-
1.
Circulating Mature PCSK9 Level Predicts Diminished Response to Statin Therapy.
Kuyama, N, Kataoka, Y, Takegami, M, Nishimura, K, Harada-Shiba, M, Hori, M, Ogura, M, Otsuka, F, Asaumi, Y, Noguchi, T, et al
Journal of the American Heart Association. 2021;(11):e019525
Abstract
Background Statin-mediated efficacy of lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol varies in each individual, and its diminished response is associated with worse outcomes. However, there is no established approach to predict hyporesponse to statins. PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subxilisin/kexin type 9) is a serine-protease associated with LDL metabolism, which circulates as mature and furin-cleaved PCSK9. Since mature PCSK9 more potently degrades the LDL receptor, its evaluation may enable the identification of statin hyporesponders. Methods and Results We analyzed 101 statin-naive patients with coronary artery disease who commenced a statin. PCSK9 subtypes at baseline and 1 month after statin use were measured by ELISA. Hyporesponse to statins was defined as a percent reduction in LDL cholesterol <15%. The relationship between each PCSK9 subtype level and hyporesponse to statins was investigated. Statins significantly lowered LDL cholesterol level (percent reduction, 40%±21%), whereas 11% of study participants exhibited a hyporeseponse to statins. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that baseline mature PCSK9 level was an independent predictor for hyporesponse to statins even after adjusting clinical characteristics (mature PCSK9 per 10-ng/mL increase: odds ratio [OR], 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.24 [P=0.03]), whereas furin-cleaved level was not (per 10-ng/mL increase: OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.73-2.58 [P=0.33]). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified mature PCSK9 level of 228 ng/mL as an optimal cutoff to predict hyporesponse to statins (area under the curve, 0.73 [sensitivity, 0.91; specificity, 0.56]). Conclusions Baseline mature PCSK9 level >228 ng/mL is associated with hyporesponse to statins. This finding suggests that mature PCSK9 might be a potential determinant of hyporesponse to statins.
-
2.
The Effects of Statin Dose, Lipophilicity, and Combination of Statins plus Ezetimibe on Circulating Oxidized Low-Density Lipoprotein Levels: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Jamialahmadi, T, Baratzadeh, F, Reiner, Ž, Simental-Mendía, LE, Xu, S, Susekov, AV, Santos, RD, Sahebkar, A
Mediators of inflammation. 2021;:9661752
Abstract
BACKGROUND Elevated plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is the main risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Statins are the drugs of choice for decreasing LDL-C and are used for the prevention and management of ASCVD. Guidelines recommend that subjects with high and very high ASCVD risk should be treated with high-intensity statins or a combination of high-intensity statins and ezetimibe. The lipophilicity or hydrophilicity (solubility) of statins is considered to be important for at least some of their LDL-C lowering independent pleiotropic effects. Oxidative modification of LDL (ox-LDL) is considered to be the most important atherogenic modification of LDL and is supposed to play a crucial role in atherogenesis and ASCVD outcomes. OBJECTIVE The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to find out what are the effects of statin intensity, lipophilicity, and combination of statins plus ezetimibe on ox-LDL. METHODS PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 5, 2021, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two independent and blinded authors evaluated eligibility by screening the titles and abstracts of the studies. Risk of bias in the studies included in this meta-analysis was evaluated according to the Cochrane instructions. Meta-analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) V2 software. Evaluation of funnel plot, Begg's rank correlation, and Egger's weighted regression tests were used to assess the presence of publication bias. RESULTS Among the 1427 published studies identified by a systematic databases search, 20 RCTs were finally included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 1874 patients are included in this meta-analysis. This meta-analysis suggests that high-intensity statin treatment is associated with a significant decrease in circulating concentrations of ox-LDL when compared with low-to-moderate treatment (SMD: -0.675, 95% CI: -0.994, -0.357, p < 0.001; I 2: 55.93%). There was no difference concerning ox-LDL concentration between treatments with hydrophilic and lipophilic statins (SMD: -0.129, 95% CI: -0.330, -0.071, p = 0.206; I 2: 45.3%), but there was a significant reduction in circulating concentrations of ox-LDL associated with statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy when compared with statin monotherapy (SMD: -0.220, 95% CI: -0.369, -0.071, p = 0.004; I 2: 0%). CONCLUSION High-dose statin or combination of statins with ezetmibe reduces plasma ox-LDL in comparison low-to-moderate intensity statin therapy alone. Statin lipophilicity is not associated with reduction in ox-LDL plasma concentrations.
-
3.
Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol predicts the benefit of adding ezetimibe on statin in statin-naïve acute coronary syndrome.
Im, J, Kawada-Watanabe, E, Yamaguchi, J, Arashi, H, Otsuki, H, Matsui, Y, Sekiguchi, H, Fujii, S, Mori, F, Ogawa, H, et al
Scientific reports. 2021;(1):7480
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate the effect of baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) on the outcomes of patients with the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) receiving pitavastatin monotherapy or the combination of pitavastatin + ezetimibe. In the HIJ-PROPER study, 1734 ACS patients with dyslipidemia were randomly assigned to receive pitavastatin or pitavastatin + ezetimibe therapy. Statin-naïve participants (n = 1429) were divided into two groups based on the median LDL-C level (131 mg/dL) at enrollment. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, unstable angina, and ischemia-driven coronary revascularization. The median follow-up was 3.2 years. In the < 131 mg/dL group (n = 686), LDL-C changes were - 34.0% and - 49.8% in the pitavastatin monotherapy and pitavastatin + ezetimibe-treated groups (P < 0.0001), respectively; in the ≥ 131 mg/dL group (n = 743), LDL-C changes were - 42.9% and - 56.4% (P < 0.0001, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed that the primary endpoint was not significantly different between the treatment groups for the < 131 mg/dL group, however, it was significantly lower in patients treated with pitavastatin + ezetimibe in the ≥ 131 mg/dL group (Hazard ratio = 0.72, 95% confidence interval = 0.56-0.91, P = 0.007, P value for interaction = 0.012). Statin-naïve ACS patients with baseline LDL-C < 131 mg/dL did not clinically benefit from pitavastatin + ezetimibe, while patients with baseline LDL-C ≥ 131 mg/dL treated with pitavastatin + ezetimibe showed better clinical results than those treated with pitavastatin monotherapy.Clinical Trial Registration: Original HIJ PROPER study; URL: http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr . Unique Identifier; UMIN000002742, registered as an International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial.
-
4.
Baseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Clinical Outcomes of Combining Ezetimibe With Statin Therapy in IMPROVE-IT.
Oyama, K, Giugliano, RP, Blazing, MA, Park, JG, Tershakovec, AM, Sabatine, MS, Cannon, CP, Braunwald, E
Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2021;(15):1499-1507
Abstract
BACKGROUND The 2018 U.S. cholesterol management guideline recommends additional lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe for secondary prevention in very high-risk patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 mg/dL despite maximally tolerated statin. OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between baseline LDL-C above and below 70 mg/dL and the benefit of adding ezetimibe to statin in patients post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of ezetimibe/simvastatin vs placebo/simvastatin in post-ACS patients followed for 6 years (median). A total of 17,999 patients were stratified by LDL-C at qualifying event into 3 groups (50-<70, 70-<100, and 100-125 mg/dL). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, major coronary events, or stroke. RESULTS Absolute differences in median LDL-C achieved at 4 months between treatment arms were similar (17-20 mg/dL). The effect of ezetimibe/simvastatin vs placebo/simvastatin on primary endpoint was consistent regardless of baseline LDL-C of 50-<70 mg/dL (HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.80-1.05]), 70-<100 mg/dL (HR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.87-1.01]), or 100-125 mg/dL (HR: 0.94 [95% CI: 0.86-1.03]; P interaction = 0.95). Normalized relative risk reductions per 1-mmol/L difference in achieved LDL-C at 4 months between treatment arms were 21% in patients with baseline LDL-C of 50-<70 mg/dL, 16% in those with 70-<100 mg/dL, and 13% in those with 100-125 mg/dL (P interaction = 0.91). No significant treatment interactions by baseline LDL-C were present for safety endpoints. CONCLUSIONS Adding ezetimibe to statin consistently reduced the risk for cardiovascular events in post-ACS patients irrespective of baseline LDL-C values, supporting the use of intensive lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe even in patients with baseline LDL-C <70 mg/dL. (IMPROVE-IT: Examining Outcomes in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Vytorin [Ezetimibe/Simvastatin] vs Simvastatin [P04103]; NCT00202878).
-
5.
Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and adherence to lipid-lowering therapies following an acute coronary syndrome.
Bruckert, E, Desamericq, G, Khachatryan, A, Ngo, P, Gusto, G, Sorio-Vilela, F
Reviews in cardiovascular medicine. 2020;(4):643-650
Abstract
Despite dyslipidaemia management guidelines, many patients do not reach low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets due to insufficiently intensive regimens or lack of adherence to their medication. This was a retrospective cohort study on the Pharmacoepidemiologic General Research eXtension (PGRx)-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) registry. Patients included were ≥ 18 years old who suffered an ACS between 2013 and 2016, and treated with lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) at hospital discharge or within 92 days. Patients were followed up to 12 months' post index ACS, a new cardiovascular event, loss to follow-up or death. Treatment intensity (high, moderate and low intensity statins ± ezetimibe) and adherence (proportion of days covered > 80%) are described. A total of 2,695 patients were included; mean age [SD] was 63.1 [12.8] years, and 77% were men. High, moderate and low intensity statins were started in 56% (1,520), 36% (971), and 3% (86) of patients, respectively. A further 2% (46) were on statin/ezetimibe combination, 2% (42) on other LLT and 1% (30) on ezetimibe alone. At follow-up, around 70% of patients were adherent to LLT, with those on moderate intensity treatments showing better adherence (76%) than those on low (63%) or high (67%) intensity treatments. Despite guideline recommendations, many patients following an ACS are not treated with high intensity statins, and adherence remains far from optimal. Effort should be made to increase the proportion of patients treated with high intensity statins following an ACS and to further improve treatment adherence.
-
6.
Role of non-statin lipid-lowering therapy in coronary atherosclerosis regression: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Masson, W, Lobo, M, Siniawski, D, Molinero, G, Masson, G, Huerín, M, Nogueira, JP
Lipids in health and disease. 2020;(1):111
Abstract
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).
-
7.
Meta-analysis of the Relation of Body Mass Index to Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Receiving Intensive Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Lowering Therapy.
Khan, SU, Khan, MU, Riaz, H, Raggi, P, Valavoor, S, Khan, MZ, Kołodziejczak, M, Khan, MS, Krupica, T, Alkhouli, M, et al
The American journal of cardiology. 2020;(5):727-734
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
The impact of body mass index (BMI) on cardiovascular outcomes in patients receiving intensive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapy is uncertain. We performed meta-analysis of 29 randomized controlled trials using PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL through April 2019. Therapies were grouped as more intensive LDL-C lowering therapy (statins, ezetimibe + statin or PCSK9 inhibitors) and less intensive LDL-C lowering therapy (less potent active control or placebo). Random effects meta-regressions and meta-analyses were performed to evaluate association of BMI with cardiovascular endpoints. In 265,766 patients, for every 1 kg/m2 increase in BMI, more intensive therapy compared with less intensive therapy was associated with hazard ratio (HR) of 1.07 for cardiovascular mortality (95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.13); HR of 1.03 for all-cause mortality (0.99 to 1.06) HR of 1.06 for myocardial infarction (1.02 to 1.09), HR of 1.08 (1.03 to 1.12) for revascularization and HR of 1.04 for MACE (1.01 to 1.07). Meta-analysis showed that patients with BMI <25 kg/m2 had the highest risk reduction in mortality and cardiovascular outcomes compared with patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 (p-interaction ≤0.05). In conclusion, patients with normal BMI treated with intensive LDL-C lowering regimens may derive a larger clinical benefit compared with patients with larger BMI. The results could be due to the higher mortality rate of obese patients that may artificially lower the efficacy of therapy, or due to a true therapeutic limitation in these patients.
-
8.
Lipid-Lowering Efficacy of Ezetimibe in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.
Shaya, FT, Sing, K, Milam, R, Husain, F, Del Aguila, MA, Patel, MY
American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions. 2020;(3):239-248
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
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.
-
9.
The efficacy and safety of statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with double-dose statin in patients with high cardiovascular risk: A meta-analysis.
Zhu, Y, Hu, H, Yang, J, Yao, Q, Xu, H, Yu, Y, Liu, T, Lin, S
Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences. 2020;(2):169-182
Abstract
Currently, statins are the first-line therapies for dyslipidemia and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, however, their hypolipidemic effects have not been satisfactory. We performed a meta-analysis to compare lipid-lowering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and statin combination therapy with double-dose statin monotherapy in patients with high cardiovascular risk. Fourteen studies involving 3105 participants were included in the final analysis; 1558 (50.18%) participants received ezetimibe and statin combination therapy and 1547 (49.82%) received double-dose statin monotherapy. Eight studies reported the percentages of changes in several lipid parameters from baseline to endpoint in both groups. Lipid parameters changed more significantly in patients coadministered with ezetimibe and statin (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C]: MD = -9.39, 95% CI -13.36 to -5.42; non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [non-HDL-C]: MD = -10.36, 95% CI -14.23 to -6.50; total cholesterol [TC]: MD = -8.11, 95% CI -10.95 to -5.26; and triglyceride [TG]: MD = -5.96, 95% CI -9.12 to -2.80), with moderate to high heterogeneity among the studies. Two out of fourteen studies investigated several different statins. Our subgroup analysis showed that, compared with double-dose atorvastatin monotherapy, ezetimibe and atorvastatin combination therapy significantly decreased LDL-C, non-HDL-C, TC, and TG levels by 14.16%, 14.01%, 11.06%, and 5.96%, respectively (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the incidence of laboratory-related adverse events (AEs) between statin combination therapy and monotherapy. Overall, ezetimibe and statin combination therapy significantly decreased LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and TC levels in patients with high cardiovascular risk, among which ezetimibe combined with atorvastatin had the best therapeutic effect. Compared with ezetimibe and statin combination therapy, double-dose statin monotherapy did not increase the risk of AEs.
-
10.
Efficacy and safety of lowering LDL cholesterol in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Gencer, B, Marston, NA, Im, K, Cannon, CP, Sever, P, Keech, A, Braunwald, E, Giugliano, RP, Sabatine, MS
Lancet (London, England). 2020;(10263):1637-1643
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND The clinical benefit of LDL cholesterol lowering treatment in older patients remains debated. We aimed to summarise the evidence of LDL cholesterol lowering therapies in older patients. METHODS In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE and Embase for articles published between March 1, 2015, and Aug 14, 2020, without any language restrictions. We included randomised controlled trials of cardiovascular outcomes of an LDL cholesterol-lowering drug recommended by the 2018 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines, with a median follow-up of at least 2 years and data on older patients (aged ≥75 years). We excluded trials that exclusively enrolled participants with heart failure or on dialysis because guidelines do not recommend lipid-lowering therapy in such patients who do not have another indication. We extracted data for older patients using a standardised data form for aggregated study-level data. We meta-analysed the risk ratio (RR) for major vascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or other acute coronary syndrome, stroke, or coronary revascularisation) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol. FINDINGS Data from six articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, which included 24 trials from the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration meta-analysis plus five individual trials. Among 244 090 patients from 29 trials, 21 492 (8·8%) were aged at least 75 years, of whom 11 750 (54·7%) were from statin trials, 6209 (28·9%) from ezetimibe trials, and 3533 (16·4%) from PCSK9 inhibitor trials. Median follow-up ranged from 2·2 years to 6·0 years. LDL cholesterol lowering significantly reduced the risk of major vascular events (n=3519) in older patients by 26% per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol (RR 0·74 [95% CI 0·61-0·89]; p=0·0019), with no statistically significant difference with the risk reduction in patients younger than 75 years (0·85 [0·78-0·92]; pinteraction=0·37). Among older patients, RRs were not statistically different for statin (0·82 [0·73-0·91]) and non-statin treatment (0·67 [0·47-0·95]; pinteraction=0·64). The benefit of LDL cholesterol lowering in older patients was observed for each component of the composite, including cardiovascular death (0·85 [0·74-0·98]), myocardial infarction (0·80 [0·71-0·90]), stroke (0·73 [0·61-0·87]), and coronary revascularisation (0·80 [0·66-0·96]). INTERPRETATION In patients aged 75 years and older, lipid lowering was as effective in reducing cardiovascular events as it was in patients younger than 75 years. These results should strengthen guideline recommendations for the use of lipid-lowering therapies, including non-statin treatment, in older patients. FUNDING None.