Anthony Keech

Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins.

BACKGROUND Results of previous randomised trials have shown that interventions that lower LDL cholesterol concentrations can significantly reduce the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) and other major vascular events in a wide range of individuals. But each separate trial has limited power to assess particular outcomes or particular categories of participant. METHODS A prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 individuals in 14 randomised trials of statins was done. Weighted estimates were obtained of effects on different clinical outcomes per 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol. FINDINGS During a mean of 5 years, there were 8186 deaths, 14,348 individuals had major vascular events, and 5103 developed cancer. Mean LDL cholesterol differences at 1 year ranged from 0.35 mmol/L to 1.77 mmol/L (mean 1.09) in these trials. There was a 12% proportional reduction in all-cause mortality per mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol (rate ratio [RR] 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.91; p<0.0001). This reflected a 19% reduction in coronary mortality (0.81, 0.76-0.85; p<0.0001), and non-significant reductions in non-coronary vascular mortality (0.93, 0.83-1.03; p=0.2) and non-vascular mortality (0.95, 0.90-1.01; p=0.1). There were corresponding reductions in myocardial infarction or coronary death (0.77, 0.74-0.80; p<0.0001), in the need for coronary revascularisation (0.76, 0.73-0.80; p<0.0001), in fatal or non-fatal stroke (0.83, 0.78-0.88; p<0.0001), and, combining these, of 21% in any such major vascular event (0.79, 0.77-0.81; p<0.0001). The proportional reduction in major vascular events differed significantly (p<0.0001) according to the absolute reduction in LDL cholesterol achieved, but not otherwise. These benefits were significant within the first year, but were greater in subsequent years. Taking all years together, the overall reduction of about one fifth per mmol/L LDL cholesterol reduction translated into 48 (95% CI 39-57) fewer participants having major vascular events per 1000 among those with pre-existing CHD at baseline, compared with 25 (19-31) per 1000 among participants with no such history. There was no evidence that statins increased the incidence of cancer overall (1.00, 0.95-1.06; p=0.9) or at any particular site. INTERPRETATION Statin therapy can safely reduce the 5-year incidence of major coronary events, coronary revascularisation, and stroke by about one fifth per mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol, largely irrespective of the initial lipid profile or other presenting characteristics. The absolute benefit relates chiefly to an individuals absolute risk of such events and to the absolute reduction in LDL cholesterol achieved. These findings reinforce the need to consider prolonged statin treatment with substantial LDL cholesterol reductions in all patients at high risk of any type of major vascular event.

Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels

BACKGROUND In patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of cholesterol levels, cholesterol-lowering therapy reduces the risk of coronary events, but the effects on mortality from coronary heart disease and overall mortality have remained uncertain. METHODS In a double-blind, randomized trial, we compared the effects of pravastatin (40 mg daily) with those of a placebo over a mean follow-up period of 6.1 years in 9014 patients who were 31 to 75 years of age. The patients had a history of myocardial infarction or hospitalization for unstable angina and initial plasma total cholesterol levels of 155 to 271 mg per deciliter. Both groups received advice on following a cholesterol-lowering diet. The primary study outcome was mortality from coronary heart disease. RESULTS Death from coronary heart disease occurred in 8.3 percent of the patients in the placebo group and 6.4 percent of those in the pravastatin group, a relative reduction in risk of 24 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 12 to 35 percent; P<0.001). Overall mortality was 14.1 percent in the placebo group and 11.0 percent in the pravastatin group (relative reduction in risk, 22 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 13 to 31 percent; P<0.001). The incidence of all cardiovascular outcomes was consistently lower among patients assigned to receive pravastatin; these outcomes included myocardial infarction (reduction in risk, 29 percent; P<0.001), death from coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction (a 24 percent reduction in risk, P<0.001), stroke (a 19 percent reduction in risk, P=0.048), and coronary revascularization (a 20 percent reduction in risk, P<0.001). The effects of treatment were similar for all predefined subgroups. There were no clinically significant adverse effects of treatment with pravastatin. CONCLUSIONS Pravastatin therapy reduced mortality from coronary heart disease and overall mortality, as compared with the rates in the placebo group, as well as the incidence of all prespecified cardiovascular events in patients with a history of myocardial infarction or unstable angina who had a broad range of initial cholesterol levels.

Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials.

Searching As reported in the study protocol (see Other Publications of Related Interest), potentially eligible studies were identified prospectively by computer-aided literature searches, manual searches of journals, examination of reference lists of trials and review articles, examination of abstracts and conference proceedings, by collaboration with the trial register of the International Committee on Thrombosis and Haemostasis and by contacting colleagues, collaborators and drug manufacturers.

Efficacy of cholesterol-lowering therapy in 18 686 people with diabetes in 14 randomised trials of statins: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Although statin therapy reduces the risk of occlusive vascular events in people with diabetes mellitus, there is uncertainty about the effects on particular outcomes and whether such effects depend on the type of diabetes, lipid profile, or other factors. We undertook a prospective meta-analysis to help resolve these uncertainties. METHODS We analysed data from 18 686 individuals with diabetes (1466 with type 1 and 17,220 with type 2) in the context of a further 71,370 without diabetes in 14 randomised trials of statin therapy. Weighted estimates were obtained of effects on clinical outcomes per 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol. FINDINGS During a mean follow-up of 4.3 years, there were 3247 major vascular events in people with diabetes. There was a 9% proportional reduction in all-cause mortality per mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol in participants with diabetes (rate ratio [RR] 0.91, 99% CI 0.82-1.01; p=0.02), which was similar to the 13% reduction in those without diabetes (0.87, 0.82-0.92; p<0.0001). This finding reflected a significant reduction in vascular mortality (0.87, 0.76-1.00; p=0.008) and no effect on non-vascular mortality (0.97, 0.82-1.16; p=0.7) in participants with diabetes. There was a significant 21% proportional reduction in major vascular events per mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol in people with diabetes (0.79, 0.72-0.86; p<0.0001), which was similar to the effect observed in those without diabetes (0.79, 0.76-0.82; p<0.0001). In diabetic participants there were reductions in myocardial infarction or coronary death (0.78, 0.69-0.87; p<0.0001), coronary revascularisation (0.75, 0.64-0.88; p<0.0001), and stroke (0.79, 0.67-0.93; p=0.0002). Among people with diabetes the proportional effects of statin therapy were similar irrespective of whether there was a prior history of vascular disease and irrespective of other baseline characteristics. After 5 years, 42 (95% CI 30-55) fewer people with diabetes had major vascular events per 1000 allocated statin therapy. INTERPRETATION Statin therapy should be considered for all diabetic individuals who are at sufficiently high risk of vascular events.

Evolocumab and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND Evolocumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits proprotein convertase subtilisin–kexin type 9 (PCSK9) and lowers low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels by approximately 60%. Whether it prevents cardiovascular events is uncertain. METHODS We conducted a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial involving 27,564 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and LDL cholesterol levels of 70 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) or higher who were receiving statin therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive evolocumab (either 140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly) or matching placebo as subcutaneous injections. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization. The key secondary efficacy end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The median duration of follow‐up was 2.2 years. RESULTS At 48 weeks, the least‐squares mean percentage reduction in LDL cholesterol levels with evolocumab, as compared with placebo, was 59%, from a median baseline value of 92 mg per deciliter (2.4 mmol per liter) to 30 mg per deciliter (0.78 mmol per liter) (P<0.001). Relative to placebo, evolocumab treatment significantly reduced the risk of the primary end point (1344 patients [9.8%] vs. 1563 patients [11.3%]; hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 0.92; P<0.001) and the key secondary end point (816 [5.9%] vs. 1013 [7.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.88; P<0.001). The results were consistent across key subgroups, including the subgroup of patients in the lowest quartile for baseline LDL cholesterol levels (median, 74 mg per deciliter [1.9 mmol per liter]). There was no significant difference between the study groups with regard to adverse events (including new‐onset diabetes and neurocognitive events), with the exception of injection‐site reactions, which were more common with evolocumab (2.1% vs. 1.6%). CONCLUSIONS In our trial, inhibition of PCSK9 with evolocumab on a background of statin therapy lowered LDL cholesterol levels to a median of 30 mg per deciliter (0.78 mmol per liter) and reduced the risk of cardiovascular events. These findings show that patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease benefit from lowering of LDL cholesterol levels below current targets. (Funded by Amgen; FOURIER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01764633.)

Effect of fenofibrate on the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy (FIELD study): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy is often associated with visual field reduction and other ocular side-effects. Our aim was to assess whether long-term lipid-lowering therapy with fenofibrate could reduce the progression of retinopathy and the need for laser treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS The Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study was a multinational randomised trial of 9795 patients aged 50-75 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive fenofibrate 200 mg/day (n=4895) or matching placebo (n=4900). At each clinic visit, information concerning laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy-a prespecified tertiary endpoint of the main study-was gathered. Adjudication by ophthalmologists masked to treatment allocation defined instances of laser treatment for macular oedema, proliferative retinopathy, or other eye conditions. In a substudy of 1012 patients, standardised retinal photography was done and photographs graded with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) criteria to determine the cumulative incidence of diabetic retinopathy and its component lesions. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN64783481. FINDINGS Laser treatment was needed more frequently in participants with poorer glycaemic or blood pressure control than in those with good control of these factors, and in those with a greater burden of clinical microvascular disease, but the need for such treatment was not affected by plasma lipid concentrations. The requirement for first laser treatment for all retinopathy was significantly lower in the fenofibrate group than in the placebo group (164 [3.4%] patients on fenofibrate vs 238 [4.9%] on placebo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.84; p=0.0002; absolute risk reduction 1.5% [0.7-2.3]). In the ophthalmology substudy, the primary endpoint of 2-step progression of retinopathy grade did not differ significantly between the two groups overall (46 [9.6%] patients on fenofibrate vs 57 [12.3%] on placebo; p=0.19) or in the subset of patients without pre-existing retinopathy (43 [11.4%] vs 43 [11.7%]; p=0.87). By contrast, in patients with pre-existing retinopathy, significantly fewer patients on fenofibrate had a 2-step progression than did those on placebo (three [3.1%] patients vs 14 [14.6%]; p=0.004). An exploratory composite endpoint of 2-step progression of retinopathy grade, macular oedema, or laser treatments was significantly lower in the fenofibrate group than in the placebo group (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.94; p=0.022). INTERPRETATION Treatment with fenofibrate in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus reduces the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy, although the mechanism of this effect does not seem to be related to plasma concentrations of lipids.

Apolipoproteins versus lipids as indices of coronary risk and as targets for statin treatment

More Nobel prizes have been awarded for the study of cholesterol than for any other molecule. Presently, concentration of LDL cholesterol is the fundamental index of risk of vascular disease. It is an estimate of the mass of cholesterol in the LDL fraction in plasma. By contrast, the value for apolipoprotein B is a measurement of the total number of atherogenic particles. Results of many studies show that apolipoprotein B is a better marker of risk of vascular disease and a better guide to the adequacy of statin treatment than any cholesterol index. Moreover, the ratio of apolipoprotein B/apolipoprotein A-1 seems superior to the ratio of total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol as an overall index of the risk of vascular disease. We review this evidence and include observations that were not previously published. The pathophysiological bases for the superiority of apolipoprotein B to cholesterol as a predictor of risk are reported elsewhere. 1

Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Is Only Weakly Correlated With the Extent and Severity of Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND Intima-media thickness (IMT) of the common carotid artery (CCA), measured with external vascular ultrasound, has been widely used in clinical trials as a surrogate marker for coronary atherosclerosis. Despite this, the degree of correlation between carotid IMT and the extent and severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) is not known. METHODS AND RESULTS Common carotid IMT was measured by ultrasound in 350 consecutive subjects of age 60 +/- 10 years (range, 30 to 85 years) on the day of coronary angiography. Carotid mean IMT was 0.83 +/- 0.20 mm (range, 0.43 to 1.80 mm), and maximum IMT was 1.04 +/- 0.27 mm (range, 0.49 to 2.19 mm). Coronary angiograms were analyzed by independent observers for disease severity (number of vessels with > or = 70% stenosis), extent score, and a modified Gensini score. Mean carotid IMT was weakly but significantly correlated with CAD severity (r = .26), extent (r = .23), and modified Gensini score (r = .29, P < .0001 for all correlations). Carotid IMT was not clinically useful, however, because it was not specific or sensitive enough to identify patients with or without significant CAD. Increasing age, male sex, and presence of diabetes were all associated with a significantly (P < .01) higher CAD score than the average for any level of carotid IMT, suggesting differential effects of these traditional risk factors on the coronary and common carotid arteries. CONCLUSIONS Although carotid IMT is significantly correlated with extent and severity of CAD, the relationship is weak. This relatively poor correlation (r2 < .10) should be considered in the interpretation of clinical trials that use carotid IMT as a surrogate end point for coronary atherosclerosis.

Effect of Pravastatin on Coronary Disease Events in Subgroups Defined by Coronary Risk Factors The Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project

BackgroundPrevious trials have had insufficient numbers of coronary events to address definitively the effect of lipid-modifying therapy on coronary heart disease in subgroups of patients with varying baseline characteristics. Methods and ResultsThe data from 3 large randomized trials with pravastatin 40 mg were pooled and analyzed with the use of a prospectively defined protocol. Included were 19 768 patients, 102 559 person-years of follow-up, 2194 primary end points (coronary death or nonfatal myocardial infarction), and 3717 expanded end points (primary end point, CABG, or PTCA). Pravastatin significantly reduced relative risk in younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients, men and women, smokers and nonsmokers, and patients with or without diabetes or hypertension. The relative effect was smaller, but absolute risk reduction was similar in patients with hypertension compared with those without hypertension. Relative risk reduction was significant in predefined categories of baseline lipid concentrations. Tests for interaction were not significant between relative risk reduction and baseline total cholesterol (5% to 95% range 177 to 297 mg/dL, 4.6 to 7.7 mmol/L), HDL cholesterol (27 to 58 mg/dL, 0.7 to 1.5 mmol/L), and triglyceride (74 to 302 mg/dL, 0.8 to 3.4 mmol/L) concentrations, analyzed as continuous variables. However, for LDL cholesterol, the probability values for interaction were 0.068 for the prespecified primary end point and 0.019 for the expanded end point. Relative risk reduction was similar throughout most of the baseline LDL cholesterol range (125 to 212 mg/dL, 3.2 to 5.5 mmol/L) with the possible exception of the lowest quintile of CARE/LIPID (<125 mg/dL) (relative risk reduction 5%, 95% CI 19% to −12%). ConclusionsPravastatin treatment is effective in reducing coronary heart disease events in patients with high or low risk factor status and across a wide range of pretreatment lipid concentrations.

Effects of Fenofibrate Treatment on Cardiovascular Disease Risk in 9,795 Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes and Various Components of the Metabolic Syndrome: The Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study

OBJECTIVE—We explored whether cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and the effects of fenofibrate differed in subjects with and without metabolic syndrome and according to various features of metabolic syndrome defined by the Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) in subjects with type 2 diabetes in the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—The prevalence of metabolic syndrome and its features was calculated. Cox proportional models adjusted for age, sex, CVD status, and baseline A1C levels were used to determine the independent contributions of metabolic syndrome features to total CVD event rates and the effects of fenofibrate. RESULTS—More than 80% of FIELD participants met the ATP III criteria for metabolic syndrome. Each ATP III feature of metabolic syndrome, apart from increased waist circumference, increased the absolute risk of CVD events over 5 years by at least 3%. Those with marked dyslipidemia (elevated triglycerides ≥2.3 mmol/l and low HDL cholesterol) were at the highest risk of CVD (17.8% over 5 years). Fenofibrate significantly reduced CVD events in those with low HDL cholesterol or hypertension. The largest effect of fenofibrate to reduce CVD risk was observed in subjects with marked dyslipidemia in whom a 27% relative risk reduction (95% CI 9–42, P = 0.005; number needed to treat = 23) was observed. Subjects with no prior CVD had greater risk reductions than the entire group. CONCLUSIONS—Metabolic syndrome components identify higher CVD risk in individuals with type 2 diabetes, so the absolute benefits of fenofibrate are likely to be greater when metabolic syndrome features are present. The highest risk and greatest benefits of fenofibrate are seen among those with marked hypertriglyceridemia.