Comparison of statin plus ezetimibe with double-dose statin on lipid profiles and inflammation markers

Efficacy and safety of double-dose statin monotherapy versus moderate-intensity statin combined with ezetimibe dual therapy in diabetic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of mortality, especially in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia. Despite adequate statin therapy, some patients fail to achieve the target low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels. Trials have compared doubling the statin dose with the addition of ezetimibe. A systematic literature search was performed using various databases. Forest plots were constructed for pooled analysis with statistical significance set at P < 0.05. Seven trials were included. Monotherapy showed no significant difference compared with dual therapy for low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels [mean difference (MD): -5.03; P = 0.37], high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels (MD: 0.01; P = 0.95), total cholesterol (MD: -2.38; P = 0.66), and triglycerides (MD: 5.37; P = 0.67) at follow-up compared to baseline. Monotherapy significantly reduced serious clinical adverse events (risk ratio: 0.21; P = 0.04), with no difference in treatment-related adverse effects, discontinuation due to treatment-related or overall adverse events.

Safety and efficacy of moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), affects approximately 18.6 million individuals worldwide and poses a significant healthcare related challenge. Despite the established efficacy of both high-intensity statin monotherapy (HIS) and moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe (MIS+EZT) in ASCVD management, the optimal treatment strategy remains unclear.

METHODS

A thorough literature study was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane databases, focusing on studies that compared the effects of MIS+EZT with HIS monotherapy in ASCVD patients.

RESULTS

In the 13 included studies, involving 8,592 patients, 4,525 (52.67%) of which received moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe treatment. The follow-up period ranged from 4 to 156 weeks, with participant ages varying from 55.2 to 71 years old. Analysis revealed that MIS+EZT was associated with a significantly greater percentage of patients who achieved the goal of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) <70 mg/dL. (odds ratio [OR] 1.76; 95% CI [1.26; 2.45]; p = 0.001; I² = 73%); LDL-C reduction (mean difference [MD] -5.05 mg/dL; 95% CI [-9.02;-1.07]; p < 0.013; I² = 56%); total cholesterol reduction (MD -7.91 mg/ dL; 95% CI [-14.90; -0.91]; p < 0.027; I² = 60%) and triglyceride reduction (MD -8.20 mg/ dL; 95% CI [-13.05; -3.35]; p < 0.001; I² = 2%). There was no statistical difference between groups in drug adverse reaction (risk ratio [RR] 1.19; 95% CI [0.79; 1.78]; p = 0.404; I² = 0%) and drug intolerance (RR 0.78; 95% CI [0.32; 1.92]; p = 0.584; I² = 35%).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis highlights the effectiveness of MIS+EZT in significantly improving lipid profile components for ASCVD patients, as can been seen through the greater percentage of patients achieving the LDL-C < 70 mg/dL target and lower LDL-C, total cholesterol and triglyceride levels. Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between the two groups.

Safety and Effectiveness of High-Intensity Statins Versus Low/Moderate-Intensity Statins Plus Ezetimibe in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease for Reaching LDL-C Goals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether adding ezetimibe to low/moderate-intensity statins has a more beneficial impact on the treatment efficacy and safety of patients with existing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared to high-intensity statin regimens.

HYPOTHESIS

A combination of low/moderate-intensity statins plus ezetimibe might be more effective and safer than high-intensity statin monotherapy.

METHODS

We searched databases for randomized controlled trials comparing lipid profile alterations, drug-related adverse events, and MACE components between high-intensity statin monotherapy and low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy. Pooled risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Our comprehensive search resulted in 32 studies comprising 6162 patients treated with monotherapy against 5880 patients on combination therapy. Combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels compared to monotherapy (MD = -6.6, 95% CI: -10.6 to -2.5); however, no significant differences were observed in other lipid parameters. Furthermore, the combination therapy group experienced a lower risk of myalgia (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.57) and discontinuation due to adverse events (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.51-0.74). The occurrence of MACE was similar between the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding ezetimibe to low/moderate-intensity statins resulted in a greater reduction in LDL-C levels, a lower rate of myalgia, and less drug discontinuation compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with existing cardiovascular disease. However, according to our meta-analysis, the observed reduction in LDL-C levels in the combination group did not correlate with a reduction in MACE compared to the high-intensity statin group.

Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Low/Moderate-Intensity Statin plus Ezetimibe Combination Therapy vs. High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: An Updated Meta-Analysis

AIM

Statin therapy is considered the gold standard for treating hypercholesterolemia. This updated meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of a low/moderate-intensity statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

METHODS

A systematic search of two databases (PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL) was conducted from inception to January 2023 and a total of 21 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified and included in the analysis. Data were pooled using Hedges's g and a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to derive standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (Cis). The primary outcome studied was the effect of these treatments on lipid parameters and safety events.

RESULTS

The results revealed that combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (SMD= - 0.41; CI - 0.63 to - 0.19; P = 0.0002). There was no significant change in the levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), Apo A1, or Apo B. The safety of these treatments was assessed by the following markers alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and creatine phosphokinase (CK), and a significant difference was only observed in CK (SMD: - 0.81; CI - 1.52 to - 0.10; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of low/moderate-intensity statin combination therapy significantly reduced LDL-C levels compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy, making it preferable for patients with related risks. However, further trials are encouraged to evaluate potential adverse effects associated with combined therapy.

Lipid-Lowering Efficacy of Combination Therapy With Moderate-Intensity Statin and Ezetimibe Versus High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy: A Randomized, Open-Label, Non-Inferiority Trial From Korea

Objective

This phase IV, multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label, and parallel clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and moderate intensity rosuvastatin combination therapy to that of high intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

Methods

This study enrolled patients with ASCVD and after a four-week screening period, patients were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (RE 10/10 group) or high-intensity rosuvastatin (R20 group) only in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the difference in the percent change in the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline to 12 weeks between two groups after treatment.

Results

The study found that after 12 and 24 weeks of treatment, the RE10/10 group had a greater reduction in LDL-C level compared to the R20 group (-22.9±2.6% vs. -15.6 ± 2.5% [p=0.041] and -24.2±2.5% vs. -12.9±2.4% [p=0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Moreover, a greater number of patients achieved the target LDL-C level of ≤70 mg/dL after the treatment period in the combination group (74.6% vs. 59.9% [p=0.012] and 76.2% vs. 50.8% [p<0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between two groups.

Conclusion

Moderate-intensity rosuvastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy had better efficacy in lowering LDL-C levels without increasing adverse effects in patients with ASCVD than high-intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03494270.

Statins Have an Anti-Inflammation in CKD Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Background

Persistent inflammation has been recognized as an important comorbid condition in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with many complications, mortality, and progression of CKD. Previous studies have not drawn a clear conclusion about the anti-inflammatory effects of statins in CKD. This meta-analysis is aimed at assessing the anti-inflammatory effects of statins therapy in patients with CKD.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in these databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, and clinical trials) to identify the randomized controlled trials that assess the anti-inflammatory effects of statins. Subgroup, sensitivity, and trim-and-fill analysis were conducted to determine the robustness of pooled results of the primary outcome.

Results

25 eligible studies with 7921 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The present study showed that statins therapy was associated with a decreased C-reactive protein (CRP) (-2.06 mg/L; 95% CI: -2.85 to -1.27, p < 0.01). Subgroup, sensitivity, and trim-and-fill analysis showed that the pooled results of CPR were stable.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis demonstrates that statins supplementation has anti-inflammatory effects in patients with CKD. Statins exert an anti-inflammatory effect that is clinically important in improving complications, reducing mortality, and slowing progression in CKD. We believe that the benefits of statins to CKD are partly due to their anti-inflammatory effects. However, stains usually are prescribed in the CKD patients with dyslipidemia, whether statins can reduce inflammation in CKD patients with normal serum lipid needed to explore in the future. Therefore, we suggest that randomized clinical trials need to assess the effect of statins in CKD patients with normal serum lipid. Whether statins can be prescribed for aiming to inhibit inflammation in CKD also needed further study. Trial Registration. The study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); registration number: CRD42022310334.

Estimated number and percentage of US adults with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease recommended add-on lipid-lowering therapy by the 2018 AHA/ACC multi-society cholesterol guideline

Study objective

The 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) cholesterol guideline recommends a maximally-tolerated statin with add-on lipid-lowering therapy, ezetimibe and/or proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) for adults with very-high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk to achieve a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) <70 mg/dL. We estimated the percentage of US adults with ASCVD recommended, by the 2018 AHA/ACC cholesterol guideline, and receiving add-on lipid-lowering therapy.

Design setting and participants

Cross-sectional study including 805 participants from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013-2020 data. NHANES sampling weights were used to obtain estimates for the US adult population.

Main measures

Very-high ASCVD risk was defined as either: ≥2 ASCVD events, or one ASCVD event with ≥2 high-risk conditions. Being recommended add-on lipid-lowering therapy was defined as having very-high ASCVD risk and LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL, or LDL-C < 70 mg/dL while taking ezetimibe or a PCSK9 inhibitor.

Results

An estimated 18.7 (95%CI, 16.0-21.4) million US adults had ASCVD, of whom 81.6 % (95%CI, 76.7 %-86.4 %) had very-high ASCVD risk, and 60.1 % (95%CI, 54.5 %-65.7 %) had very-high ASCVD risk and LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL. Overall, 61.4 % (95%CI, 55.8 %-66.9 %) were recommended add-on lipid-lowering therapy and 3.2 % (95 % CI, 1.2 %-5.3 %) were taking it. Smokers, adults with diabetes, hypertension and chronic kidney disease were more likely, while those taking atorvastatin or rosuvastatin were less likely, to be recommended add-on lipid-lowering therapy.

Conclusion

The majority of US adults with ASCVD are recommended add-on lipid-lowering therapy by the 2018 AHA/ACC cholesterol guideline but few are receiving it.

The role of inflammation and the possibilities of inflammation reduction to prevent cardiovascular events

Chronic systemic inflammation is a risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD). Whether this relationship extends to subclinical inflammation, quantified by values of circulating markers associated with inflammation in the high range of the normal interval, remains debatable. This narrative review evaluates evidence exploring this relationship. A review of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, including diet and lifestyle strategies, supplements, nutraceuticals, and other natural substances aimed at reducing inflammation was also conducted, since few reviews have synthesized this literature. PubMed and EMBASE were used to search the literature and several well-studied triggers of inflammation [oxidized LDL, Lp(a), as well as C-reactive protein (CRP)/high-sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP)] were included to increase sensitivity and address the lack of existing reviews summarizing their influence in the context of inflammation. All resulting references were assessed. Overall, there is good data supporting associations between circulating hs-CRP and CV outcomes. However, the same was not seen in studies evaluating triggers of inflammation, such as oxidized LDL or Lp(a). There is also insufficient evidence showing treatments to target inflammation and lead to reductions in hs-CRP result in improvements in CV outcomes, particularly in those with normal baseline levels of hs-CRP. Regarding pharmacological interventions, statins, bempedoic acid, and apabetalone significantly reduce circulating hs-CRP, unlike PCSK-9 inhibitors. A variety of natural substances and vitamins were also evaluated and none reduced hs-CRP. Regarding non-pharmacological interventions, weight loss was strongly associated with reductions in circulating hs-CRP, whereas various dietary interventions and exercise regimens were not, unless accompanied by weight loss.

Comparative safety and efficacy of low- or moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy and high-intensity statin monotherapy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Statin is highly recommended for dyslipidemia to prevent atherosclerosis-related cardiovascular diseases and death. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies and safeties of low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy. Meta-analysis was conducted on data included in published studies performed to compare the effects of the two treatments on lipid parameters and hs-CRP. Safety-related parameters were also evaluated. Eighteen articles were included in the meta-analysis. In terms of efficacy, low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe reduced LDL-C (SE = 0.307; 95% CI 0.153–0.463), TC (SE = 0.217; 95% CI 0.098–0.337), triglyceride (SE = 0.307; 95% CI 0.153–0.463), and hs-CRP (SE = 0.190; 95% CI 0.018–0.362) significantly more than high-intensity statin therapy. In terms of safety, the two treatments were not significantly different in terms of ALT elevation, but high-intensity statin increased AST and CK significantly more than combination therapy. This analysis indicates that low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combined therapy is more effective and safer than high-intensity statin monotherapy, which suggests the addition of ezetimibe to statin should be preferred over increasing statin dose and that high-intensity statin should be used more carefully, especially in patients with related risks.

The safety and efficacy of Ezetimibe Plus Statins on ASVD and Related Diseases

It is well known that atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASVD) in the elderly is a global disease with high morbidity, mortality and disability, and plasma LDL-C correction is the most important strategy for ASVD control. However, a large proportion of patients failed to achieve their ideal LDL-C goals after statins use. Ezetimibe, a newly non-statin lipid-lowering agent, is an inhibitor of exogenous cholesterol absorption. Whereby, ezetimibe plus statins may reduce LDL-C more strongly than statins alone. Differed from any other papers published previously, which only involved ezetimibe plus statins for coronary heart disease, the highlight of this paper is to summarize the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe plus statins in all kinds of ASVD subtypes and their related diseases, mainly included aortic atherosclerosis, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular and peripheral artery diseases. Obviously, this paper is inimitable, which will provide the readers an important reference, especially in treating the elderly with multi-organs atherosclerosis.

Comparison of the Effects of High-intensity Statin Therapy with Moderate-Intensity Statin and Ezetimibe Combination Therapy on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: a Nationwide Cohort Study

Objective

We compared the effects of high-intensity statin monotherapy versus moderate-intensity statin and ezetimibe combination therapy on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we screened 82,941 patients with AMI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 2013 and 2016. Among them, we identified 9,908 patients treated with atorvastatin 40 mg (A40, n=4,041), atorvastatin 20 mg + ezetimibe 10 mg (A20+E10, n=233), rosuvastatin 20 mg (R20, n=5,251), or rosuvastatin 10 mg + ezetimibe 10 mg (R10+E10, n=383). The primary outcome was MACE, a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction undergoing PCI, repeat revascularization, and ischemic stroke. Multivariable analyses were performed using the inverse probability of treatment weighting method.

Results

The incidence rate of MACE in the overall population was 42.97 cases per 1,000 person-years. There was no significant difference in the risk of composite outcomes of MACE between the groups. However, the R10+E10 group showed a higher risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-3.94) than the A40 group (reference group) in the weighted multivariable model.

Conclusions

In this study, there was no significant difference in the composite outcome of MACE between high-intensity statin monotherapy and moderate-intensity statin and ezetimibe combination therapy.

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

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.

The Effect of Statin Therapy on Inflammatory Biomarkers: A Systematic Review

3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors are commonly used drugs in the management of elevated lipid levels and cardiovascular disease. In cardiovascular diseases, among other common chronic conditions, inflammatory biomarkers are used to monitor disease progression and the risk of recurrent adverse events. We explored whether or not there was a positive effect on these biomarkers using HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. The systematic review was conducted by gathering relevant papers mainly from three databases, identified through a generated Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) strategy. Identification of papers was subsequently followed by applying a selected inclusion and exclusion criteria to narrow the papers chosen for review. Post the application of stipulated criteria, 12 papers remained. They were subsequently assessed for risk of bias using a Cochrane risk analysis tool, identifying most as having some concerns of bias or low risk of bias. We found that HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors exhibit both a lipid-lowering effect addition to an anti-inflammatory effect.

Efficacy evaluation of PCSK9 monoclonal antibody (Evolocumab) in combination with Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe on cholesterol levels in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD): A retrospective analysis from a single center in China

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9(PCSK9) monoclonal antibody (Mab; Evolocumab) has been reported to inhibit low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lipoprotein(a) [LP(a)] in coronary heart diseases (CHD) patients in America, Europe and Japan. However, little is known about the effect of Evolocumab in Chinese population. This retrospective study in Chinese CHD patients compared the efficacy without or with Evolocumab therapy added to the conventional treatment with a statin (Rosuvastatin) and a gut cholesterol absorption inhibitor (Ezetimibe).

METHODS

CHD patients from our hospital were divided into three therapeutic groups, A) the statin monotherapy group (10 mg Rosuvastatin every night); B) the statin/cholesterol absorption inhibitor group (10 mg Rosuvastatin and 10 mg Ezetimibe daily); and C) the triple therapy with PCSK9 Mab group (10 mg Rosuvastatin daily, 10 mg Ezetimibe daily, and 140 mg Evolocumab once 2 weeks). The plasma lipid data were collected at 0, 4, 12, and 24 Week(s). The Graphpad Prism 7 program was used to perform all the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 103 patients 91 were eligible for further evaluation with 31 in group A, 31 in group B, and 29 in group C. The plasma LDL-C levels were reduced only by 33.82% in the Rosuvastatin monotherapy group, 52.13% in the Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe group, and 73.59% in the Evolocumab/Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe group (P < 0.0001) at 24 weeks compared to the prior therapy levels. Neither the statin therapy alone (5.95%; P = 0.6), nor the double therapy (5.27%; P = 0.7) affected LP(a) levels. In contrast, addition of Evolocumab to the double therapy significantly decreased LP(a) level by 37.2% (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Addition of Evolocumab to the standard double therapy in Chinese CHD patients improved the efficacy in LDL-C reduction when compared to Rosuvastatin alone or in Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe double therapy. Furthermore, the addition of Evolocumab lowered LP(a) level in Chinese CHD patients.

Effect of pravastatin on erythrocyte membrane fatty acid contents in patients with chronic kidney disease

Background

Statin treatment has decreased the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Erythrocyte membrane oleic acid level is higher in patients with acute coronary syndrome. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of pravastatin on the erythrocyte membrane fatty acid (FA) contents in patients with CKD.

Methods

Sixty-two patients were enrolled from January 2017 to March 2019 (NCT02992548). Pravastatin was initially administered at a dose of 20 mg for 24 weeks. The pravastatin dose was increased to 40 mg after 12 weeks if it was necessary to control dyslipidemia. The primary outcome was change in erythrocyte membrane FA, including oleic acid, after pravastatin treatment for 24 weeks.

Results

Forty-five patients finished this study, and there was no adverse effect related to pravastatin. Compared with baseline, total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were significantly decreased after pravastatin treatment. Compared with baseline, saturated FA, oleic acid, and arachidonic acid levels were significantly increased and polyunsaturated FA and linoleic acid (LA) levels were significantly decreased after pravastatin treatment. There was also a decrease in eicosapentaenoic acid after pravastatin treatment in CKD patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m².

Conclusion

Administration of pravastatin in patients with CKD leads to a decrease in FA known to be protective against the risk of CVD. Omega-3 FA or LA supplementation might be necessary to recover changes in erythrocyte membrane FA contents when pravastatin is used for treating dyslipidemia in patients with CKD.

Intensive statin versus low-dose statin + ezetimibe treatment for fibrous cap thickness of coronary vulnerable plaques

BACKGROUND

Acute coronary syndromes mainly result from abrupt thrombotic occlusion caused by atherosclerotic vulnerable plaques (VPs) that suddenly rupture or erosion. Fibrous cap thickness (FCT) is a major determinant of the propensity of a VP to rupture and is recognized as a key factor. The intensive use of statins is known to have the ability to increase FCT; however, there is a risk of additional adverse effects. However, lower dose statin with ezetimibe is known to be tolerable by patients. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of intensive statin vs. low-dose stain + ezetimibe therapy on FCT, as evaluated using optical coherence tomography.

METHOD

Patients who had VPs (minimum FCT <65 μm and lipid core >90°) and deferred from intervention in our single center from January 2014 to December 2018 were included in the trial. They were divided into the following two groups: intensive statin group (rosuvastatin 15-20 mg or atorvastatin 30-40 mg) and combination therapy group (rosuvastatin 5-10 mg or atorvastatin 10-20 mg + ezetimibe 10 mg). At the 12-month follow-up, we compared the change in the FCT (ΔFCT%) between the two groups and analyzed the association of ΔFCT% with risk factors. Fisher exact test was used for all categorical variables. Student's t test or Mann-Whitney U-test was used for analyzing the continuous data. The relationship between ΔFCT% and risk factors was analyzed using linear regression analysis.

RESULT

Total 53 patients were finally enrolled, including 26 patients who were in the intensive statin group and 27 who were in the combination therapy group. At the 12-month follow-up, the serum levels of total cholesterol (TC), total triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C), hypersensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) levels were reduced in both the groups. The ΔTC%, ΔLDL-C%, and ΔLp-PLA2% were decreased further in the combination therapy group. FCT was increased in both the groups (combination treatment group vs. intensive statin group: 128.89 ± 7.64 vs. 110.19 ± 7.00 μm, t = -9.282, P < 0.001) at the 12-month follow-up. The increase in ΔFCT% was more in the combination therapy group (123.46% ± 14.05% vs. 91.14% ± 11.68%, t = -9.085, P < 0.001). Based on the multivariate linear regression analysis, only the serum Lp-PLA2 at the 12-month follow-up (B = -0.203, t = -2.701, P = 0.010), ΔTC% (B = -0.573, t = -2.048, P = 0.046), and Δhs-CRP% (B = -0.302, t = -2.963, P = 0.005) showed an independent association with ΔFCT%.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose statin combined with ezetimibe therapy maybe provide a profound and significant increase in FCT as compared to intensive statin monotherapy. The reductions in Lp-PLA2, ΔTC%, and Δhs-CRP% are independently associated with an increase in FCT.

Efficacy of Statin/Ezetimibe for Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Asian Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Several clinical trials have investigated the effect of statin/ezetimibe combination therapy on secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in the Asian population.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to summarize study results regarding the effect of statin/ezetimibe combination therapy on lipid parameters and highly sensitive C-reactive protein (HsCRP) biomarkers in ASCVD patients from Asian countries.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for relevant papers published from 2008 to June 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that (1) were conducted in ASCVD patients in Asian countries; (2) examined the effects of statin/ezetimibe combination therapies compared with a control group; and (3) reported sufficient data on lipid parameters and HsCRP biomarkers. The results were reported as weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. Funnel plots and Egger's regression test were used to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-four RCTs were reviewed and 20 were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 4344 participants were included (n = 2197 in the intervention group and n = 2147 in the control group), and the intervention durations ranged from 6 weeks to 3.6 years. Ezetimibe coadministered with statin therapy, compared with control treatment, significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; n = 20 studies) [WMD  - 0.39 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.73 to - 0.05; p < 0.001], triglycerides (TG; n = 18 studies) [WMD - 0.23 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.33 to - 0.13; p < 0.001], and total cholesterol (TC; n = 17 studies) [WMD - 0.31 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.45 to - 0.17; p < 0.001). Although the effect of statin/ezetimibe combinations on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; n = 17 studies) [WMD 0.02 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.05 to 0.09; p < 0.001) was very minimal and no effect was observed on HsCRP levels (n = 11 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that statin/ezetimibe combinations reduced LDL-C, TC, and TG levels but had minimal effects on HDL-C and no effect HsCRP biomarkers in ASCVD patients. The statin/ezetimibe therapy enabled a more effective reduction in LDL-C levels; however, the duration of the treatment was suboptimal.

Comparative Lipid-Lowering/Increasing Efficacy of 7 Statins in Patients with Dyslipidemia, Cardiovascular Diseases, or Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analyses of 50 Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

The drug efficacy may differ among different statins, and evidence from head-to-head comparisons is sparse and inconsistent. The study is aimed at comparing the lipid-lowering/increasing effects of 7 different statins in patients with dyslipidemia, cardiovascular diseases, or diabetes mellitus by conducting systematic review and network meta-analyses (NMA) of the lipid changes after certain statins' use.

METHODS

In this study, we searched four electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through February 25, 2020, comparing the lipid-lowering efficacy of no less than two of the included statins (or statin vs. placebo). Three reviewers independently extracted data in duplicate. Firstly, mixed treatment overall comparison analyses, in the form of frequentist NMAs, were conducted using STATA 15.0 software. Then, subgroup analyses were conducted according to different baseline diseases. At last, sensitivity analyses were conducted according to age and follow-up duration. The trial was registered with PROSPERO (number CRD42018108799).

RESULTS

As a result, seven statin monotherapy treatments in 50 studies (51956 participants) were used for the analyses. The statins included simvastatin (SIM), fluvastatin (FLU), atorvastatin (ATO), rosuvastatin (ROS), lovastatin (LOV), pravastatin (PRA), and pitavastatin (PIT). In terms of LDL-C lowering, rosuvastatin ranked 1st with a surface under cumulated ranking (SUCRA) value of 93.1%. The comparative treatment efficacy for LDL-C lowering was ROS>ATO>PIT>SIM>PRA>FLU>LOV>PLA. All of the other ranking and NMA results were reported in SUCRA plots and league tables.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the NMAs, it can be concluded that rosuvastatin ranked 1st in LDL-C, ApoB-lowering efficacy and ApoA1-increasing efficacy. Lovastatin ranked 1st in TC- and TG-lowering efficacy, and fluvastatin ranked 1st in HDL-C-increasing efficacy. The results should be interpreted with caution due to some limitations in our review. However, they can provide references and evidence-based foundation for drug selection in both statin monotherapies and statin combination therapies.

Lipid-Lowering Therapy and Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Goal Achievement in High-Cardiovascular-Risk Patients in Fuzhou, China

PURPOSE

This study aims to analyze the treatment patterns and goal attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and diabetes mellitus (DM) in the real-world setting in Fuzhou, China.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥20 years with a valid LDL-C measurement (index date) in 2016 were selected from National Healthcare Big Data in Fuzhou, China. Patients were stratified into mutually exclusive cardiovascular risk categories: ASCVD (including recent acute coronary syndrome [ACS], chronic coronary heart disease [CHD], stroke, and peripheral arterial disease [PAD]), and DM alone (without ASCVD). Lipid-modifying medication and LDL-C attainment at the index date were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 21 989 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 17 320 (78.8%) with ASCVD and 4669 (21.2%) with DM alone; 47.7% of patients received current statin therapy in the overall cohort (53.5% in ASCVD, 26.5% for DM); 20.5% ASCVD population achieved LDL-C target with the highest in patients with recent ACS (33.8%), followed by chronic CHD (21.2%), PAD (20.9%), and ischemic stroke (17.3%); 49.0% of patients with DM achieved LDL-C target. Higher LDL-C attainment was observed in high-intensity statin and a combination of statin and nonstatin groups. Atorvastatin was the most commonly used statin with the highest LDL-C attainment, followed by rosuvastatin.

CONCLUSION

Compared with previous studies in China, our study found a relatively low statin use and LDL-C target attainment, but higher than similar studies in Europe. Guidelines should be well complied and more prescription of high-intensity statin or statin and nonstatin combination should be advocated.