Dataset Information

Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol predicts the benefit of adding ezetimibe on statin in statin-naive acute coronary syndrome.

ABSTRACT: We aimed to evaluate the effect of baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) on the outcomes of patients with the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) receiving pitavastatin monotherapy or the combination of pitavastatin + ezetimibe. In the HIJ-PROPER study, 1734 ACS patients with dyslipidemia were randomly assigned to receive pitavastatin or pitavastatin + ezetimibe therapy. Statin-naïve participants (n = 1429) were divided into two groups based on the median LDL-C level (131 mg/dL) at enrollment. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, unstable angina, and ischemia-driven coronary revascularization. The median follow-up was 3.2 years. In the < 131 mg/dL group (n = 686), LDL-C changes were - 34.0% and - 49.8% in the pitavastatin monotherapy and pitavastatin + ezetimibe-treated groups (P < 0.0001), respectively; in the ≥ 131 mg/dL group (n = 743), LDL-C changes were - 42.9% and - 56.4% (P < 0.0001, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed that the primary endpoint was not significantly different between the treatment groups for the < 131 mg/dL group, however, it was significantly lower in patients treated with pitavastatin + ezetimibe in the ≥ 131 mg/dL group (Hazard ratio = 0.72, 95% confidence interval = 0.56-0.91, P = 0.007, P value for interaction = 0.012). Statin-naïve ACS patients with baseline LDL-C < 131 mg/dL did not clinically benefit from pitavastatin + ezetimibe, while patients with baseline LDL-C ≥ 131 mg/dL treated with pitavastatin + ezetimibe showed better clinical results than those treated with pitavastatin monotherapy.Clinical Trial Registration: Original HIJ PROPER study; URL: http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr . Unique Identifier; UMIN000002742, registered as an International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial.

SUBMITTER: Im J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8021554 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is an important modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. It is unclear whether the percentage LDL-C lowering with pharmacotherapies differs on the basis of baseline LDL-C levels. To evaluate the association between baseline LDL-C levels and the percentage LDL-C reduction with a statin, ezetimibe, and a PCSK9 inhibitor. This secondary exploratory study analyzed data from 3 randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials (Aggrastat to Zocor-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 21 [A to Z-TIMI 21], Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial [IMPROVE-IT], and Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With Elevated Risk [FOURIER]) of lipid-lowering therapies (statin, ezetimibe, and a PCSK9 inhibitor) and included participants with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Analyses took place form April to October 2020. In A to Z-TIMI 21, 1:1 randomization to simvastatin, 40 mg, daily for 30 days followed by 80 mg daily thereafter vs placebo for 4 months followed by simvastatin, 20 mg, daily thereafter. In IMPROVE-IT, 1:1 randomization to ezetimibe, 10 mg, daily plus simvastatin, 40 mg, daily vs placebo plus simvastatin, 40 mg, daily. In FOURIER, 1:1 randomization to evolocumab, 140 mg, every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly vs matching placebo. The percentage LDL-C reduction at either 1 month (A to Z-TIMI 21, IMPROVE-IT) or 3 months (FOURIER) as a function of baseline LDL-C level. Data were modeled using a generalized linear regression model. A total of 3187 patients from A to Z-TIMI 21, 10 680 patients from IMPROVE-IT, and 25 847 patients from FOURIER were analyzed. There was a higher percentage reduction in LDL-C levels with evolocumab in patients with lower baseline LDL-C levels, ranging from 59.4% (95% CI, 59.1%-59.8%) in patients with a baseline LDL-C level of 130 mg/dL to 66.1% (95% CI, 65.6%-66.6%) in patients with a baseline LDL-C level of 70 mg/dL (P < .001). In contrast, across the same range of baseline LDL-C level, there was a more modest difference for simvastatin (44.6% [95% CI, 43.9%-45.2%] vs 47.8% [95% CI, 46.4%-49.2%]; P < .001) and minimal difference with ezetimibe (25.0% [95% CI, 23.3%-26.6%] vs 26.2% [95% CI, 24.2%-28.1%]; P = .007). The percentage LDL-C reduction with statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibition is not attenuated in patients starting with lower baseline LDL-C levels and is 6.6% greater for PCSK9 inhibition. These data are encouraging for the use of intensive LDL-C-lowering therapy even for patients with lower LDL-C levels.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Robust evidence is lacking on optimal timing of statin administration and its impact on patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to evaluate among incident statin users the relationship between those prescribed evening vs. daily dosing instructions, medication adherence, and changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c). DESIGN:This is an observational cohort study at Sutter Health, a community-based healthcare system, 2010-2016. PARTICIPANTS:Patients were ??35 years of age as of the first statin prescription (baseline), with 12 to 36 months of electronic health record activity before and after baseline. Incident use was defined as no statin prescription in 12 months prior to baseline. MAIN MEASURES:Differences in medication adherence (proportion of days covered ??0.80) over 12 months from baseline and mean change in LDL-c between 12 and 24 months from baseline were measured using regression modeling, adjusting for baseline demographics and clinical, prescriber, and statin characteristics. KEY RESULTS:Among 31,252 patients with valid statin prescriptions between 2010 and 2016, 5099 eligible incident statin users (mean age, 63 years) were identified, of whom 53% were prescribed evening and 47% daily dosing instructions. No difference in likelihood of statin adherence over 12 months was observed for evening vs. daily dosing (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.90; 95% CI 0.75, 1.08). No differences were observed in mean change in LDL-c (adjusted mean difference 1.42 mg/dL; 95% CI -?1.02, 3.89) or likelihood of attaining LDL-c <?70 mg/dL (adjusted OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.67, 1.04) for evening vs. daily dosing over a mean of 19 months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:Among incident statin users from a real-world clinical setting, those with daily and evening dosing instructions had similar adherence rates and mean changes in LDL-c. Given potential clinical equipoise for evening and daily dosing, clinicians should consider patient-tailored statin dosing instructions to reduce potentially unnecessary regimen complexity.

Dataset Information

Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol predicts the benefit of adding ezetimibe on statin in statin-naive acute coronary syndrome.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets