Plaque REgression with Cholesterol absorption Inhibitor or Synthesis inhibitor Evaluated by IntraVascular UltraSound (PRECISE-IVUS Trial): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Lipid lowering in patients 75 years and older

More than twenty years ago, knowledge about the importance of cholesterol absorption and the potential therapeutic effect of its inhibition led to the discovery and clinical application of the first and only cholesterol absorption inhibitor to date – ezetimibe. Since then, ezetimibe has become a well-recognized player in lipid-lowering therapy. Recent findings of IMPROVE-IT and EWTOPIA 75 imply that elderly patients over the age of 75 years in particular benefit from ezetimibe. This review summarizes the evidence, discusses the possible underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and calls for a change in future dyslipidemia guidelines.

Intra-coronary Imaging for the Evaluation of Plaque Modifications Induced by Drug Therapies for Secondary Prevention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease are at a high risk of subsequent cardiovascular events; therefore, secondary prevention in the form of therapeutic lifestyle changes, and drug therapies is vital. This article aims to review potential application of intra-coronary imaging for the evaluation of plaque modifications, induced by medications for secondary prevention for CAD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Intra-coronary imaging provides detailed information on the atherosclerotic plaque which is the primary pathological substrate for the recurrent ischemic cardiovascular events. These modalities can detect features associated with high risk and allow serial in vivo imaging of lesions. Therefore, intravascular imaging tools have been used in landmark studies and played a role in improving our understanding of the disease processes. Changes in size and plaque composition over time can be evaluated by these tools and may help understanding the impact of a treatment. Moreover, surrogate imaging end points can be used when testing new drugs for secondary prevention.

Efficacy and Safety of Ezetimibe in Combination with Atorvastatin for Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients Accompanied with Type 2 Diabetes: A Single-Center, Non-randomized Cohort Study

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and hyperlipidemia are with high risk of myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary death events. The combined use of ezetimibe and atorvastatin could improve treatment efficacy and safety. To explore the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe in combination with atorvastatin for the treatment of patients with T2DM and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This was a non-randomized cohort study of 95 consecutive, treatment-naïve patients with T2DM and ACS treated at the Quanzhou First Hospital of Fujian Province between February 2014 and March 2016. According to the treatment strategy they selected, the patients were categorized into the atorvastatin (n = 46) and atorvastatin + ezetimibe (n = 49) groups. The patients were followed up at 2 weeks and 12 months. The primary endpoints included the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events and changed in blood lipids and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP). At 12 months, serum total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were significantly lower, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels were significantly higher in the atorvastatin + ezetimibe (EZ) group than in the atorvastatin group (all p < 0.05). The LDL-C control rate at 12 months was significantly higher in the atorvastatin + EZ group compared with the atorvastatin group (p = 0.006). Seven patients in the atorvastatin group were re-hospitalized for angina pectoris, while only one patient in the atorvastatin + EZ group was re-hospitalized for angina pectoris (p = 0.02). The efficacy of atorvastatin + EZ in treating T2DM patients accompanied with ACS was significantly higher than using atorvastatin alone. This combined strategy has good safety profile, and could be recommended for clinical application.

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.

Homogeneous Assays for LDL-C and HDL-C are Reliable in Both the Postprandial and Fasting State

AIM

Most epidemiological and clinical studies calculated low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) by Friedewald's formula which cannot be used in the postprandial samples. Although the homogeneous assays with poor analytical performance were withdrawn from the market, it remained unclear whether the currently available reagents for LDL-C and high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) are as accurate for postprandial samples as for fasting samples.

METHODS

Fresh blood samples were collected from 59 non-diseased and 109 diseased subjects. Postprandial samples constituted 72.9% and 39.4% of these samples. LDL-C and HDL-C concentrations were measured using the homogeneous assays of four manufacturers (Denka Seiken, Wako, Kyowa Medex, and Sekisui Medical). Simultaneously, LDL-C and HDL-C concentrations were determined using the reference measurement procedures (RMPs) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Total errors were calculated using a routine method (TE_com) and via error component analysis (TE_ECA).

RESULTS

All homogeneous assays for LDL-C and HDL-C met the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) requirements in terms of coefficient of variation, and TE_com in both non-diseased and diseased subjects. LDL-C and HDL-C values measured by the homogeneous assays were in good agreement with those measured by the RMPs in both fasting and postprandial samples. The TE_com and TE_ECA values of the postprandial samples were similar to those of fasting samples, although the TE_ECA values were up to 4.4-fold greater than the TE_com values.

CONCLUSIONS

In both non-diseased and diseased subjects, the homogeneous assays for LDL-C and HDL-C of four manufacturers are as accurate for postprandial samples as for fasting samples.

High-dose statin therapy with rosuvastatin reduces small dense LDL and MDA-LDL: The Standard versus high-dose therApy with Rosuvastatin for lipiD lowering (SARD) trial

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular events (CV) continue to occur due to residual risks in high-risk patients in spite of substantial reductions in the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) with statins. It has been reported that the small-dense LDL (sd-LDL) components of high atherogenic particles are associated with an increased risk of CV, more than large buoyant LDL. However, there are few reports regarding the effects of high-dose statin therapy in improving atherogenic lipoproteins.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter study, a total of 111 high-risk patients were randomly assigned to two groups. In the high-dose therapy group, 58 patients were administered 5mg of rosuvastatin per day for four weeks, after which the dose was titrated to 10mg for the following eight weeks. In the low-dose therapy group, 53 patients were given 2.5mg for 12 weeks. We evaluated the lipid profiles, including the levels of sd-LDL, malondialdehyde-modified LDL-cholesterol (C) (MDA-LDL) as oxidized-LDL, and remnant-like particle-cholesterol. The LDL-C, non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and LDL-C/HDL-C ratio were decreased in the high-dose therapy group (p<0.01). Moreover, the sd-LDL and MDA-LDL levels were significantly reduced in the high-dose therapy group (p<0.05). There were no serious adverse events in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose statin therapy significantly reduced the sd-LDL and MDA-LDL components of atherosclerotic lipoproteins without adverse events in comparison with low-dose statin therapy.