MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study

Optimal Medical Management Reduces Risk of Disease Progression and Ischemic Events in Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Patients: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study

Background and Purpose: To assess the effect of optimal medical management including atherosclerotic risk factor control on ischemic stroke (IS), transient ischemic attack (TIA), carotid revascularization (CRV), and progression of severity of carotid stenosis (PSCS) in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS). Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with ACAS (who had at least 3 serial carotid duplex ultrasounds) for incidence of IS, TIA, and PSCS. Results: Eight hundred sixty-four patients with a mean follow-up duration of 79 ± 36 months were included. IS/TIA and CRV occurred in 12.2% of the patients and PCSS was observed in 21.5% vessels. On univariate analysis it was found that low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels >100 mg/dL, no statin or low-potency statins, average systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥140 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90 mm Hg and history of smoking were predictors of the combined endpoint of IS/TIA/CRV and PSCS. On multivariate analysis, it was found that LDL >100 mg/dL, no statin or low-potency statin, SBP ≥140 mm Hg and/or DBP ≥90 mm Hg, and Hx of smoking were independent predictors of PSCS. Similarly no statin or low-potency statin, SBP ≥140 mm Hg and/or DBP ≥90 mm Hg, Hx of atrial fibrillation/flutter, Hx of chronic kidney disease, and PSCS were independent predictors of IS/TIA. No statin or low-potency statin, SBP ≥140 mm Hg and/or DBP ≥90 mm Hg, diabetes mellitus, baseline carotid artery stenosis ≥70%, and PSCS were found to be independent predictors of combined endpoint IS/TIA and CRV. Conclusion: Intensive medical therapy in the patients with ACAS results in lower incidence of IS/TIA, CRV, and PSCS with a significant incremental beneficial effect.

Antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality in healthy participants and patients with various diseases

BACKGROUND

Our systematic review has demonstrated that antioxidant supplements may increase mortality. We have now updated this review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science to February 2011. We scanned bibliographies of relevant publications and asked pharmaceutical companies for additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all primary and secondary prevention randomised clinical trials on antioxidant supplements (beta-carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium) versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors extracted data. Random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analyses were conducted. Risk of bias was considered in order to minimise the risk of systematic errors. Trial sequential analyses were conducted to minimise the risk of random errors. Random-effects model meta-regression analyses were performed to assess sources of intertrial heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-eight randomised trials with 296,707 participants were included. Fifty-six trials including 244,056 participants had low risk of bias. Twenty-six trials included 215,900 healthy participants. Fifty-two trials included 80,807 participants with various diseases in a stable phase. The mean age was 63 years (range 18 to 103 years). The mean proportion of women was 46%. Of the 78 trials, 46 used the parallel-group design, 30 the factorial design, and 2 the cross-over design. All antioxidants were administered orally, either alone or in combination with vitamins, minerals, or other interventions. The duration of supplementation varied from 28 days to 12 years (mean duration 3 years; median duration 2 years). Overall, the antioxidant supplements had no significant effect on mortality in a random-effects model meta-analysis (21,484 dead/183,749 (11.7%) versus 11,479 dead/112,958 (10.2%); 78 trials, relative risk (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.05) but significantly increased mortality in a fixed-effect model (RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.05). Heterogeneity was low with an I(2)- of 12%. In meta-regression analysis, the risk of bias and type of antioxidant supplement were the only significant predictors of intertrial heterogeneity. Meta-regression analysis did not find a significant difference in the estimated intervention effect in the primary prevention and the secondary prevention trials. In the 56 trials with a low risk of bias, the antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality (18,833 dead/146,320 (12.9%) versus 10,320 dead/97,736 (10.6%); RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.07). This effect was confirmed by trial sequential analysis. Excluding factorial trials with potential confounding showed that 38 trials with low risk of bias demonstrated a significant increase in mortality (2822 dead/26,903 (10.5%) versus 2473 dead/26,052 (9.5%); RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.15). In trials with low risk of bias, beta-carotene (13,202 dead/96,003 (13.8%) versus 8556 dead/77,003 (11.1%); 26 trials, RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.09) and vitamin E (11,689 dead/97,523 (12.0%) versus 7561 dead/73,721 (10.3%); 46 trials, RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.05) significantly increased mortality, whereas vitamin A (3444 dead/24,596 (14.0%) versus 2249 dead/16,548 (13.6%); 12 trials, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.18), vitamin C (3637 dead/36,659 (9.9%) versus 2717 dead/29,283 (9.3%); 29 trials, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.07), and selenium (2670 dead/39,779 (6.7%) versus 1468 dead/22,961 (6.4%); 17 trials, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) did not significantly affect mortality. In univariate meta-regression analysis, the dose of vitamin A was significantly associated with increased mortality (RR 1.0006, 95% CI 1.0002 to 1.001, P = 0.002).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to support antioxidant supplements for primary or secondary prevention. Beta-carotene and vitamin E seem to increase mortality, and so may higher doses of vitamin A. Antioxidant supplements need to be considered as medicinal products and should undergo sufficient evaluation before marketing.

Combination of niacin extended-release and simvastatin results in a less atherogenic lipid profile than atorvastatin monotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of combination niacin extended-release + simvastatin (NER/S) versus atorvastatin alone on apolipoproteins and lipid fractions in a post hoc analysis from SUPREME, a study which compared the lipid effects of niacin extended-release + simvastatin and atorvastatin in patients with hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients (n = 137) with dyslipidemia (not previously receiving statin therapy or having discontinued any lipid-altering treatment 4-5 weeks prior to the study) received NER/S (1000/40 mg/day for four weeks, then 2000/40 mg/day for eight weeks) or atorvastatin 40 mg/day for 12 weeks. Median percent changes in apolipoprotein (apo) A-1, apo B, and the apo B:A-I ratio, and nuclear magnetic resonance lipoprotein subclasses from baseline to week 12 were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

NER/S treatment produced significantly greater percent changes in apo A-I and apo B:A-I, and, at the final visit, apo B < 80 mg/dL was attained by 59% versus 33% of patients, compared with atorvastatin treatment (P = 0.003). NER/S treatment resulted in greater percent reductions in calculated particle numbers for low-density lipoprotein (LDL, 52% versus 43%; P = 0.022), small LDL (55% versus 45%; P = 0.011), very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) and total chylomicrons (63% versus 39%; P < 0.001), and greater increases in particle size for LDL (2.7% versus 1.0%; P = 0.007) and VLDL (9.3% versus 0.1%; P < 0.001), compared with atorvastatin.

CONCLUSION

NER/S treatment significantly improved apo A-I levels and the apo B:A-I ratio, significantly lowered the number of atherogenic LDL particles and VLDL and chylomicron particles, and increased the mean size of LDL and VLDL particles, compared with atorvastatin.

Antioxidant supplements for preventing gastrointestinal cancers

BACKGROUND

Oxidative stress may cause gastrointestinal cancers. The evidence on whether antioxidant supplements are effective in preventing gastrointestinal cancers is contradictory.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidant supplements in preventing gastrointestinal cancers.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through the trials registers of the four Cochrane Review Groups on gastrointestinal diseases, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2007), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, SCI-EXPANDED, and The Chinese Biomedical Database from inception to October 2007. We scanned reference lists and contacted pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing antioxidant supplements to placebo/no intervention examining occurrence of gastrointestinal cancers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors (GB and DN) independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. Outcome measures were gastrointestinal cancers, overall mortality, and adverse effects. Outcomes were reported as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analysis. Meta-regression assessed the effect of covariates across the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 20 randomised trials (211,818 participants), assessing beta-carotene (12 trials), vitamin A (4 trials), vitamin C (8 trials), vitamin E (10 trials), and selenium (9 trials). Trials quality was generally high. Heterogeneity was low to moderate. Antioxidant supplements were without significant effects on gastrointestinal cancers (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.06). However, there was significant heterogeneity (I(2) = 54.0%, P = 0.003). The heterogeneity may have been explained by bias risk (low-bias risk trials RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.13 compared to high-bias risk trials RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80; test of interaction P < 0.0005), and type of antioxidant supplement (beta-carotene potentially increasing and selenium potentially decreasing cancer risk). The antioxidant supplements had no significant effects on mortality in a random-effects model meta-analysis (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.07, I(2) = 53.5%), but significantly increased mortality in a fixed-effect model meta-analysis (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.07). Beta-carotene in combination with vitamin A (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.23) and vitamin E (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11) significantly increased mortality. Increased yellowing of the skin and belching were non-serious adverse effects of beta-carotene. In five trials (four with high risk of bias), selenium seemed to show significant beneficial effect on gastrointestinal cancer occurrence (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.75, I(2) = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We could not find convincing evidence that antioxidant supplements prevent gastrointestinal cancers. On the contrary, antioxidant supplements seem to increase overall mortality. The potential cancer preventive effect of selenium should be tested in adequately conducted randomised trials.

Statin treatment as a confounding factor in human trials with vitamin E

Interventional trials with vitamin E have been planned on the assumption that it could reduce atherosclerotic progression via inhibition of oxidative stress. These trials have been conducted in patients at risk for or with cardiovascular disease, but the results have been divergent. The reason for the equivocal results is still unclear. We have recently demonstrated that in patients with hypercholesterolemia, the administration of a statin is associated with reduced urinary isoprostanes, a marker of oxidative stress, and normalization of circulating levels of vitamin E, indicating that statins enhance the antioxidant status. Based on these arguments, we reanalyzed the interventional trials with vitamin E to see if concomitant use of statins could have created a potential bias. We reviewed 9 interventional trials, each including > 1000 patients. In 5 of the 9 trials, the concomitant use of statins was reported. In the arm randomized to vitamin E, a concomitant use of statins was reported in at least one-third of the population. In some trials, the percentage of patients given statins was > 50%, suggesting that a large part of the follow-up population was likely useless treated with vitamin E in view of the concomitant antioxidant effect of statins. Also, the anti-atherosclerotic effect of statins could have reduced the possibility that a prespecified sample size had an adequate power to observe a difference between vitamin E and placebo-treated groups. We therefore suggest that a meta-analysis of trials with vitamin E should be re-done by excluding patients who concomitantly used statins.

Antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality in healthy participants and patients with various diseases

BACKGROUND

Animal and physiological research as well as observational studies suggest that antioxidant supplements may improve survival.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of antioxidant supplements on mortality in primary or secondary prevention randomised clinical trials.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2005), EMBASE (1985 to October 2005), and the Science Citation Index Expanded (1945 to October 2005). We scanned bibliographies of relevant publications and wrote to pharmaceutical companies for additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all primary and secondary prevention randomised clinical trials on antioxidant supplements (beta-carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium) versus placebo or no intervention. Included participants were either healthy (primary prevention trials) or had any disease (secondary prevention trials).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors extracted data. Trials with adequate randomisation, blinding, and follow-up were classified as having a low risk of bias. Random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed. Random-effects meta-regression analyses were performed to assess sources of intertrial heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-seven randomised trials with 232,550 participants were included. Forty-seven trials including 180,938 participants had low risk of bias. Twenty-one trials included 164,439 healthy participants. Forty-six trials included 68111 participants with various diseases (gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, neurological, ocular, dermatological, rheumatoid, renal, endocrinological, or unspecified). Overall, the antioxidant supplements had no significant effect on mortality in a random-effects meta-analysis (relative risk [RR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99 to 1.06), but significantly increased mortality in a fixed-effect model (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.06). In meta-regression analysis, the risk of bias and type of antioxidant supplement were the only significant predictors of intertrial heterogeneity. In the trials with a low risk of bias, the antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.08). When the different antioxidants were assessed separately, analyses including trials with a low risk of bias and excluding selenium trials found significantly increased mortality by vitamin A (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.24), beta-carotene (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11), and vitamin E (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.07), but no significant detrimental effect of vitamin C (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.20). Low-bias risk trials on selenium found no significant effect on mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.09).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to support antioxidant supplements for primary or secondary prevention. Vitamin A, beta-carotene, and vitamin E may increase mortality. Future randomised trials could evaluate the potential effects of vitamin C and selenium for primary and secondary prevention. Such trials should be closely monitored for potential harmful effects. Antioxidant supplements need to be considered medicinal products and should undergo sufficient evaluation before marketing.

The endocannabinoid system: a promising novel mechanistic pathway in the cardiometabolic syndrome

The endocannabinoid system (ECS) is a neuroendocrine system that modulates several cardiometabolic processes. An overactive ECS is implicated as a significant contributor to the cardiometabolic syndrome and obesity, in addition to a large number of other physiologic processes. Endocannabinoid receptors have been detected centrally and peripherally, regulating appetite, food intake, metabolism, and storage. ECS blockade is thought to be a promising new pharmacologic modality of improving the unfavorable metabolic risk profile in patients with the cardiometabolic syndrome and obesity.

Antioxidant supplements for preventing gastrointestinal cancers

BACKGROUND

Oxidative stress may cause gastrointestinal cancers. The evidence on whether antioxidant supplements are effective in preventing gastrointestinal cancers is contradictory.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidant supplements in preventing gastrointestinal cancers.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified trials through the trials registers of the four Cochrane Review Groups on gastrointestinal diseases, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and SCI-EXPANDED from inception to February 2003, and The Chinese Biomedical Database (March 2003). We scanned reference lists and contacted pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing antioxidant supplements to placebo/no intervention examining the incidence of gastrointestinal cancers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. The outcome measures were incidence of gastrointestinal cancers, overall mortality, and adverse events. Outcomes were reported as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on fixed and random effects meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 randomised trials (170,525 participants), assessing beta-carotene (9 trials), vitamin A (4 trials), vitamin C (4 trials), vitamin E (5 trials), and selenium (6 trials). Trial quality was generally high. Heterogeneity was low to moderate. Neither the fixed effect (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.04) nor random effects meta-analyses (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.05) showed significant effects of supplementation with antioxidants on the incidences of gastrointestinal cancers. Among the seven high-quality trials reporting on mortality (131,727 participants), the fixed effect (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.10) unlike the random effects meta-analysis (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.15) showed that antioxidant supplements significantly increased mortality. Two low-quality trials (32,302 participants) found no significant effect of antioxidant supplementation on mortality. The difference between the mortality estimates in high- and low-quality trials was significant by test of interaction (z = 2.10, P = 0.04). Beta-carotene and vitamin A (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.45) and beta-carotene and vitamin E (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.20) significantly increased mortality, while beta-carotene alone only tended to do so (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11). Increased yellowing of the skin and belching were non-serious adverse effects of beta-carotene. In four trials (three with unclear/inadequate methodology), selenium showed significant beneficial effect on gastrointestinal cancer incidences.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

We could not find evidence that antioxidant supplements prevent gastrointestinal cancers. On the contrary, they seem to increase overall mortality. The potential cancer preventive effect of selenium should be studied in adequately conducted randomised trials.