Konstantinos C Koskinas1, George C M Siontis1, Raffaele Piccolo1, Dimitris Mavridis2,3, Lorenz Räber1, François Mach4, Stephan Windecker1. 1. Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland. 2. Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece. 3. Centre de Recherche Épidémiologie et Statistique Sorbonne Paris Cité (CRESS-UMR1153), Inserm/Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. 4. Department of Cardiology, Geneva University Hospital, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
Aims: Current evidence on dyslipidaemia management has expanded to novel treatments and very low achieved levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). We sought to compare the clinical impact of more-intensive vs. less-intensive LDL-C lowering by means of statins and currently recommended non-statin medications in secondary prevention. Methods and results: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials of statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, or bile acid sequestrants with >500 patients followed for ≥1 year. We employed random-effects models using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to compare outcomes. We included 19 trials (15 of statins, 3 of PCSK9 inhibitors, and 1 of ezetimibe) with 152 507 patients randomly assigned to more-intensive (n = 76 678) or less-intensive treatment (n = 75 829). More-intensive treatment was associated with 19% relative risk reduction for the primary outcome, major vascular events (MVEs; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77-0.86). Risk reduction was greater across higher baseline levels and greater achieved reductions of LDL-C. The clinical benefit was significant across varying types of more-intensive treatment and was consistent for statins (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76-0.86) and non-statin agents (PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.94) as active (more-intensive) intervention (P-interaction = 0.38). Each 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C was associated with 19% relative decrease in MVE. Death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary revascularization also favoured more-intensive treatment. Conclusion: Reduction of MVE is proportional to the magnitude of LDL-C lowering across a broad spectrum of on-treatment levels in secondary prevention. Statin intensification and add-on treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors or ezetimibe are associated with significant reduction of cardiovascular morbidity in this very high-risk population.
Aims: Current evidence on dyslipidaemia management has expanded to novel treatments and very low achieved levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). We sought to compare the clinical impact of more-intensive vs. less-intensive LDL-C lowering by means of statins and currently recommended non-statin medications in secondary prevention. Methods and results: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials of statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, or bile acid sequestrants with >500 patients followed for ≥1 year. We employed random-effects models using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to compare outcomes. We included 19 trials (15 of statins, 3 of PCSK9 inhibitors, and 1 of ezetimibe) with 152 507 patients randomly assigned to more-intensive (n = 76 678) or less-intensive treatment (n = 75 829). More-intensive treatment was associated with 19% relative risk reduction for the primary outcome, major vascular events (MVEs; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77-0.86). Risk reduction was greater across higher baseline levels and greater achieved reductions of LDL-C. The clinical benefit was significant across varying types of more-intensive treatment and was consistent for statins (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76-0.86) and non-statin agents (PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.94) as active (more-intensive) intervention (P-interaction = 0.38). Each 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C was associated with 19% relative decrease in MVE. Death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary revascularization also favoured more-intensive treatment. Conclusion: Reduction of MVE is proportional to the magnitude of LDL-C lowering across a broad spectrum of on-treatment levels in secondary prevention. Statin intensification and add-on treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors or ezetimibe are associated with significant reduction of cardiovascular morbidity in this very high-risk population.
Authors: Safi U Khan; Muhammad U Khan; Shahul Valavoor; Muhammad Shahzeb Khan; Victor Okunrintemi; Mamas A Mamas; Thorsten M Leucker; Michael J Blaha; Erin D Michos Journal: Eur J Prev Cardiol Date: 2019-09-02 Impact factor: 7.804
Authors: Konstantinos C Koskinas; Stephan Windecker; Aliki Buhayer; Baris Gencer; Giovanni Pedrazzini; Christian Mueller; Stephan Cook; Olivier Muller; Christian M Matter; Lorenz Räber; Dik Heg; François Mach Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Eric McDade; Iryna Voytyuk; Paul Aisen; Randall J Bateman; Maria C Carrillo; Bart De Strooper; Christian Haass; Eric M Reiman; Reisa Sperling; Pierre N Tariot; Riqiang Yan; Colin L Masters; Robert Vassar; Stefan F Lichtenthaler Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2021-09-21 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Thomas O'Toole; Michelle D Kelsey; Nishant P Shah; Robert W McGarrah; Neha J Pagidipati Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 3.955
Authors: Siva H Yedlapati; Safi U Khan; Swapna Talluri; Ahmed N Lone; Muhammad Zia Khan; Muhammad Shahzeb Khan; Ann M Navar; Martha Gulati; Heather Johnson; Seth Baum; Erin D Michos Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2021-03-13 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Stella Talic; Clara Marquina; Richard Ofori-Asenso; Marjana Petrova; Danny Liew; Alice J Owen; Sean Lybrand; David Thomson; Jenni Ilomaki; Ella Zomer; Zanfina Ademi Journal: Cardiovasc Drugs Ther Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 3.947