists of identified studies and contacted content experts and trialists for relevant references. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials comparing any oral or parenteral anticoagulant or mechanical intervention to no thromboprophylaxis or placebo, or comparing two different anticoagulants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data on risk of bias, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes including symptomatic VTE and major bleeding as the primary effectiveness and safety outcomes, respectively. We applied GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS We identified six additional randomised controlled trials (3326 participants) for this update, bringing the included study total to 32 (15,678 participants), all evaluating pharmacological interventions and performed mainly in people with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. The certainty of the evidence ranged from high to very low across the different outcomes and comparisons. The main limiting factors were imprecision and risk of bias. Thromboprophylaxis with direct oral anticoagulants (direct factor Xa inhibitors apixaban and rivaroxaban) may decrease the incidence of symptomatic VTE (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.06; 3 studies, 1526 participants; low-certainty evidence); and probably increases the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.68; 3 studies, 1494 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). When compared with no thromboprophylaxis, low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduced the incidence of symptomatic VTE (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.83; 11 studies, 3931 participants; high-certainty evidence); and probably increased the risk of major bleeding events (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.35; 15 studies, 7282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In participants with multiple myeloma, LMWH resulted in lower symptomatic VTE compared with the vitamin K antagonist warfarin (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.83; 1 study, 439 participants; high-certainty evidence), while LMWH probably lowers symptomatic VTE more than aspirin (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17; 2 studies, 781 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Major bleeding was observed in none of the participants with multiple myeloma treated with LMWH or warfarin and in less than 1% of those treated with aspirin. Only one study evaluated unfractionated heparin against no thromboprophylaxis, but did not report on VTE or major bleeding. When compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis, warfarin may importantly reduce symptomatic VTE (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.20; 1 study, 311 participants; low-certainty evidence) and may result in a large increase in major bleeding (RR 3.82, 95% CI 0.97 to 15.04; 4 studies, 994 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study evaluated antithrombin versus no antithrombin in children. This study did not report on symptomatic VTE but did report any VTE (symptomatic and incidental VTE). The effect of antithrombin on any VTE and major bleeding is uncertain (any VTE: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.73; major bleeding: RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.03 to 18.57; 1 study, 85 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS In ambulatory cancer patients, primary thromboprophylaxis with direct factor Xa inhibitors may reduce the incidence of symptomatic VTE (low-certainty evidence) and probably increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo. LMWH decreases the incidence of symptomatic VTE (high-certainty evidence), but increases the risk of major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence) when compared with placebo or no thromboprophylaxis. Evidence for the use of thromboprophylaxis with anticoagulants other than direct factor Xa inhibitors and LMWH is limited. More studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary prophylaxis in specific types of chemotherapeutic agents and types of cancer, such as gastrointestinal or genitourinary cancer.