BACKGROUND: To date, most clinical comparisons of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy versus statin monotherapy have relied entirely on surrogate variables. In this systematic review, we study the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy in comparison to statin monotherapy in terms of the prevention of cardiovascular events in hyperlipidemic patients with atherosclerosis and/or diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This review is based on a systematic literature search (1995 to July 2015) in PubMed, the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), the Cochrane Library, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. RESULTS: Nine randomized, controlled trials with data from a total of 19 461 patients were included. Ezetimibe-statin combination therapy was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events than statin monotherapy: 33% of the patients treated with ezetimibe and a statin, and 35% of those treated with a statin alone, had a cardiovascular event within seven years (number needed to treat [NNT]: 50 over 7 years). Combination therapy was also significantly more effective in preventing a composite endpoint consisting of death due to cardiovascular disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina pectoris, coronary revascularization, and nonfatal stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [0,89; 0,99]; p = 0.016). Diabetic patients benefited from combination therapy rather than monotherapy with respect to cardiovascular morbidity (HR 0.87 [0.78; 0.94]). On the other hand, the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy did not lessen either cardiovascular or overall mortality. Serious undesired events occurred in 38% of the patients taking ezetimibe and a statin nd in 39% of the patients taking a statin alone (relative risk 1.09 [0.77; 1.55]). CONCLUSION: In high-risk patients with an acute coronary syndrome, combination therapy with ezetimibe and a statin lowered the risk of cardiovascular events in comparison to statin monotherapy. The risk of dying or suffering an adverse drug effect was similar in the two treatment groups.
BACKGROUND: To date, most clinical comparisons of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy versus statin monotherapy have relied entirely on surrogate variables. In this systematic review, we study the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy in comparison to statin monotherapy in terms of the prevention of cardiovascular events in hyperlipidemic patients with atherosclerosis and/or diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This review is based on a systematic literature search (1995 to July 2015) in PubMed, the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), the Cochrane Library, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. RESULTS: Nine randomized, controlled trials with data from a total of 19 461 patients were included. Ezetimibe-statin combination therapy was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events than statin monotherapy: 33% of the patients treated with ezetimibe and a statin, and 35% of those treated with a statin alone, had a cardiovascular event within seven years (number needed to treat [NNT]: 50 over 7 years). Combination therapy was also significantly more effective in preventing a composite endpoint consisting of death due to cardiovascular disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina pectoris, coronary revascularization, and nonfatal stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [0,89; 0,99]; p = 0.016). Diabeticpatients benefited from combination therapy rather than monotherapy with respect to cardiovascular morbidity (HR 0.87 [0.78; 0.94]). On the other hand, the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy did not lessen either cardiovascular or overall mortality. Serious undesired events occurred in 38% of the patients taking ezetimibe and a statin nd in 39% of the patients taking a statin alone (relative risk 1.09 [0.77; 1.55]). CONCLUSION: In high-risk patients with an acute coronary syndrome, combination therapy with ezetimibe and a statin lowered the risk of cardiovascular events in comparison to statin monotherapy. The risk of dying or suffering an adverse drug effect was similar in the two treatment groups.
Authors: Michael A Blazing; Robert P Giugliano; Christopher P Cannon; Thomas A Musliner; Andrew M Tershakovec; Jennifer A White; Craig Reist; Amy McCagg; Eugene Braunwald; Robert M Califf Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: L M Gaudiani; A Lewin; L Meneghini; I Perevozskaya; D Plotkin; Y Mitchel; S Shah Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Mahshid Dehghan; Andrew Mente; Koon K Teo; Peggy Gao; Peter Sleight; Gilles Dagenais; Alvaro Avezum; Jeffrey L Probstfield; Tony Dans; Salim Yusuf Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-12-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: R Ara; I Tumur; A Pandor; A Duenas; R Williams; A Wilkinson; S Paisley; J Chilcott Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: J Shepherd; S M Cobbe; I Ford; C G Isles; A R Lorimer; P W MacFarlane; J H McKillop; C J Packard Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1995-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Maria Mytilinaiou; Ioannis Kyrou; Mike Khan; Dimitris K Grammatopoulos; Harpal S Randeva Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2018-07-12 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Juan M Suárez-Rivero; Carmen J Pastor-Maldonado; Mario de la Mata; Marina Villanueva-Paz; Suleva Povea-Cabello; Mónica Álvarez-Córdoba; Irene Villalón-García; Alejandra Suárez-Carrillo; Marta Talaverón-Rey; Manuel Munuera; José A Sánchez-Alcázar Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2019-10-20 Impact factor: 5.923