Dataset Information

Comparative effectiveness of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a nationwide cohort study.

ABSTRACT: The long-term outcome of first-line moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy for secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy remains elusive. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of moderate-intensity statin and ezetimibe combination therapy with high-intensity statin monotherapy. We conducted a nationwide, population-based, retrospective, cohort study of patients with ACS from 2013 to 2019. The patients using combination therapy were matched (1:1) to those using monotherapy. The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke and all-cause mortality. We estimated the hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Cox proportional hazards regression. After propensity score matching, 10,723 pairs were selected. Men accounted for 70% of the patients and 37% aged > 70 years. The primary endpoint occurred in 1297 patients (12.1%) in the combination group and in 1426 patients (13.3%) in the monotherapy group, and decreased risk (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.92, P < 0.001) in the combination group. Among the patients with ACS, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy was associated with decreased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy in a nationwide population-based study representing routine clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Jang JY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10774297 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative effectiveness of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a nationwide cohort study.

Jang Ji-Yong JY Kim Seonji S Cho Jaehyeong J Chun Sung-Youn SY You Seng Chan SC Kim Jung-Sun JS

Scientific reports 20240108 1

The long-term outcome of first-line moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy for secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy remains elusive. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of moderate-intensity statin and ezetimibe combination therapy with high-intensity statin monotherapy. We conducted a nationwide, population-based, retrospective, coh ...[more]

PMID: 38191642

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite widespread use of high-intensity statin monotherapy, achieving target LDL-C levels and reducing cardiovascular events in patients with or at high risk of developing ASCVD remains challenging. Our study measured the effects of low/moderate-intensity statins and ezetimibe combination therapy compared to high-dose statin monotherapy on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and coronary atherosclerotic plaque reduction.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL register of trials for studies comparing the combination therapy to high-intensity statin monotherapy in terms of MACEs and coronary atherosclerotic plaque reduction. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or major cardiovascular events (MI, HF, Revascularization, or non-fatal stroke). Other outcomes included other MACEs, lipid-lowering efficacy, and safety outcomes. A protocol was registered to PROSPERO under registration number [CRD42024545807].Results15 studies encompassing 251,450 participants were included in our meta-analysis. In our pooled analysis of observational studies, combination therapy was associated with lower rates of the primary composite outcome (HR = 0.76, CI 95% [0.73, 0.80]), cardiovascular death (HR = 0.80, CI 95% [0.74, 0.88]), all-cause death (HR = 0.84, CI 95% [0.78, 0.91]), and non-fatal stroke (HR = 0.81, CI 95% [0.75, 0.87]). However, the pooled analysis of RCTs did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference between both arms concerning clinical endpoints. Combination therapy had a higher number of patients with LDL-C < 70 mg/dL (RR = 1.27, CI 95% [1.21, 1.34]), significantly lowered LDL-C (MD = -7.95, CI 95% [-10.02, -5.89]) and TC (MD = -26.77, CI 95% [-27.64, -25.89]) in the pooled analysis of RCTs. In terms of safety, the combination therapy lowered muscle-related adverse events (RR = 0.52, CI 95% [0.32, 0.85]) and number of patients with liver enzyme elevation (RR = 0.51, CI 95% [0.29, 0.89]) in the pooled analysis of RCTs and was associated with lower rates of new-onset diabetes (HR = 0.80, CI 95% [0.74, 0.87]) in the pooled analysis of observational studies.ConclusionEvidence from RCTs indicates that low/moderate statin therapy in combination with ezetimibe has a superior lipid-lowering effect and reduces side effects compared to high-dose statins. Observational studies suggest improved clinical outcomes but need to be corroborated by large, outcomes-powered RCTs over longer follow-up periods.

Project description:PurposeGuidelines recommend high-intensity statin treatment after ischemic stroke, but evidence is sparse on the effectiveness and safety of different statin treatment intensities. We examined effectiveness and safety outcomes among patients initiating high-intensity versus moderate-intensity statins after ischemic stroke.MethodsIn this population-based new-user active-comparator cohort study, we used the Danish Stroke Registry, covering all Danish hospitals, to identify patients with a first-time ischemic stroke during 2012-2021. Using multiple Danish registries, patients who redeemed a statin prescription within 21 days after stroke admission were classified as high-intensity statin initiators or moderate-intensity statin initiators. Propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance patient characteristics. We used competing risk methods to compute 5 year risk differences (RDs) and Cox proportional hazards regression to compute 5 year hazard ratios (HRs) of stroke recurrence, myocardial infarction, heart failure, venous thromboembolism, and all-cause mortality (effectiveness outcomes) and diabetes, liver disease, and kidney disease (safety outcomes).ResultsHigh-intensity (n = 13,032) and moderate-intensity (n = 14,355) statin initiators were identified. Risks of most examined effectiveness outcomes were comparable between statin intensities. There was no clear association between statin intensity and stroke recurrence (RD: 0.8% [95% CI: 0.1, 1.4], HR: 1.08 [95% CI: 0.96, 1.22]). All-cause mortality was slightly reduced among high-intensity statin initiators (RD: -1.1% [95% CI: -0.1, -2.1], HR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.85, 1.01]. Risks of most safety outcomes were comparable between statin intensities, but high-intensity statin use was associated with an increased risk of diabetes (RD: 1.2% [95% CI: 0.4, 1.9], HR: 1.10 [95% CI: 1.00, 1.21]).Discussion and conclusionCompared with initiation of moderate-intensity statins, initiation of high-intensity statins after ischemic stroke was associated with similar risks of most effectiveness and safety outcomes. However, mortality risk was reduced, and diabetes risk was increased.

Project description:ImportanceHigh-intensity statin is strongly recommended in patients at very high risk (VHR) of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, concerns about statin-associated adverse effects result in underuse of this strategy in practice.ObjectiveTo evaluate the outcomes of a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination in VHR and non-VHR patients with ASCVD.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a post hoc analysis of the Randomized Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Lipid Lowering With Statin Monotherapy vs Statin/Ezetimibe Combination for High-Risk Cardiovascular Disease (RACING) open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. The study was conducted from February 2017 to December 2018 at 26 centers in Korea. Study participants included patients with documented ASCVD. Data were analyzed from April to June 2022.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe (rosuvastatin, 10 mg, with ezetimibe, 10 mg) or high-intensity statin monotherapy (rosuvastatin, 20 mg). Patients at VHR for ASCVD were defined according to the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was the 3-year outcome of cardiovascular death, coronary or peripheral revascularization, hospitalization of cardiovascular events, or nonfatal stroke.ResultsA total of 3780 patients (mean [SD] age, 64 [10] years; 2826 male [75%]) in the RACING trial, 1511 (40.0%) were categorized as VHR, which was associated with a greater occurrence of the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; 95% CI, 1.15-1.75). There was no significant difference in the primary end point between those who received combination therapy and high-intensity statin monotherapy among patients with VHR disease (11.2% vs 11.7%; HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.30) and non-VHR disease (7.7% vs 8.7%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66-1.18). The median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level was significantly lower in the combination therapy group than in the high-intensity statin group (VHR, 1 year: 57 [47-71] mg/dL vs 65 [53-78] mg/dL; non-VHR, 1 year: 58 mg/dL vs 68 mg/dL; P < .001). Furthermore, in both the VHR and non-VHR groups, combination therapy was associated with a significantly greater mean change in LDL-C level (VHR, 1 year: -19.1 mg/dL vs -10.1 mg/dL; 2 years: -22.3 mg/dL vs -13.0 mg/dL; 3 years: -18.8 mg/dL vs -9.7 mg/dL; non-VHR, 1 year: -23.7 mg/dL vs -12.5 mg/dL; 2 years: -25.2 mg/dL vs -15.1 mg/dL; 3 years: -23.5 mg/dL vs -12.6 mg/dL; all P < .001) and proportion of patients with LDL-C level less than 70 mg/dL (VHR, 1 year: 73% vs 58%; non-VHR, 1 year: 72% vs 53%; P < .001). Discontinuation or dose reduction of the lipid-lowering drug due to intolerance occurred less frequently in the combination therapy group (VHR, 4.6% vs 7.7%; P = .02; non-VHR, 5.0% vs 8.7%; P = .001).Conclusions and relevanceResults suggest that the outcomes of ezetimibe combination observed in the RACING trial were consistent among patients at VHR of ASCVD.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03044665.

Dataset Information

Comparative effectiveness of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a nationwide cohort study.

Publications

Comparative effectiveness of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a nationwide cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets