Baris Gencer1,2, Luc Djousse3, Omar T Al-Ramady3, Nancy R Cook3,4, JoAnn E Manson3,4, Christine M Albert5. 1. Cardiology Division, Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland (B.G.). 2. Institute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Switzerland (B.G.). 3. Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (L.D., O.T.A., N.R.C., J.E.M.). 4. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (N.R.C., J.E.M.). 5. Department of Cardiology, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA (C.M.A.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some, but not all, large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of marine ɷ-3 fatty acids supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes have reported increased risks of atrial fibrillation (AF). The potential reasons for disparate findings may be dose-related. METHODS: The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for articles and abstracts published between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2020, in addition to a meta-analysis of large cardiovascular RCTs published in 2019. RCTs of cardiovascular outcomes of marine ɷ-3 fatty acids that reported results for AF, either as a prespecified outcome, an adverse event, or a cause for hospitalization, with a minimum sample size of 500 patients and a median follow-up of at least 1 year were included. RCTs specifically examining shorter-term effects of ɷ-3 fatty acids on recurrent AF in patients with established AF or postoperative AF were not included. The hazard ratio (HR) for the reported AF outcomes within each trial was meta-analyzed using random effects model with Knapp-Hartung adjustment and evaluated a dose-response relationship with a meta-regression model. RESULTS: Of 4049 screened records, 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Of those, 5 were already detected in a previous meta-analysis of cardiovascular RCTs. Among the 81 210 patients from 7 trials, 58 939 (72.6%) were enrolled in trials testing ≤1 g/d and 22 271 (27.4%) in trials testing >1 g/d of ɷ-3 fatty acids. The mean age was 65 years, and 31 842 (39%) were female. The weighted average follow-up was 4.9 years. In meta-analysis, the use of marine ɷ-3 fatty acid supplements was associated with an increased risk of AF (n=2905; HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.07-1.46]; P=0.013). In analyses stratified by dose, the HR was greater in the trials testing >1 g/d (HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.04-2.15]; P=0.042) compared with those testing ≤1 g/d (HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.03-1.22]; P=0.024; P for interaction <0.001). In meta-regression, the HR for AF increased per 1 g higher dosage of ɷ-3 fatty acids dosage (HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.06-1.15]; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In RCTs examining cardiovascular outcomes, marine ɷ-3 supplementation was associated with an increased risk of AF. The risk appeared to be greater in trials testing >1 g/d.
BACKGROUND: Some, but not all, large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of marine ɷ-3 fatty acids supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes have reported increased risks of atrial fibrillation (AF). The potential reasons for disparate findings may be dose-related. METHODS: The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for articles and abstracts published between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2020, in addition to a meta-analysis of large cardiovascular RCTs published in 2019. RCTs of cardiovascular outcomes of marine ɷ-3 fatty acids that reported results for AF, either as a prespecified outcome, an adverse event, or a cause for hospitalization, with a minimum sample size of 500 patients and a median follow-up of at least 1 year were included. RCTs specifically examining shorter-term effects of ɷ-3 fatty acids on recurrent AF in patients with established AF or postoperative AF were not included. The hazard ratio (HR) for the reported AF outcomes within each trial was meta-analyzed using random effects model with Knapp-Hartung adjustment and evaluated a dose-response relationship with a meta-regression model. RESULTS: Of 4049 screened records, 7 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Of those, 5 were already detected in a previous meta-analysis of cardiovascular RCTs. Among the 81 210 patients from 7 trials, 58 939 (72.6%) were enrolled in trials testing ≤1 g/d and 22 271 (27.4%) in trials testing >1 g/d of ɷ-3 fatty acids. The mean age was 65 years, and 31 842 (39%) were female. The weighted average follow-up was 4.9 years. In meta-analysis, the use of marine ɷ-3 fatty acid supplements was associated with an increased risk of AF (n=2905; HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.07-1.46]; P=0.013). In analyses stratified by dose, the HR was greater in the trials testing >1 g/d (HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.04-2.15]; P=0.042) compared with those testing ≤1 g/d (HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.03-1.22]; P=0.024; P for interaction <0.001). In meta-regression, the HR for AF increased per 1 g higher dosage of ɷ-3 fatty acids dosage (HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.06-1.15]; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In RCTs examining cardiovascular outcomes, marine ɷ-3 supplementation was associated with an increased risk of AF. The risk appeared to be greater in trials testing >1 g/d.
Authors: Scott M Grundy; Neil J Stone; Alison L Bailey; Craig Beam; Kim K Birtcher; Roger S Blumenthal; Lynne T Braun; Sarah de Ferranti; Joseph Faiella-Tommasino; Daniel E Forman; Ronald Goldberg; Paul A Heidenreich; Mark A Hlatky; Daniel W Jones; Donald Lloyd-Jones; Nuria Lopez-Pajares; Chiadi E Ndumele; Carl E Orringer; Carmen A Peralta; Joseph J Saseen; Sidney C Smith; Laurence Sperling; Salim S Virani; Joseph Yeboah Journal: Circulation Date: 2018-11-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Dariush Mozaffarian; Jason H Y Wu; Marcia C de Oliveira Otto; Chirag M Sandesara; Robert G Metcalf; Roberto Latini; Peter Libby; Federico Lombardi; Patrick T O'Gara; Richard L Page; Maria G Silletta; Luigi Tavazzi; Roberto Marchioli Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-03-26 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Stephen J Nicholls; A Michael Lincoff; Michelle Garcia; Dianna Bash; Christie M Ballantyne; Philip J Barter; Michael H Davidson; John J P Kastelein; Wolfgang Koenig; Darren K McGuire; Dariush Mozaffarian; Paul M Ridker; Kausik K Ray; Brian G Katona; Anders Himmelmann; Larrye E Loss; Martin Rensfeldt; Torbjörn Lundström; Rahul Agrawal; Venu Menon; Kathy Wolski; Steven E Nissen Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-12-08 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: François Mach; Colin Baigent; Alberico L Catapano; Konstantinos C Koskinas; Manuela Casula; Lina Badimon; M John Chapman; Guy G De Backer; Victoria Delgado; Brian A Ference; Ian M Graham; Alison Halliday; Ulf Landmesser; Borislava Mihaylova; Terje R Pedersen; Gabriele Riccardi; Dimitrios J Richter; Marc S Sabatine; Marja-Riitta Taskinen; Lale Tokgozoglu; Olov Wiklund Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Christine M Albert; Nancy R Cook; Julie Pester; M Vinayaga Moorthy; Claire Ridge; Jacqueline S Danik; Baris Gencer; Hasan K Siddiqi; Chee Ng; Heike Gibson; Samia Mora; Julie E Buring; JoAnn E Manson Journal: JAMA Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Theingi Aung; Jim Halsey; Daan Kromhout; Hertzel C Gerstein; Roberto Marchioli; Luigi Tavazzi; Johanna M Geleijnse; Bernhard Rauch; Andrew Ness; Pilar Galan; Emily Y Chew; Jackie Bosch; Rory Collins; Sarah Lewington; Jane Armitage; Robert Clarke Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Javier Mariani; Hernán C Doval; Daniel Nul; Sergio Varini; Hugo Grancelli; Daniel Ferrante; Gianni Tognoni; Alejandro Macchia Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2013-02-19 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Peter E Penson; Eric Bruckert; David Marais; Željko Reiner; Matteo Pirro; Amirhossein Sahebkar; Gani Bajraktari; Erkin Mirrakhimov; Manfredi Rizzo; Dimitri P Mikhailidis; Alexandros Sachinidis; Dan Gaita; Gustavs Latkovskis; Mohsen Mazidi; Peter P Toth; Daniel Pella; Fahad Alnouri; Arman Postadzhiyan; Hung-I Yeh; G B John Mancini; Stephan von Haehling; Maciej Banach Journal: J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle Date: 2022-03-10 Impact factor: 12.063