Alberico L. Catapano

ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: the Task Force for the management of dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) due to atherosclerosis of the arterial vessel wall and to thrombosis is the foremost cause of premature mortality and of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in Europe, and is also increasingly common in developing countries.1 In the European Union, the economic cost of CVD represents annually E192 billion1 in direct and indirect healthcare costs. The main clinical entities are coronary artery disease (CAD), ischaemic stroke, and peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The causes of these CVDs are multifactorial. Some of these factors relate to lifestyles, such as tobacco smoking, lack of physical activity, and dietary habits, and are thus modifiable. Other risk factors are also modifiable, such as elevated blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, and dyslipidaemias, or non-modifiable, such as age and male gender. These guidelines deal with the management of dyslipidaemias as an essential and integral part of CVD prevention. Prevention and treatment of dyslipidaemias should always be considered within the broader framework of CVD prevention, which is addressed in guidelines of the Joint European Societies’ Task forces on CVD prevention in clinical practice.2 – 5 The latest version of these guidelines was published in 20075; an update will become available in 2012. These Joint ESC/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines on the management of dyslipidaemias are complementary to the guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice and address not only physicians [e.g. general practitioners (GPs) and cardiologists] interested in CVD prevention, but also specialists from lipid clinics or metabolic units who are dealing with dyslipidaemias that are more difficult to classify and treat.

Lipoprotein(a) as a cardiovascular risk factor: current status

Aims The aims of the study were, first, to critically evaluate lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a cardiovascular risk factor and, second, to advise on screening for elevated plasma Lp(a), on desirable levels, and on therapeutic strategies. Methods and results The robust and specific association between elevated Lp(a) levels and increased cardiovascular disease (CVD)/coronary heart disease (CHD) risk, together with recent genetic findings, indicates that elevated Lp(a), like elevated LDL-cholesterol, is causally related to premature CVD/CHD. The association is continuous without a threshold or dependence on LDL- or non-HDL-cholesterol levels. Mechanistically, elevated Lp(a) levels may either induce a prothrombotic/anti-fibrinolytic effect as apolipoprotein(a) resembles both plasminogen and plasmin but has no fibrinolytic activity, or may accelerate atherosclerosis because, like LDL, the Lp(a) particle is cholesterol-rich, or both. We advise that Lp(a) be measured once, using an isoform-insensitive assay, in subjects at intermediate or high CVD/CHD risk with premature CVD, familial hypercholesterolaemia, a family history of premature CVD and/or elevated Lp(a), recurrent CVD despite statin treatment, ≥3% 10-year risk of fatal CVD according to European guidelines, and/or ≥10% 10-year risk of fatal + non-fatal CHD according to US guidelines. As a secondary priority after LDL-cholesterol reduction, we recommend a desirable level for Lp(a) <80th percentile (less than ∼50 mg/dL). Treatment should primarily be niacin 1–3 g/day, as a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled intervention trials demonstrates reduced CVD by niacin treatment. In extreme cases, LDL-apheresis is efficacious in removing Lp(a). Conclusion We recommend screening for elevated Lp(a) in those at intermediate or high CVD/CHD risk, a desirable level <50 mg/dL as a function of global cardiovascular risk, and use of niacin for Lp(a) and CVD/CHD risk reduction.

Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease: evidence and guidance for management

Even at low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal, patients with cardiometabolic abnormalities remain at high risk of cardiovascular events. This paper aims (i) to critically appraise evidence for elevated levels of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs) and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) as cardiovascular risk factors, and (ii) to advise on therapeutic strategies for management. Current evidence supports a causal association between elevated TRL and their remnants, low HDL-C, and cardiovascular risk. This interpretation is based on mechanistic and genetic studies for TRL and remnants, together with the epidemiological data suggestive of the association for circulating triglycerides and cardiovascular disease. For HDL, epidemiological, mechanistic, and clinical intervention data are consistent with the view that low HDL-C contributes to elevated cardiovascular risk; genetic evidence is unclear however, potentially reflecting the complexity of HDL metabolism. The Panel believes that therapeutic targeting of elevated triglycerides (≥1.7 mmol/L or 150 mg/dL), a marker of TRL and their remnants, and/or low HDL-C (<1.0 mmol/L or 40 mg/dL) may provide further benefit. The first step should be lifestyle interventions together with consideration of compliance with pharmacotherapy and secondary causes of dyslipidaemia. If inadequately corrected, adding niacin or a fibrate, or intensifying LDL-C lowering therapy may be considered. Treatment decisions regarding statin combination therapy should take into account relevant safety concerns, i.e. the risk of elevation of blood glucose, uric acid or liver enzymes with niacin, and myopathy, increased serum creatinine and cholelithiasis with fibrates. These recommendations will facilitate reduction in the substantial cardiovascular risk that persists in patients with cardiometabolic abnormalities at LDL-C goal.

2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias

The Task Force for the Management of Dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)  Developed with the special contribution of the European Assocciation for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR)  ABI : ankle-brachial index

Statin-associated muscle symptoms: impact on statin therapy—European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel Statement on Assessment, Aetiology and Management

Statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS) are one of the principal reasons for statin non-adherence and/or discontinuation, contributing to adverse cardiovascular outcomes. This European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) Consensus Panel overviews current understanding of the pathophysiology of statin-associated myopathy, and provides guidance for diagnosis and management of SAMS. Statin-associated myopathy, with significant elevation of serum creatine kinase (CK), is a rare but serious side effect of statins, affecting 1 per 1000 to 1 per 10 000 people on standard statin doses. Statin-associated muscle symptoms cover a broader range of clinical presentations, usually with normal or minimally elevated CK levels, with a prevalence of 7–29% in registries and observational studies. Preclinical studies show that statins decrease mitochondrial function, attenuate energy production, and alter muscle protein degradation, thereby providing a potential link between statins and muscle symptoms; controlled mechanistic and genetic studies in humans are necessary to further understanding. The Panel proposes to identify SAMS by symptoms typical of statin myalgia (i.e. muscle pain or aching) and their temporal association with discontinuation and response to repetitive statin re-challenge. In people with SAMS, the Panel recommends the use of a maximally tolerated statin dose combined with non-statin lipid-lowering therapies to attain recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets. The Panel recommends a structured work-up to identify individuals with clinically relevant SAMS generally to at least three different statins, so that they can be offered therapeutic regimens to satisfactorily address their cardiovascular risk. Further research into the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms may offer future therapeutic potential.

Carotid intima-media thickness progression to predict cardiovascular events in the general population (the PROG-IMT collaborative project) : a meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND Carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) is related to the risk of cardiovascular events in the general population. An association between changes in cIMT and cardiovascular risk is frequently assumed but has rarely been reported. Our aim was to test this association. METHODS We identified general population studies that assessed cIMT at least twice and followed up participants for myocardial infarction, stroke, or death. The study teams collaborated in an individual participant data meta-analysis. Excluding individuals with previous myocardial infarction or stroke, we assessed the association between cIMT progression and the risk of cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, vascular death, or a combination of these) for each study with Cox regression. The log hazard ratios (HRs) per SD difference were pooled by random effects meta-analysis. FINDINGS Of 21 eligible studies, 16 with 36,984 participants were included. During a mean follow-up of 7·0 years, 1519 myocardial infarctions, 1339 strokes, and 2028 combined endpoints (myocardial infarction, stroke, vascular death) occurred. Yearly cIMT progression was derived from two ultrasound visits 2-7 years (median 4 years) apart. For mean common carotid artery intima-media thickness progression, the overall HR of the combined endpoint was 0·97 (95% CI 0·94-1·00) when adjusted for age, sex, and mean common carotid artery intima-media thickness, and 0·98 (0·95-1·01) when also adjusted for vascular risk factors. Although we detected no associations with cIMT progression in sensitivity analyses, the mean cIMT of the two ultrasound scans was positively and robustly associated with cardiovascular risk (HR for the combined endpoint 1·16, 95% CI 1·10-1·22, adjusted for age, sex, mean common carotid artery intima-media thickness progression, and vascular risk factors). In three studies including 3439 participants who had four ultrasound scans, cIMT progression did not correlate between occassions (reproducibility correlations between r=-0·06 and r=-0·02). INTERPRETATION The association between cIMT progression assessed from two ultrasound scans and cardiovascular risk in the general population remains unproven. No conclusion can be derived for the use of cIMT progression as a surrogate in clinical trials. FUNDING Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

Homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia: new insights and guidance for clinicians to improve detection and clinical management. A position paper from the Consensus Panel on Familial Hypercholesterolaemia of the European Atherosclerosis Society

Aims Homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (HoFH) is a rare life-threatening condition characterized by markedly elevated circulating levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and accelerated, premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ACVD). Given recent insights into the heterogeneity of genetic defects and clinical phenotype of HoFH, and the availability of new therapeutic options, this Consensus Panel on Familial Hypercholesterolaemia of the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) critically reviewed available data with the aim of providing clinical guidance for the recognition and management of HoFH. Methods and results Early diagnosis of HoFH and prompt initiation of diet and lipid-lowering therapy are critical. Genetic testing may provide a definitive diagnosis, but if unavailable, markedly elevated LDL-C levels together with cutaneous or tendon xanthomas before 10 years, or untreated elevated LDL-C levels consistent with heterozygous FH in both parents, are suggestive of HoFH. We recommend that patients with suspected HoFH are promptly referred to specialist centres for a comprehensive ACVD evaluation and clinical management. Lifestyle intervention and maximal statin therapy are the mainstays of treatment, ideally started in the first year of life or at an initial diagnosis, often with ezetimibe and other lipid-modifying therapy. As patients rarely achieve LDL-C targets, adjunctive lipoprotein apheresis is recommended where available, preferably started by age 5 and no later than 8 years. The number of therapeutic approaches has increased following approval of lomitapide and mipomersen for HoFH. Given the severity of ACVD, we recommend regular follow-up, including Doppler echocardiographic evaluation of the heart and aorta annually, stress testing and, if available, computed tomography coronary angiography every 5 years, or less if deemed necessary. Conclusion This EAS Consensus Panel highlights the need for early identification of HoFH patients, prompt referral to specialized centres, and early initiation of appropriate treatment. These recommendations offer guidance for a wide spectrum of clinicians who are often the first to identify patients with suspected HoFH.

2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias: The Task Force for the Management of Dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Assocciation for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR).

Authors/Task Force Members:Alberico L. Catapano (Chairperson) (Italy) , Ian Graham (Chairperson) (Ireland) , Guy De Backer (Belgium), Olov Wiklund (Sweden), M. John Chapman (France), Heinz Drexel (Austria), Arno W. Hoes (The Netherlands), Catriona S. Jennings (UK), Ulf Landmesser (Germany), Terje R. Pedersen (Norway), Zeljko Reiner (Croatia), Gabriele Riccardi (Italy), Marja-Riita Taskinen (Finland), Lale Tokgozoglu (Turkey), W.M. Monique Verschuren (The Netherlands), Charalambos Vlachopoulos (Greece), David A. Wood (UK), Jose Luis Zamorano (Spain)

The ACC/AHA 2013 guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in adults: the good the bad and the uncertain: a comparison with ESC/EAS guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias 2011

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is the most important public health problem of our time in both Europe and the rest of the world, accounting for the greatest expenditure in most healthcare budgets. Achieving consistency of clinical care, incorporating new evidence and their synthesis into practical recommendations for clinicians is the task of various guideline committees throughout the world. Any change in a set of guidelines therefore can have far reaching consequences, particularly if they appear to be at variance with the existing guidelines. The present article discusses the recent American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines 2013 on the control of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in adults. When compared with the ESC/EAS guidelines on lipid modification in 2011, the ACC/AHA guidelines of 2013 differ markedly. Specifically, (i) the scope is limited to randomized trials only, which excludes a significant body of data and promotes essentially a statin centric approach only; (ii) the abolition of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets in favour of specific statin regimens that produce a 30-50% reduction in LDL-C we believe will confuse many physicians and miss the opportunity for medication adherence and patient engagement in self-management; (iii) the absence of target LDL-C levels in very high-risk patients with high absolute risk or residual risk factors will discourage clinicians to consider the addition of lipid modification treatments and individualize patient care; (iv) a reduction in the threshold for treatment in primary prevention will result in a greater number of patients being prescribed statin therapy, which is potentially good in young patients with high life time risk, but will result in a very large number of older patients offered therapy; and (v) the mixed pool risk calculator used to asses CVD risk in the guidelines for primary prevention has not been fully evaluated. This article discusses the potential implications of adopting the ACC/AHA guidelines on patient care in Europe and beyond and concludes with the opinion that the ESC/EAS guidelines from 2011 seem to be the most wide ranging, pragmatic and appropriate choice for European countries.

Deficiency of the Long Pentraxin PTX3 Promotes Vascular Inflammation and Atherosclerosis

Background— Immune responses participate in several phases of atherosclerosis; there is, in fact, increasing evidence that both adaptive immunity and innate immunity tightly regulate atherogenesis. Pentraxins are a superfamily of acute-phase proteins that includes short pentraxins such as C-reactive protein or long pentraxins such as PTX3, a molecule acting as the humoral arm of innate immunity. To address the potential role of PTX3 in atherogenesis, we first investigated the expression of PTX3 during atherogenesis, generated double-knockout mice lacking PTX3 and apolipoprotein E, and then studied the effect of murine PTX3 deficiency on plasma lipids, atherosclerosis development, and gene expression pattern in the vascular wall. Methods and Results— PTX3 expression increases in the vascular wall of apolipoprotein E–knockout mice from 3 up to 18 months of age. Double-knockout mice lacking PTX3 and apolipoprotein E were fed an atherogenic diet for 16 weeks. Aortic lesions were significantly increased in double-knockout mice and mice heterozygous for PTX3 compared with apolipoprotein E–knockout mice. Mice lacking PTX3 showed a more pronounced inflammatory profile in the vascular wall as detected by cDNA microarray and quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis and an increased macrophage accumulation within the plaque. Finally, lesion size correlated with the number of bone marrow monocytes. Conclusion— PTX3 has atheroprotective effects in mice, which, in light of the cardioprotective effects recently reported, suggests a cardiovascular protective function of the long pentraxin 3 through the modulation of the immunoinflammatory balance in the cardiovascular system.