Omega-6 fats for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Omega-6 fats are polyunsaturated fats vital for many physiological functions, but their effect on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk is debated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of increasing omega-6 fats (linoleic acid (LA), gamma-linolenic acid (GLA), dihomo-gamma-linolenic acid (DGLA) and arachidonic acid (AA)) on CVD and all-cause mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to May 2017 and clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to September 2016, without language restrictions. We checked trials included in relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing higher versus lower omega-6 fat intake in adults with or without CVD, assessing effects over at least 12 months. We included full texts, abstracts, trials registry entries and unpublished studies. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, CVD mortality, CVD events, risk factors (blood lipids, adiposity, blood pressure), and potential adverse events. We excluded trials where we could not separate omega-6 fat effects from those of other dietary, lifestyle or medication interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts, assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of included trials. We wrote to authors of included studies. Meta-analyses used random-effects analysis, while sensitivity analyses used fixed-effects and limited analyses to trials at low summary risk of bias. We assessed GRADE quality of evidence for 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs in 6461 participants who were followed for one to eight years. Seven trials assessed the effects of supplemental GLA and 12 of LA, none DGLA or AA; the omega-6 fats usually displaced dietary saturated or monounsaturated fats. We assessed three RCTs as being at low summary risk of bias.Primary outcomes: we found low-quality evidence that increased intake of omega-6 fats may make little or no difference to all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.12, 740 deaths, 4506 randomised, 10 trials) or CVD events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.15, 1404 people experienced events of 4962 randomised, 7 trials). We are uncertain whether increasing omega-6 fats affects CVD mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.55, 472 deaths, 4019 randomised, 7 trials), coronary heart disease events (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.17, 1059 people with events of 3997 randomised, 7 trials), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.20, 817 events, 2879 participants, 2 trials) or stroke (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.45 to 4.11, 54 events, 3730 participants, 4 trials), as we assessed the evidence as being of very low quality. We found no evidence of dose-response or duration effects for any primary outcome, but there was a suggestion of greater protection in participants with lower baseline omega-6 intake across outcomes.Additional key outcomes: we found increased intake of omega-6 fats may reduce myocardial infarction (MI) risk (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.02, 609 events, 4606 participants, 7 trials, low-quality evidence). High-quality evidence suggests increasing omega-6 fats reduces total serum cholesterol a little in the long term (mean difference (MD) -0.33 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.16, I2 = 81%; heterogeneity partially explained by dose, 4280 participants, 10 trials). Increasing omega-6 fats probably has little or no effect on adiposity (body mass index (BMI) MD -0.20 kg/m2, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.16, 371 participants, 1 trial, moderate-quality evidence). It may make little or no difference to serum triglycerides (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.21, 834 participants, 5 trials), HDL (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.02, 1995 participants, 4 trials) or low-density lipoprotein (MD -0.04 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.14, 244 participants, 2 trials, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This is the most extensive systematic assessment of effects of omega-6 fats on cardiovascular health, mortality, lipids and adiposity to date, using previously unpublished data. We found no evidence that increasing omega-6 fats reduces cardiovascular outcomes other than MI, where 53 people may need to increase omega-6 fat intake to prevent 1 person from experiencing MI. Although benefits of omega-6 fats remain to be proven, increasing omega-6 fats may be of benefit in people at high risk of MI. Increased omega-6 fats reduce serum total cholesterol but not other blood fat fractions or adiposity.

Statins for children with familial hypercholesterolemia

BACKGROUND

Familial hypercholesterolemia is one of the most common inherited metabolic diseases and is an autosomal dominant disorder meaning heterozygotes, or carriers, are affected. Those who are homozygous have severe disease. The average worldwide prevalence of heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia is at least 1 in 500, although recent genetic epidemiological data from Denmark and next generation sequencing data suggest the frequency may be closer to 1 in 250. Diagnosis of familial hypercholesterolemia in children is based on elevated total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels or DNA-based analysis, or both. Coronary atherosclerosis has been detected in men with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia as young as 17 years old and in women with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia at 25 years old. Since the clinical complications of atherosclerosis occur prematurely, especially in men, lifelong treatment, started in childhood, is needed to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. In children with the disease, diet was the cornerstone of treatment but the addition of lipid-lowering medications has resulted in a significant improvement in treatment. Anion exchange resins, such as cholestyramine and colestipol, were found to be effective, but they are poorly tolerated. Since the 1990s studies carried out on children aged 6 to 17 years with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia have demonstrated significant reductions in their serum total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. While statins seem to be safe and well-tolerated in children, their long-term safety in this age group is not firmly established. This is an update of a previously published version of this Cochane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of statins in children with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia.

SEARCH METHODS

Relevant studies were identified from the Group's Inborn Errors and Metabolism Trials Register and Medline.Date of most recent search: 20 February 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and controlled clinical studies including participants up to 18 years old, comparing a statin to placebo or to diet alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 26 potentially eligible studies, of which we included nine randomized placebo-controlled studies (1177 participants). In general, the intervention and follow-up time was short (median 24 weeks; range from six weeks to two years). Statins reduced the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration at all time points (moderate quality evidence). Serum aspartate and alanine aminotransferase, as well as creatinine kinase concentrations, did not differ between treated and placebo groups at any time point (low quality evidence). The risks of myopathy (low quality evidence) and clinical adverse events (moderate quality evidence) were very low and also similar in both groups. In one study simvastatin was shown to improve flow-mediated dilatation of the brachial artery (low quality evidence), and in another study treatment with pravastatin for two years induced a significant regression in carotid intima media thickness (low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statin treatment is an effective lipid-lowering therapy in children with familial hypercholesterolemia. No significant safety issues were identified. Statin treatment seems to be safe in the short term, but long-term safety remains unknown. Children treated with statins should be carefully monitored and followed up by their pediatricians and their care transferred to an adult lipidologist once they reach 18 years of age. Large long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the long-term safety issues of statins.

Lipid-lowering efficacy of rosuvastatin

BACKGROUND

Rosuvastatin is one of the most potent statins and is currently widely prescribed. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of rosuvastatin on blood lipids.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of rosuvastatin on serum total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, non-HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides in participants with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease. Secondary objectives To quantify the variability of the effect of various doses of rosuvastatin.To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in the randomized placebo-controlled trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 10 of 12, 2014 in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to October week 5 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 2014 week 44), Web of Science Core Collection (1970 to 5 November 2014) and BIOSIS Citation Index (1969 to 31 October 2014). No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of rosuvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included and extracted data. WDAEs information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials.

MAIN RESULTS

One-hundred and eight trials (18 placebo-controlled and 90 before-and-after) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of rosuvastatin in 19,596 participants. Rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg/day caused LDL-cholesterol decreases of 46% to 55%, when all the trials were combined using the generic inverse variance method. The quality of evidence for these effects is high. Log dose-response data over doses of 1 to 80 mg, revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol. When compared to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin was about three-fold more potent at reducing LDL-cholesterol. There was no dose-related effect of rosuvastatin on blood HDL-cholesterol, but overall, rosuvastatin increased HDL by 7%. There is a high risk of bias for the trials in this review, which would affect WDAEs, but unlikely to affect the lipid measurements. WDAEs were not statistically different between rosuvastatin and placebo in 10 of 18 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 0.84; 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.47).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The total blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of rosuvastatin was linearly dependent on dose. Rosuvastatin log dose-response data were linear over the commonly prescribed dose range. Based on an informal comparison with atorvastatin, this represents a three-fold greater potency. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with rosuvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 44% of the placebo-controlled trials.