Effects of adding ezetimibe to fluvastatin on kidney function in patients with hypercholesterolemia: a randomized control trial

Effect of Combination Therapy with Ezetimibe and Statins versus Statin Monotherapy on Carotid Intima-Media Thickness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background and Objectives: Lipid-lowering agents such as ezetimibe are recommended in uncontrolled hyperlipidemia for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) is a surrogate marker of atherosclerosis and a predictor of cardiovascular and cerebral events. The effects of ezetimibe on CIMT have been inconsistently reported. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the effects of ezetimibe/statin and statin alone therapies on CIMT reduction. Materials and Methods: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published prior to 26 January 2023 with the MeSH keywords 'Ezetimibe' and 'Carotid Intima-Media Thickness'. The results were presented as standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals using the random-effect model method, and heterogeneity was assessed. Subgroup, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Five RCTs with 642 participants were included. CIMT reduction was not significantly different between the ezetimibe/statin and statin alone groups. However, in subgroup analyses, CIMT in the ezetimibe/statin group was significantly reduced in patients with non-familial hypercholesterolemia (SMD: -0.34 mm and p = 0.002) and in patients with secondary prevention (SMD: -0.38 mm and p = 0.002). The low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was significantly reduced in the ezetimibe/statin group (SMD: -0.58 mg/dL and p < 0.001). Conclusions: The effect of ezetimibe on CIMT reduction was shown in non-familial hypercholesterolemia and secondary prevention. These results suggest that the efficacy of ezetimibe may vary with potential CIMT reduction benefits in certain subpopulations.

The comparative impact among different intensive statins and combination therapies with niacin/ezetimibe on carotid intima-media thickness: a systematic review, traditional meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To compare the impact of different statins therapies on the reduction of carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) may reflect their cardiovascular benefits which is useful in clinical decision.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched, and 3539 articles published from 1992 to 2020 were retrieved. CIMT in randomized controlled trials for statins therapies were included for traditional and network meta-analyses analyzed by Stata 16. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool.

RESULTS

Thirty-three randomized controlled trials (n=8762) were eligible for network meta-analysis, of which 18 randomized controlled trials (n=5252) were included for comparison between statins and no statins and 11 randomized controlled trials (n=1338) were included for comparison between high-intensity statins or combination with niacin/ezetimibe and moderate/low-intensity statins in 2 traditional meta-analyses. In the traditional meta-analyses, the statins groups significantly reduce CIMT compared to no statins (standard mean difference=-0.207, 95% confidence interval: -0.291 to -0.123, p<0.001), while high-intensity statins or combination with niacin/ezetimibe performed significant CIMT reduction compared to moderate/low-intensity statins (standard mean difference=-0.287, 95% confidence interval: -0.460 to -0.114, p=0.001). In the network meta-analysis, a relative rank for the ability to reduce CIMT was given as follows: combination therapy with niacin (mean rank: 1.7), high-intensity statins, combination therapy with ezetimibe, and moderate/low-intensity statins.

CONCLUSION

Statins combined with niacin performed a greater CIMT reduction compared to high-intensity statins alone and combination therapies with ezetimibe. The advantage of niacin-combined statins therapies to improve cardiovascular endpoint needs further validation through randomized controlled trials.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42020175972.

Traditional Risk Factors are Causally Related to Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Progression: Inferences from Observational Cohort Studies and Interventional Trials

In the present review, associations between traditional vascular risk factors (VRFs) and carotid intimamedial thickness progression (C-IMTp) as well as the effects of therapies for VRFs control on C-IMTp were appraised to infer causality between each VRF and C-IMTp. Cohort studies indicate that smoking, binge drinking, fatness, diabetes, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia are associated with accelerated C-IMTp. An exception is physical activity, with mixed data. Interventions for the control of obesity, diabetes, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia decelerate C-IMTp. Conversely, scarce information is available regarding the effect of smoking cessation, stop of excessive alcohol intake and management of the metabolic syndrome. Altogether, these data support a causative role of several traditional VRFs on C-IMTp. Shortcomings in study design and/or ultrasonographic protocols may account for most negative studies, which underlines the importance of careful consideration of methodological aspects in investigations using C-IMTp as the outcome.

Comparison of Renal Effects of Ezetimibe-Statin Combination versus Statin Monotherapy: A Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis

Neither lowering of blood lipid levels nor treatment with statins definitively improves renal outcomes. Ezetimibe, a non-statin antilipidemic agent, is known to not only decrease blood lipid levels but also reduce inflammatory response and activate autophagy. We evaluated the effect of adding ezetimibe to a statin on renal outcome compared with statin monotherapy by analyzing longitudinal data of 4537 patients treated with simvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg (S + E) or simvastatin 20 mg alone (S) for more than 180 days. A propensity-score-based process was used to match baseline characteristics, medical history, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between S + E and S groups. Changes in serum creatinine and incidence of renal events, defined as doubling of serum creatinine to ≥1.5 mg/dL or occurrence of end-stage renal disease after the first day of treatment initiation, were compared between the groups. Among 3104 well-matched patients with a median follow-up of 4.2 years, the S + E group showed a significantly lower risk of renal events than the S group (hazard ratio 0.58; 95% CI 0.35-0.95, P = 0.032). In addition, the S + E group tended to preserve renal function compared with the S group throughout follow-up, as assessed by serum creatinine changes (P-values for time–group interactions <0.001). These data support the beneficial effects on renal function when combining ezetimibe with a statin.

Effect of different types of statins on kidney function decline and proteinuria: a network meta-analysis

Previous studies showed that statins reduce the progression of kidney function decline and proteinuria, but whether specific types of statins are more beneficial than others remains unclear. We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to investigate which statin most effectively reduces kidney function decline and proteinuria. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database until July 13, 2018, and included 43 RCTs (>110,000 patients). We performed a pairwise random-effects meta-analysis and a network meta-analysis according to a frequentist approach. We assessed network inconsistency, publication bias, and estimated for each statin the probability of being the best treatment. Considerable heterogeneity was present among the included studies. In pairwise meta-analyses, 1-year use of statins versus control reduced kidney function decline by 0.61 (95%-CI: 0.27; 0.95) mL/min/1.73 m² and proteinuria with a standardized mean difference of -0.58 (95%-CI:-0.88; -0.29). The network meta-analysis for the separate endpoints showed broad confidence intervals due to the small number available RCTs for each individual comparison. In conclusion, 1-year statin use versus control attenuated the progression of kidney function decline and proteinuria. Due to the imprecision of individual comparisons, results were inconclusive as to which statin performs best with regard to renal outcome.

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.

Systemic and renal lipids in kidney disease development and progression

Altered lipid metabolism characterizes proteinuria and chronic kidney diseases. While it is thought that dyslipidemia is a consequence of kidney disease, a large body of clinical and experimental studies support that altered lipid metabolism may contribute to the pathogenesis and progression of kidney disease. In fact, accumulation of renal lipids has been observed in several conditions of genetic and nongenetic origins, linking local fat to the pathogenesis of kidney disease. Statins, which target cholesterol synthesis, have not been proven beneficial to slow the progression of chronic kidney disease. Therefore, other therapeutic strategies to reduce cholesterol accumulation in peripheral organs, such as the kidney, warrant further investigation. Recent advances in the understanding of the biology of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) have revealed that functional HDL, rather than total HDL per se, may protect from both cardiovascular and kidney diseases, strongly supporting a role for altered cholesterol efflux in the pathogenesis of kidney disease. Although the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for lipid-induced renal damage have yet to be uncovered, several studies suggest novel mechanisms by which cholesterol, free fatty acids, and sphingolipids may affect glomerular and tubular cell function. This review will focus on the clinical and experimental evidence supporting a causative role of lipids in the pathogenesis of proteinuria and kidney disease, with a primary focus on podocytes.