Paul M Ridker1, Samia Mora2, Lynda Rose2. 1. The Center for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 900 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA pridker@partners.org. 2. The Center for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 900 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: Current statin guidelines in Europe and Canada advocate achieving a fixed LDL target or the attainment of a ≥50% reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC), while current US guidelines advocate the use of statin therapies that reduce LDLC by <50% (moderate intensity) or ≥50% (high intensity). Data are limited, however, linking the achievement of these % reduction thresholds to subsequent cardiovascular outcomes particularly for contemporary high-intensity regimens. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a randomized trial of 17 082 initially healthy men and women with median baseline LDLC of 108 mg/dL (interquartile range 94-119), we (i) used waterfall plots to assess the variability in LDLC response to rosuvastatin 20 mg daily and (ii) evaluated the impact of reaching ≥50% reductions in LDLC on risk of developing the first cardiovascular events. Among rosuvastatin allocated participants, 3640 individuals (46.3%) experienced an LDLC reduction ≥50%; 3365 individuals (42.8%) experienced an LDLC reduction >0 but <50%; and 851 individuals (10.8%) experienced no reduction or an increase in LDLC compared with baseline. These % LDLC reductions directly related to the risks of first cardiovascular events; at trial completion, incidence rates for the primary endpoint were 11.2, 9.2, 6.7, and 4.8 per 1000 person-years for those in the placebo, no LDLC reduction, LDLC reduction <50%, and LDLC reduction ≥50% groups, respectively. Compared with placebo, the multivariable adjusted hazard ratios for sequentially greater on-treatment per cent reductions in LDLC were 0.91 (95%CI 0.54-1.53), 0.61 (95%CI 0.44-0.83), and 0.43 (95%CI 0.30-0.60) (P < 0.00001). Similar relationships between % reduction and clinical outcomes were observed in analyses focusing on non-HDLC or apolipoprotein B. CONCLUSIONS: As documented for low- and moderate-intensity regimens, variability in % LDLC reduction following high-intensity statin therapy is wide yet the magnitude of this % reduction directly relates to efficacy. These data support guideline approaches that incorporate % reduction targets for statin therapy as well as absolute targets, and might provide a structure for the allocation of emerging adjunctive lipid-lowering therapies such as PCSK9 inhibitors should these agents prove broadly effective for cardiovascular event reduction. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: Current statin guidelines in Europe and Canada advocate achieving a fixed LDL target or the attainment of a ≥50% reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC), while current US guidelines advocate the use of statin therapies that reduce LDLC by <50% (moderate intensity) or ≥50% (high intensity). Data are limited, however, linking the achievement of these % reduction thresholds to subsequent cardiovascular outcomes particularly for contemporary high-intensity regimens. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a randomized trial of 17 082 initially healthy men and women with median baseline LDLC of 108 mg/dL (interquartile range 94-119), we (i) used waterfall plots to assess the variability in LDLC response to rosuvastatin 20 mg daily and (ii) evaluated the impact of reaching ≥50% reductions in LDLC on risk of developing the first cardiovascular events. Among rosuvastatin allocated participants, 3640 individuals (46.3%) experienced an LDLC reduction ≥50%; 3365 individuals (42.8%) experienced an LDLC reduction >0 but <50%; and 851 individuals (10.8%) experienced no reduction or an increase in LDLC compared with baseline. These % LDLC reductions directly related to the risks of first cardiovascular events; at trial completion, incidence rates for the primary endpoint were 11.2, 9.2, 6.7, and 4.8 per 1000 person-years for those in the placebo, no LDLC reduction, LDLC reduction <50%, and LDLC reduction ≥50% groups, respectively. Compared with placebo, the multivariable adjusted hazard ratios for sequentially greater on-treatment per cent reductions in LDLC were 0.91 (95%CI 0.54-1.53), 0.61 (95%CI 0.44-0.83), and 0.43 (95%CI 0.30-0.60) (P < 0.00001). Similar relationships between % reduction and clinical outcomes were observed in analyses focusing on non-HDLC or apolipoprotein B. CONCLUSIONS: As documented for low- and moderate-intensity regimens, variability in % LDLC reduction following high-intensity statin therapy is wide yet the magnitude of this % reduction directly relates to efficacy. These data support guideline approaches that incorporate % reduction targets for statin therapy as well as absolute targets, and might provide a structure for the allocation of emerging adjunctive lipid-lowering therapies such as PCSK9 inhibitors should these agents prove broadly effective for cardiovascular event reduction. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Neil J Stone; Jennifer G Robinson; Alice H Lichtenstein; C Noel Bairey Merz; Conrad B Blum; Robert H Eckel; Anne C Goldberg; David Gordon; Daniel Levy; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Patrick McBride; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Karol Watson; Peter W F Wilson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-11-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: John F Thompson; Craig L Hyde; Linda S Wood; Sara A Paciga; David A Hinds; David R Cox; G Kees Hovingh; John J P Kastelein Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Genet Date: 2009-02-12
Authors: Sripal Bangalore; Andrei Breazna; David A DeMicco; Chuan-Chuan Wun; Franz H Messerli Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-04-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Christopher P Cannon; Michael A Blazing; Robert P Giugliano; Amy McCagg; Jennifer A White; Pierre Theroux; Harald Darius; Basil S Lewis; Ton Oude Ophuis; J Wouter Jukema; Gaetano M De Ferrari; Witold Ruzyllo; Paul De Lucca; KyungAh Im; Erin A Bohula; Craig Reist; Stephen D Wiviott; Andrew M Tershakovec; Thomas A Musliner; Eugene Braunwald; Robert M Califf Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Paul M Ridker; Eleanor Danielson; Francisco A H Fonseca; Jacques Genest; Antonio M Gotto; John J P Kastelein; Wolfgang Koenig; Peter Libby; Alberto J Lorenzatti; Jean G MacFadyen; Børge G Nordestgaard; James Shepherd; James T Willerson; Robert J Glynn Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-11-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: S Matthijs Boekholdt; G Kees Hovingh; Samia Mora; Benoit J Arsenault; Pierre Amarenco; Terje R Pedersen; John C LaRosa; David D Waters; David A DeMicco; R John Simes; Antony C Keech; David Colquhoun; Graham A Hitman; D John Betteridge; Michael B Clearfield; John R Downs; Helen M Colhoun; Antonio M Gotto; Paul M Ridker; Scott M Grundy; John J P Kastelein Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-08-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Daniel I Chasman; Franco Giulianini; Jean MacFadyen; Bryan J Barratt; Fredrik Nyberg; Paul M Ridker Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Genet Date: 2012-02-13
Authors: Joep Perk; Guy De Backer; Helmut Gohlke; Ian Graham; Zeljko Reiner; Monique Verschuren; Christian Albus; Pascale Benlian; Gudrun Boysen; Renata Cifkova; Christi Deaton; Shah Ebrahim; Miles Fisher; Giuseppe Germano; Richard Hobbs; Arno Hoes; Sehnaz Karadeniz; Alessandro Mezzani; Eva Prescott; Lars Ryden; Martin Scherer; Mikko Syvänne; Wilma J M Scholte op Reimer; Christiaan Vrints; David Wood; Jose Luis Zamorano; Faiez Zannad Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: J L Mega; N O Stitziel; S Kathiresan; M S Sabatine; J G Smith; D I Chasman; M Caulfield; J J Devlin; F Nordio; C Hyde; C P Cannon; F Sacks; N Poulter; P Sever; P M Ridker; E Braunwald; O Melander Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-03-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Maciej Banach; Piotr Jankowski; Jacek Jóźwiak; Barbara Cybulska; Adam Windak; Tomasz Guzik; Artur Mamcarz; Marlena Broncel; Tomasz Tomasik; Jacek Rysz; Agnieszka Jankowska-Zduńczyk; Piotr Hoffman; Agnieszka Mastalerz-Migas Journal: Arch Med Sci Date: 2016-12-19 Impact factor: 3.318
Authors: Sheldon W Tobe; James A Stone; Todd Anderson; Simon Bacon; Alice Y Y Cheng; Stella S Daskalopoulou; Justin A Ezekowitz; Jean C Gregoire; Gord Gubitz; Rahul Jain; Karim Keshavjee; Patty Lindsay; Mary L'Abbe; David C W Lau; Lawrence A Leiter; Eileen O'Meara; Glen J Pearson; Doreen M Rabi; Diana Sherifali; Peter Selby; Jack V Tu; Sean Wharton; Kimberly M Walker; Diane Hua-Stewart; Peter P Liu Journal: CMAJ Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Fernando H Y Cesena; Antonio Gabriele Laurinavicius; Viviane A Valente; Raquel D Conceição; Raul D Santos; Marcio S Bittencourt Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2018-03-25 Impact factor: 2.882