Bruno Vergès1. 1. Service Endocrinologie, Diabétologie et Maladies Métaboliques, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Dijon, Dijon, France. bruno.verges@chu-dijon.fr
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study was to provide valuable information on the ability of fibrates to reduce cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes. The purpose of this review is to analyse results from FIELD and to see whether they may lead to modify the recommendations for treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia. RECENT FINDINGS: In FIELD, fenofibrate therapy was associated with a nonsignificant 11% reduction in the primary endpoint (coronary heart disease death, nonfatal myocardial infarction), corresponding to a significant 24% reduction in nonfatal myocardial infarction (P = 0.010) and a nonsignificant 19% increase in CHD mortality. Fenofibrate reduced CHD events only in patients in primary prevention, but not in secondary prevention. Fenofibrate treatment was associated with less albuminuria progression and less retinopathy needing laser treatment. SUMMARY: FIELD's results are somewhat disappointing. The relatively low cardiovascular risk population from FIELD and the 'pollution' by statin therapy may not totally explain the weak results of fenofibrate in the reduction in CHD events. The significant increase in plasma homocysteine observed with fenofibrate could partly explain not only the higher number of venous thrombotic events, but also the poor effect of fenofibrate in reducing clinical outcomes, more particularly in patients with previous cardiovascular disease.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study was to provide valuable information on the ability of fibrates to reduce cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes. The purpose of this review is to analyse results from FIELD and to see whether they may lead to modify the recommendations for treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia. RECENT FINDINGS: In FIELD, fenofibrate therapy was associated with a nonsignificant 11% reduction in the primary endpoint (coronary heart disease death, nonfatal myocardial infarction), corresponding to a significant 24% reduction in nonfatal myocardial infarction (P = 0.010) and a nonsignificant 19% increase in CHD mortality. Fenofibrate reduced CHD events only in patients in primary prevention, but not in secondary prevention. Fenofibrate treatment was associated with less albuminuria progression and less retinopathy needing laser treatment. SUMMARY: FIELD's results are somewhat disappointing. The relatively low cardiovascular risk population from FIELD and the 'pollution' by statin therapy may not totally explain the weak results of fenofibrate in the reduction in CHD events. The significant increase in plasma homocysteine observed with fenofibrate could partly explain not only the higher number of venous thrombotic events, but also the poor effect of fenofibrate in reducing clinical outcomes, more particularly in patients with previous cardiovascular disease.
Authors: Aldi T Kraja; Michael A Province; Robert J Straka; Jose M Ordovas; Ingrid B Borecki; Donna K Arnett Journal: Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 2.895