Real-World Attainment of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goals in Patients at High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Treated with High-Intensity Statins: The TERESA Study

Rosuvastatin-Based Lipid-Lowering Therapy for the Control of LDL Cholesterol in Patients at High Vascular Risk

Vascular diseases are the leading cause of death in Spain. Hypercholesterolemia is not only a cardiovascular risk factor, but also underlies the etiopathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Therefore, reducing LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) to the goals recommended by clinical practice guidelines, is essential to decrease the risk of vascular complications. Despite this, current LDL-C control is scarce, even in subjects with high and very high risk. This is mainly due to an insufficient intensification of lipid-lowering treatment. In this context, it is essential to prescribe the appropriate therapy, adjusted to patient's needs based on their LDL-C and their vascular risk. Rosuvastatin, alone or in combination with ezetimibe, provides intensive LDL-C reductions (up to 50-55% and 60-75%, respectively), with a low risk of side effects and in an efficient manner, in patients both without and with established atherosclerotic vascular disease.

Impact of Guideline-Directed Management Strategies for Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Control in Patients Who Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

There are little direct comparative evidences of strategies between ≥50% and the absolute target goal of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level <55 mg/100 ml for the patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to investigate the clinical impact of different strategies between 2 groups of patients who underwent PCI. A total of 3,104 patients with previous PCI were retrospectively enrolled from 2014 to 2020 at Yeungnam University Medical Center. The study population was stratified into 2 groups based on whether the LDL-C level was <55 mg/100 ml at the 1-year mark or not. Furthermore, the 50% reduction rate of LDL-C was also categorized based on whether it had decreased by ≥50% from the initial LDL-C level at the 1-year mark. The primary end point was 3-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) which were defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, hospitalization for heart failure, or nonfatal stroke. There was no significant difference between the LDL <55 mg/100 ml group and the LDL ≥55 mg/100 ml group in the risk of MACEs (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.38, p = 0.690) after propensity score matching. However, the group that achieved ≥50% reduction of LDL-C from baseline LDL-C level showed a significant reduction in the occurrence of MACEs in the subgroup of LDL-C level ≥55 mg/100 ml (hazard ratio 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.19 to 0.89, p = 0.025) compared with the group with <50% reduction of LDL-C. In all patients, the achievement rate of target LDL-C <55 mg/100 ml and more than 50% reduction from baseline was 17.2%. In conclusion, guideline-directed management strategy of ≥50% reduction of LDL-C from the baseline will be needed to reduce the incidence of MACEs in patients with LDL-C ≥55 mg/100 ml who underwent PCI. Additional efforts to increase the target goal achievement rate of LDL-C are warranted.

STRUGGLE FOR. Italian-Polish-Spanish-Uzbek-Vietnamese Expert Forum Position Paper 2023 for better control of classical modifiable risk factors in clinical practice

The progress in pharmacotherapy that has been made in recent years, including the introduction of very effective and safe lipid-lowering and antihypertensive drugs, has not yet translated into the expected universal control of blood pressure, lipid disorders and diabetes. In the STRUGGLE FOR Italian- -Polish-Spanish-Uzbek-Vietnamese Expert Forum Position Paper 2023, experts from five countries recounted several points about the paradigms of cardiological and cardiometabolic care for better control of classical modifiable risk factors in the year 2023. It is believed herein, that the need to intensify treatment, actively search for patients with cardiovascular risk factors, especially with arterial hypertension, hypercholesterolemia and diabetes, should go hand in hand with the implementation of the latest therapy, based on single pill combinations including proven, effective antihypertensive, lipid-lowering and antidiabetic molecules, many of which are listed in the present document. There is a need to use both new technological concepts, completely new drugs, as well as novel treatment concepts such as metabolic treatment in coronary artery disease, try to intensify the fight against smoking in every way, including the available range of drugs and procedures reducing the harm. This approach will provide substantially better control of the underlying cardiovascular risk factors in countries as varied as Italy, Poland, Spain, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Statin Monotherapy and Statin plus Ezetimibe Combination in a Real-World Setting

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to conduct a comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of ezetimibe in combination with statins or statin monotherapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia in a real-world setting.

METHODS

It was a retrospective multicenter observational study conducted in Russia. We included patients who received statins or a combination of statins with ezetimibe for ≥3 months. The primary endpoint of this study was the frequency of achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal levels at the time of enrollment in the study (%).

RESULTS

The full analysis set consisted of 1000 patients: 250 subjects in the statin monotherapy group and 750 subjects in the combination group. The groups did not differ in clinical, demographic, or laboratory variables, except for a higher prevalence of hypertension and higher baseline lipid values in the statin monotherapy group. During treatment, the LDL-C concentration decreased by 1.10 ± 1.04 mmol/L (change of -27.5 ± 28.5% from baseline) in the statin monotherapy group and by 1.55 ± 1.17 mmol/L (change of -38.2 ± 25.6% from baseline) in the combination therapy group, p < 0.001. The target LDL-C level was achieved in 22.4% of the patients in the monotherapy group compared with 28.8% of the patients in the combination therapy group, p = 0.049.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, statin/ezetimibe combination therapy demonstrated a more frequent achievement of target LDL-C levels compared with statin monotherapy. The addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy increased the probability of achieving LDL-C level goals by 29%.