Search

Background: Despite advances in surgery and pharmacotherapy, there remains significant residual ischemic risk after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Methods: In REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl–Intervention Trial), a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, statin-treated patients with controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and mild to moderate hypertriglyceridemia were randomized to 4 g daily of icosapent ethyl or placebo. They experienced a 25% reduction in risk of a primary efficacy end point (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina) and a 26% reduction in risk of a key secondary efficacy end point (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) when compared with placebo. The current analysis reports on the subgroup of patients from the trial with a history of coronary artery bypass grafting. Results: Of the 8179 patients randomized in REDUCE-IT, a total of 1837 (22.5%) had a history of coronary artery bypass grafting, with 897 patients randomized to icosapent ethyl and 940 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups. Randomization to icosapent ethyl was associated with a significant reduction in the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63–0.92]; P =0.004), in the key secondary end point (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.56–0.87]; P =0.001), and in total (first plus subsequent or recurrent) ischemic events (rate ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50–0.81]; P =0.0002) compared with placebo. This yielded an absolute risk reduction of 6.2% (95% CI, 2.3%–10.2%) in first events, with a number needed to treat of 16 (95% CI, 10–44) during a median follow-up time of 4.8 years. Safety findings were similar to the overall study: beyond an increased rate of atrial fibrillation/flutter requiring hospitalization for at least 24 hours (5.0% vs 3.1%; P =0.03) and a nonsignificant increase in bleeding, occurrences of adverse events were comparable between groups. Conclusions: In REDUCE-IT patients with a history of coronary artery bypass grafting, treatment with icosapent ethyl was associated with significant reductions in first and recurrent ischemic events. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01492361.

Clinical lipidology belongs par excellence to the preventive mode of medical practice. This Roundtable brings two long-time advocates of cardiometabolic prevention and a newly minted preventive cardiologist into a discussion that expands their recent JCL editorial on this topic. Atherosclerosis is a single disease process that leads to approximately 25% of deaths in economically advanced nations and a growing fraction of mortality and morbidity in nations with developing and emerging economies. Our discussants suggest that at least 75% of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease can be prevented. Diet and lifestyle including physical activity are the cornerstones for this effort. Public and private choices about diet-lifestyle are influenced by economics, education (especially in childhood), inequities, technology, misinformation, and trust. Lipid clinics perform well with pharmacologic treatment of lipid disorders and increasingly give attention to hypertension, obesity, and diabetes as needed. Cardiometabolic prevention in the clinic works best through provider teams. Business considerations and exemplary programs are highlighted.

Background Non-statin lipid lowering therapies (LLTs) provide additional treatment options for patients. Use patterns and patient perceptions of non-statin LLT remain incompletely described. Hypothesis The guideline-recommended statin intensity remains underutilized in patients treated with and without non-statin LLT. Methods The PALM Registry collected LLT information on patients with or at risk of ASCVD treated at 125 US clinics in 2015. We compared patient perceptions, lipid levels and statin use among patients treated with and without non-statin LLT. Results Among 7720 patients, 1930 (25.0%) were treated with a non-statin LLT (1249 fish oil, 417 fibrates, 329 ezetimibe, 196 niacin). Concurrent statin treatment occurred in 73.7%, of which 45.4% were dosed under the guideline-recommended intensity. Compared with patients on statin alone, patients receiving both a statin and non-statin LLT (n = 1423) were more likely to be male, white race and to perceive themselves as higher risk of ASCVD compared with their peers (38.5% vs. 34.9%, p = .047). Only 27.4% of patients treated with non-statin LLT alone perceived themselves at higher risk. Most (75.7%) patients treated with a non-statin LLT alone reported never being treated with a statin, despite ASCVD in 30.8% of these patients. Among those previously treated with a statin, 59.3% reported being willing to try a statin again. Conclusions Non-statin LLT is used in one in four patients with or at risk for ASCVD; its use is frequently in place of statin therapy or in the absence of guideline-recommended statin intensity. More work is needed to establish statins as first line therapy.

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is associated with an increased prevalence of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), however, little is known about sex-specific differences in premature ASCVD and its risk factors.The present study seeks to assess the burden and risk factors for premature ASCVD among men and women with FH.In this study we retrospectively examined sex-specific differences in ASCVD prevalence, risk factor burdens, and lipid treatment outcomes in 782 individuals with clinically or genetically confirmed FH treated in 5 U.S. lipid and genetics clinics. A generalized linear model using Binomial distribution with random study site effect and sex-stratified analysis was used to determine the strongest predictors of premature ASCVD, and lipid treatment outcomes. Covariates included age, sex, diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, and current smoking.Among the cohort, 98/280 men (35%) and 89/502 women (18%) had premature ASCVD (defined as55 years in men and65 years in women). Women with premature ASCVD had higher mean treated total cholesterol (216 vs. 179 mg/dl, p=0.001) and LDL-C (135 vs. 109 mg/dl, p= 0.005).These data confirm that high percentages of women and men with FH develop premature ASCVD, and suggest that FH may narrow the observed sex difference in premature ASCVD onset. These data support more aggressive prevention and treatment strategies in FH, including in women, to reduce non-lipid risk factors and residual hypercholesterolemia.

Despite the high incidence of patients with statin tolerance problems, randomized evaluations of nonstatin oral treatment options for lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in this population are sparse.To assess the LDL-C lowering effect of bempedoic acid in patients not taking statins.This was a pooled analysis of data from patients enrolled in four phase 3 bempedoic acid studies (12 to 52 weeks in duration) who were not taking concomitant statins (Phase 3 No Statin Cohort) and a phase 3 bempedoic acid plus ezetimibe fixed-dose combination study (BA+EZE FDC No Statin Cohort). The primary endpoint for all studies was the percent change from baseline to week 12 in LDL-C levels. Safety and tolerability were assessed by laboratory values and adverse events.In the Phase 3 No Statin Cohort, bempedoic acid (n = 394) lowered LDL-C levels at week 12 significantly more than placebo (n = 192; -26.5% [95% CI, -29.7%, -23.2%]; P0.001). The fixed-dose combination of bempedoic acid with ezetimibe lowered LDL-C by 39.2% (95% CI, -51.7% to -26.7%; P0.001). Muscle-related disorders occurred at a rate of 26.4 and 28.6 per 100 person-years with bempedoic acid and placebo, respectively.In patients with hypercholesterolemia unable to take statins, bempedoic acid lowered LDL-C levels by a mean of 26.5% vs placebo and bempedoic acid + ezetimibe fixed-dose combination lowered LDL-C by 39.2%. The treatments were generally well tolerated, suggesting that bempedoic acid may be efficacious and well tolerated in this challenging-to-treat patient population.

Acquisition costs and cost-effectiveness have limited access and recommendations to use proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9)-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Recently, prices were reduced by 60% for alirocumab and evolocumab. This statement systematically reviewed subgroup analyses from statin and PCSK9 mAb trials to identify higher risk groups for which PCSK9 mAbs at the new price could be considered a reasonable (

Background Black men and women are at higher risk for, and suffer greater morbidity and mortality from, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared with adults of European Ancestry (EA). Black patients with familial hypercholesterolemia are at particularly high risk for ASCVD complications because of lifelong exposure to elevated levels of low‐density‐lipoprotein cholesterol. Methods and Results This retrospective study analyzed ASCVD prevalence and risk factors in 808 adults with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia from 5 US‐based lipid clinics, and compared findings in Black versus EA patients. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine the strongest predictors of ASCVD as a function of race. No significant difference was noted in the prevalence of ASCVD in Black versus EA patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (39% versus 32%, respectively; P =0.15). However, Black versus EA patients had significantly greater prevalence of modifiable risk factors, including body mass index (mean, 32±7 kg/m 2 versus 29±6 kg/m 2 ; P P P P =0.006). Black versus EA patients also had significantly lower usage of statins (61% versus 73%; P =0.004) and other lipid‐lowering agents. In a fully adjusted multivariate model, race was not independently associated with ASCVD (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.60–1.49; P =0.72). Conclusions The strongest predictors of ASCVD in Black patients with familial hypercholesterolemia were hypertension and cigarette smoking. These data support wider usage of statins and other lipid‐lowering therapies and greater attention to modifiable risk, specifically blood pressure management and smoking cessation.

We describe a case of a 59-year-old man with severe heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and elevated lipoprotein(a) presenting with severe aortic stenosis, treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). His history also includes premature coronary artery disease requiring coronary artery bypass surgery at age 48 and a stroke at age 55. His pre-treatment lipid values include an LDL-Cholesterol (LDL-C) of 458 mg/dL, total cholesterol of 588 mg/dL, and lipoprotein (a) level of 351 nmol/L. Since his FH diagnosis, he has received several lipid-lowering agents including statins, bile acid sequestrants, nicotinic acid derivatives, and PCSK9 inhibitors. This case reflects the association of FH and elevated lipoprotein(a) with aortic stenosis and TAVR as a viable and effective treatment.

Background Numerous implementation strategies to improve utilization of statins in patients with hypercholesterolemia have been utilized, with varying degrees of success. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the state of evidence of implementation strategies on the uptake of statins. Methods and results This systematic review identified and categorized implementation strategies, according to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation, used in studies to improve statin use. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception to October 2018. All included studies were reported in English and had at least one strategy to promote statin uptake that could be categorized using the ERIC compilation. Data extraction was completed independently, in duplicate, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. We extracted LDL-C (concentration and target achievement), statin prescribing, and statin adherence (percentage and target achievement). A total of 258 strategies were used across 86 trials. The median number of strategies used was 3 (SD 2.2, range 1–13). Implementation strategy descriptions often did not include key defining characteristics: temporality was reported in 59%, dose in 52%, affected outcome in 9%, and justification in 6%. Thirty-one trials reported at least 1 of the 3 outcomes of interest: significantly reduced LDL-C (standardized mean difference [SMD] − 0.17, 95% CI − 0.27 to − 0.07, p = 0.0006; odds ratio [OR] 1.33, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58, p = 0.0008), increased rates of statin prescribing (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.60 to 3.06, p < 0.0001), and improved statin adherence (SMD 0.13, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.19; p = 0.0002; OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.63, p = 0.023). The number of implementation strategies used per study positively influenced the efficacy outcomes. Conclusion Although studies demonstrated improved statin prescribing, statin adherence, and reduced LDL-C, no single strategy or group of strategies consistently improved outcomes. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42018114952.

Introduction: Black men and women are at higher risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and when diagnosed, have greater morbidity and mortality as compared to individuals from European ancestry (EA). In patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), it remains unknown whether Black patients have similarly increased risk for ASCVD. Hypothesis: To characterize the prevalence of ASCVD and to determine the strongest predictors of ASCVD in Black FH patients compared to EAs. Methods: The prevalence of ASCVD in 173 Black adult patients with FH followed in US-based lipid clinics was assessed retrospectively through a multicenter. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the strongest predictors of ASCVD. Covariates included age, sex, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and current smoking. ASCVD was defined as coronary, peripheral, and cerebrovascular events including angina, myocardial infarction, coronary angioplasty, peripheral arterial surgery, claudication, peripheral angioplasty, transient ischemic attack, stroke, and carotid endarterectomy. Results: Baseline characteristics of the 173 Black adult patients compared to EAs are shown in table 1. Black patients with FH were more likely to have higher BMI, hypertension, diabetes and to be current smokers. The prevalence of ASCVD in Black patients with FH was 38% compared to 30% in EAs, an absolute difference of 8% (p=0.047). The strongest predictors of ASCVD in Black patients with FH were hypertension and current smoking (table 2). Conclusions: Black patients with FH have a significantly higher prevalence of ASCVD when compared to EAs with FH. The strongest predictors of ASCVD in Black patients with FH were hypertension and current smoking. Aggressive primary prevention strategies specifically focused on the management of hypertension and smoking cessation should be tested for impact on the cardiovascular risk profile of Black patients with FH.

The funding information in this paper was presented incorrectly. It should be: This study was supported in part by Aegerion, Inc. and REGENXBIO Inc.

Background: Statin-treated patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at high cardiovascular (CV) risk. Methods: In REDUCE-IT, icosapent ethyl (IPE; 4 g/day) reduced CV risk vs. placebo in statin-treated patients with either DM plus risk factors or established CV disease. The primary endpoint was CV death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina. The key secondary endpoint was CV death, MI, or stroke. Key DM analyses were prespecified. Results: 58.5% of patients had DM; 91.0% on ≥1 DM medication, 49.5% on ≥2. IPE reduced primary (Figure) and key secondary first and total (first plus recurrent) events. Patients with and without DM both showed substantial benefits, but patients with DM had 1.5-fold greater rates of the primary endpoint in the placebo group, and a 7% absolute risk reduction in first and a 12.7% reduction in total events (both p Conclusion: IPE 4 g/day provides robust CV benefits in statin-treated patients with DM, with large relative and absolute risk reductions in both first and total CV events. Disclosure D.L. Bhatt: Research Support; Self; Abbott, Afimmune, Amarin Corporation, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cardax, Chiesi USA, Inc., CSL Behring, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Fractyl Laboratories, Inc., Idorsia, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Ischemix, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly Diabetes, Medtronic, Pfizer Inc., PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., PLx Pharma Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche Pharma, Sanofi-Aventis, Synaptic. E.A. Brinton: Consultant; Self; Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Medicines Company, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Amarin Corporation, Amgen, Esperion Therapeutics, Inc. Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation, Kowa Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. M. Miller: Consultant; Self; Amarin Corporation. P.G. Steg: Consultant; Self; Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Idorsia, Mylan, Novartis AG, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Servier. Research Support; Self; Amarin Corporation. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. T.A. Jacobson: Consultant; Self; Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi US. Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation. S.B. Ketchum: Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation. R.T. Doyle: Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation. R.A. Juliano: Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation. L. Jiao: Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation. C. Granowitz: Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation. O. Ganda: Consultant; Self; Amarin Corporation. Other Relationship; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. F.K. Welty: Other Relationship; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH. R.S. Busch: Research Support; Self; Amarin Corporation, Bayer AG, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly Diabetes, Novo Nordisk Inc. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Amarin Corporation, Amgen, Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi US. A.C. Goldberg: Advisory Panel; Self; Akcea Therapeutics, Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi-Aventis. Research Support; Self; Akcea Therapeutics, Amarin Corporation, Amgen, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Pfizer Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi-Aventis. Other Relationship; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. D.M. Herrington: None. M. Budoff: Research Support; Self; Amarin Corporation, General Electric. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Amarin Corporation. J. Tardif: Research Support; Self; Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., REGENXBIO Inc., Sanofi, Servier. Other Relationship; Self; Amarin Corporation, AstraZeneca, DalCor Pharmaceuticals. C.M. Ballantyne: Consultant; Self; Abbott, Akcea Therapeutics, Amarin Corporation, Amgen, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Corvidia, Denka-Seiken Co., Ltd., Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Gilead Sciences, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Matinas BioPharma, Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Novo Nordisk Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche Diagnostic USA, Sanofi. Research Support; Self; Abbott, Akcea Therapeutics, Amgen, Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche Diagnostic USA. Funding Amarin Pharma Inc

Cardiac dysfunction in T2D is associated with excessive FA uptake, oxidation, and generation of toxic lipid species by the heart. It is not known whether decreasing lipid delivery to the heart can effect improvement in cardiac function in humans with T2D. Thus, our objective was to test the hypothesis that lowering lipid delivery to the heart would result in evidence of decreased "lipotoxicity," improved cardiac function, and salutary effects on plasma biomarkers of cardiovascular risk. Thus, we performed a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled parallel design study of the effects of 12 weeks of fenofibrate-induced lipid lowering on cardiac function, inflammation, and oxidation biomarkers, and on the ratio of two plasma ceramides, Cer d18:1 (4E) (1OH, 3OH)/24:0 and Cer d18:1 (4E) (1OH, 3OH)/16:0 (i.e., "C24:0/C16:0"), which is associated with decreased risk of cardiac dysfunction and heart failure. Fenofibrate lowered plasma TG and cholesterol but did not improve heart systolic or diastolic function. Fenofibrate treatment lowered the plasma C24:0/C16:0 ceramide ratio and minimally altered oxidative stress markers but did not alter measures of inflammation. Overall, plasma TG lowering correlated with improvement of cardiac relaxation (diastolic function) as measured by tissue Doppler-derived parameter e'. Moreover, lowering the plasma C24:0/C16:0 ceramide ratio was correlated with worse diastolic function. These findings indicate that fenofibrate treatment per se is not sufficient to effect changes in cardiac function; however, decreases in plasma TG may be linked to improved diastolic function. In contrast, decreases in plasma C24:0/C16:0 are linked with worsening cardiac function.

Importance: Additional treatment options are needed for patients who do not achieve sufficient reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level with available lipid-lowering therapies. Objective: To assess the efficacy of bempedoic acid vs placebo in patients at high cardiovascular risk receiving maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted at 91 clinical sites in North America and Europe from November 2016 to September 2018, with a final date of follow-up of September 22, 2018. A total of 779 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, or both met randomization criteria, which included LDL-C level 70 mg/dL (1.8 mmol/L) or greater while receiving maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy. Interventions: Patients were randomized 2:1 to treatment with bempedoic acid (180 mg) (n = 522) or placebo (n = 257) once daily for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was percent change from baseline in LDL-C level at week 12. Secondary measures included changes in levels of lipids, lipoproteins, and biomarkers. Results: Among 779 randomized patients (mean age, 64.3 years; 283 women [36.3%]), 740 (95.0%) completed the trial. At baseline, mean LDL-C level was 120.4 (SD, 37.9) mg/dL. Bempedoic acid lowered LDL-C levels significantly more than placebo at week 12 (-15.1% vs 2.4%, respectively; difference, -17.4% [95% CI, -21.0% to -13.9%]; P

Background The alirocumab expanded use program provided open-label access to alirocumab before its commercial availability to patients with severe hypercholesterolemia not controlled with maximally tolerated doses of standard-of-care lipid-lowering therapy. Objective To describe the safety and lipid-lowering efficacy of alirocumab in high-risk patients who were likely to be early users of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors after approval. Methods Patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) and/or coronary heart disease (CHD) and baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of ≥160 mg/dL on maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy were enrolled and received alirocumab 150 mg every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. Patients were permitted use of all available statins; those not taking any dose of statin could also be enrolled. Results Of 100 enrolled patients, 93 were white, 62 were women, and overall mean age was 58 years; 61 had HeFH, 3 had unknown type of familial hypercholesterolemia, 66 had CHD, and 30 had both familial hypercholesterolemia and CHD. Sixty-four patients were identified by their providers to have some level of statin intolerance; of these, 47 were not on statin. Alirocumab reduced LDL-C on average from 221 mg/dL at baseline to 102 mg/dL by week 24 (−55%). Treatment-emergent adverse events were experienced in 61% of patients and treatment-emergent adverse events leading to permanent treatment discontinuation in 3% of patients; no deaths occurred. Conclusions Safety and efficacy observations from the open-label alirocumab expanded use program of very high-risk patients with HeFH and/or CHD and baseline LDL-C of ≥160 mg/dL uncontrolled by maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy were consistent with those in the placebo/ezetimibe-controlled ODYSSEY trials.

The latest cholesterol guidelines have shifted focus from achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets toward statin use and intensity guided by atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk.Statin use and intensity were evaluated in 5,905 statin-eligible primary or secondary prevention patients from 138 PALM Registry practices.Overall, 74.7% of eligible adults were on statins; only 42.4% were on guideline-recommended intensity. Relative to primary prevention patients, ASCVD patients were more likely to be on a statin (83.6% vs 63.4%, P.0001) and guideline-recommended intensity (47.3% vs 36.0%, P.0001). Men were more likely than women to be prescribed recommended intensity for primary (odds ratio [OR] 1.87, 95% CI 1.49-2.34) and secondary (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.26-1.70) prevention. In primary prevention, increasing age, diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and lower 10-year ASCVD risk were associated with increased odds of receiving recommended intensity. Among ASCVD patients, those with coronary artery disease were more likely to be on recommended intensity than cerebrovascular or peripheral vascular disease patients (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.41-2.09), as were those seen by cardiologists (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.12-1.83). Median LDL-C levels were highest among patients not on statins (124.0 mg/dL) and slightly higher among those on lower-than-recommended intensity compared with recommended-therapy recipients (88.0 and 84.0 mg/dL, respectively; P≤.0001).In routine contemporary practice, 1 in 4 guideline-eligible patients was not on a statin; less than half were on the recommended statin intensity. Untreated and undertreated patients had significantly higher LDL-C levels than those receiving guideline-directed statin treatment.

Background The previously published ODYSSEY ESCAPE trial demonstrated a significant reduction in the use of lipoprotein apheresis for heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) patients when placed on alirocumab 150 mg every 2 weeks. In patients with HeFH who have consistently elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) despite maximally tolerated statin therapy, current lipid guidelines recommend apheresis. Although apheresis reduces LDL-C levels by 50%–75%, it must be repeated, as frequently as every 1–2 weeks. Objective To assess clinical experience with apheresis and alirocumab for patients in a real-world practice setting. Methods This retrospective review included patients from 5 apheresis centers who were treated with apheresis and had started alirocumab therapy. In addition to LDL-C levels, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), non-HDL-C, triglycerides, and particle number were evaluated if data were available. Results Eleven of the 25 (44%) patients discontinued apheresis completely after initiation of alirocumab therapy, having achieved LDL-C 50% reduction from baseline levels. Among the 14 patients who remained on apheresis, seven decreased the frequency of apheresis sessions. No significant safety problems were reported. Conclusion Alirocumab lowered LDL-C levels by an average of 55.5% in patients receiving apheresis for elevated LDL-C. Seventy-two percent of patients on alirocumab therapy discontinued or reduced the frequency of apheresis treatment. However, some patients continued to require apheresis due to elevated lipoprotein(a), extremely elevated LDL-C, or if alirocumab therapy was discontinued due to less than anticipated LDL-C reduction.

Background Current treatment guidelines strongly recommend statin therapy for secondary prevention. However, it remains unclear whether patients’ perceptions of cardiovascular risk, beliefs on cholesterol, or the intensity of prescribed statin therapy differs for patients with coronary artery disease ( CAD ) versus cerebrovascular disease (Ce VD ) versus both CAD and Ce VD ( CAD &Ce VD ). Methods and Results The PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry collected data on statin use, intensity, and core laboratory low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels for 3232 secondary prevention patients treated at 133 US clinics. Among individuals with Ce VD only (n=403), CAD only (n=2202), and Ce VD & CAD (n=627), no significant differences were observed in patient‐perceived cardiovascular disease risk, beliefs on cholesterol lowering, or perceived effectiveness and safety of statin therapy. However, patients with Ce VD only were less likely to receive any statin therapy (76.2% versus 86.2%; adjusted odds ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.45–0.91), or guideline‐recommended statin intensity (34.6% versus 50.4%; adjusted odds ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.45–0.81) than those with CAD only. Individuals with Ce VD only were also less likely to achieve low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol dL (59.2% versus 69.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.64–0.99) than individuals with CAD alone. There were no significant differences in the use of any statin therapy or guideline‐recommended statin intensity between individuals with CAD &Ce VD and those with CAD only. Conclusions Despite lack of significant differences in patient‐perceived cardiovascular risk or statin beliefs, patients with Ce VD were significantly less likely to receive higher intensity statin or achieve low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol dL than those with CAD only.

The following article represents material presented and discussed at a symposium hosted by the National Lipid Association hosted entitled "Managing the Challenging Homozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia Patient-Academic Insights and Practical Approaches for a Severe Dyslipidemia" on November 7, 2015 in Orlando, FL. Presenters included G.K.H., A.C.G, and P.M.M. The diagnosis and genetic causes of extremely high low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, which has become known as homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, were discussed. This disorder in adults manifest often by LDL cholesterol in excess of 500 occurs in several populations with a prevalence of 1 in 300,000. In more sequestered areas, the frequency may be much greater due to founder effects of specific settlers carrying the responsible alleles. Although the great majority of these patients have a variant sequences in the LDL receptor gene, variants in the apolipoprotein B, proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9, or LDL receptor adaptor protein gene loci can also be causative. Some individuals have additional genetic abnormalities, which have not been fully revealed. In most studies, the diagnosis has depended on predefined clinical findings in association with the very elevated LDL cholesterol. Standard lipid-lowering drugs such as statins, ezetimibe, or bile acid-binding resins are usually only partially beneficial and leave the patients at high risk. Lipoprotein apheresis has been a more effective therapy and is a mainstay in treatment of many patients. New therapies such as mipomersen and lomitapide have reduced LDL dramatically in some but are often ineffective in others. Inhibitors of proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 can reduce LDL dramatically but in those with null genes for the LDL receptor, they are also ineffective. The availability of this battery of drugs has markedly improved the potential of pharmacotherapy to control LDL values and prolong the life of these patients.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to guideline-recommended statin recommendations in the United States (U.S.) is suboptimal. Patients’ likelihood to be treated according to guidelines may vary by the practice in which they are treated. METHODS: Variation in the use of statin therapy in 5,445 patients, with known or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and meeting a statin treatment indication, was examined across 74 U.S. Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) Registry clinics. Multivariable generalized linear mixed modeling was used to determine the median odds ratio (MOR) for statin use and 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline-recommended statin intensity by practice. MOR quantifies between-practice variation by comparing the odds of receiving guideline-recommended statin treatment in a patient from a randomly selected practice with a similar patient from another random practice. Risk-adjusted low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) control (

Guideline implementation requires clinician knowledge but may be influenced by pre-existing beliefs and biases. We assessed the association of these clinician factors with lipid management following the release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guidelines. In the PALM registry, 774 clinicians completed a survey to assess their knowledge of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, belief in statin benefit, and statin safety concerns. The association of these factors with statin use, statin dosing, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were assessed in the 6,839 patients treated by these clinicians between May and November 2015. Overall, 63.9% of clinicians responded to at least 3 out of 4 hypothetical scenarios in concordance with guideline recommendations (good tested knowledge), 88.4% reported belief in statin benefit, and 15.4% raised concerns about statin safety. Belief in statin benefit was more prevalent among cardiologists, who represented 48.8% of the clinicians surveyed, and concerns regarding statin safety were higher among noncardiologists and clinicians in an academic setting. Guideline knowledge was not associated with a difference in statin use (74.1% vs 73.8%, p = 0.84) and achievement of LDL-C level100 mg/dl (54.7% vs 52.4%, p = 0.07). However, patients treated by clinicians who reported belief in statin benefit were more likely to receive guideline-recommended statin intensity (41.9% vs 36.9%, p = 0.03), whereas patients treated by clinicians expressing statin safety concerns were less likely receive statins of at least guideline-recommended intensity (36.8% vs 42.5%, p = 0.001) and to achieve an LDL-C100 mg/dl (44.1% vs 56.1%, p0.001); the latter persisted after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.89). In conclusion, clinician beliefs regarding benefits and risks of statins were significantly associated with guideline adherence and patients' achieved LDL-C levels, whereas clinician knowledge of guideline recommendations was not.

Background The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults recommended testing low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol ( LDL ‐C) to identify untreated patients with LDL ‐C ≥190 mg/dL, assess lipid‐lowering therapy adherence, and consider nonstatin therapy. We sought to determine whether clinician lipid testing practices were consistent with these guidelines. Methods and Results The PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry enrolled primary and secondary prevention patients from 140 US cardiology, endocrinology, and primary care offices in 2015 and captured demographic data, lipid treatment history, and the highest LDL ‐C level in the past 2 years. Core laboratory lipid levels were drawn at enrollment. Among 7627 patients, 2787 (36.5%) had no LDL ‐C levels measured in the 2 years before enrollment. Patients without chart‐documented LDL ‐C levels were more often women, nonwhite, uninsured, and non–college graduates (all P P =0.0034), a high‐intensity statin (21.5% versus 24.3%; P =0.016), nonstatin lipid‐lowering therapy (24.8% versus 27.3%; P =0.037), and had higher core laboratory LDL ‐C levels at enrollment (median 97 versus 92 mg/dL; P LDL ‐C testing. Of 166 individuals with core laboratory LDL ‐C levels ≥190 mg/dL, 36.1% had no LDL ‐C measurement in the prior 2 years, and 57.2% were not on a statin at the time of enrollment. Conclusions In routine clinical practice, LDL ‐C testing is associated with higher‐intensity lipid‐lowering treatment and lower achieved LDL ‐C levels.

African American individuals face higher atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk than white individuals; reasons for these differences, including potential differences in patient beliefs regarding preventive care, remain unknown.To evaluate differences in statin use between white and African American patients and identify the potential causes for any observed differences.Using the 2015 Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) Registry data, we compared statin use and dosing between African American and white outpatient adults who were potentially eligible for primary or secondary prevention statins. A total of 138 US community health care practices contributed to the data. Data analysis was conducted from March 2017 to May 2018.Primary outcomes were use and dosing of statin therapy according to the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline by African American or white race. Secondary outcomes included lipid levels and patient-reported beliefs. Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association between race and statin undertreatment, a category combining people who were not taking a statin or those taking a dose intensity lower than recommended.A total of 5689 patients (806 [14.2%] African American) in the PALM registry were eligible for statin therapy. African American individuals were less likely than white individuals to be treated with a statin (570/807 [70.6%] vs 3654/4883 [74.8%]; P = .02). Among those treated, African American patients were less likely than white patients to receive a statin at guideline-recommended intensity (269 [33.3%] vs 2145 [43.9%], respectively; P .001; relative risk, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.00-1.15]; P = .05, after adjustment for demographic and clinical factors). The median (interquartile range) low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels of patients receiving treatment were higher among African American than white individuals (97.0 [76.0-121.0] mg/dL vs 85.0 [68.0-105.0] mg/dL; P .001). African American individuals were less likely than white individuals to believe statins were safe (292 [36.2%] vs 2800 [57.3%]; P .001) or effective (564 [70.0%] vs 3635 [74.4%]; P = .008) and were less likely to trust their clinician (663 [82.3%] vs 4579 [93.8%]; P .001). Group differences in statin undertreatment were not significant after adjusting for demographic, clinical, and clinician factors, socioeconomic status, and patient beliefs (final adjusted relative risk, 1.03 [95% CI 0.96-1.11]; P = .35).African American individuals were less likely to receive guideline-recommended statin therapy. Demographic, clinical, socioeconomic, belief-related, and clinician differences contributed to observed differences and represent potential targets for intervention.

Background Previously, in prostate cancer-free men, we found that statin initiation resulted in a 4.1% decline in PSA. This decline in PSA was proportional to the decline in cholesterol, suggesting a link between cholesterol and PSA levels. Whether these associations vary by race has not been explored and therefore we examined the association between pre-statin serum cholesterol and PSA in black and white prostate cancer-free men. Methods We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of 1,163 men (709 white and 454 black) without prostate cancer who initiated a statin between 1994 and 2006. Linear regression was used to test the association between pre-statin serum cholesterol and PSA levels, adjusting for potential confounders and stratifying by race. Results Black men were younger, had higher low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels (both P 0.5). Conclusions Among prostate cancer-free men about to begin a statin, pre-statin total cholesterol and LDL were correlated with PSA levels in white, but not black men. If confirmed in future studies, these findings suggest that serum cholesterol may be related to prostate biology, and that this effect may vary by race. Prostate 75:1877–1885, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

When compared against placebo in randomized trials, statins are extremely well tolerated, causing muscle-related side effects in 1% or fewer of treated patients.1 Yet in routine practice, patients often report having symptoms which are misattributed to their statin.2–4 Using data from the PALM Registry, we examined patient-reported rates of statin intolerance, characteristics of patients with perceived side effects, and response to perceived statin intolerance in contemporary practice. The data, analytic methods, and study materials will not be made available to other researchers for purposes of reproducing the results. The PALM Registry enrolled 7938 patients from 140 primary care, cardiology, and endocrinology practices in the United States (May 27, 2015 to November 12, 2015) and has been described in detail.5 Trained study coordinators identified eligible patients (patients on a statin, at risk for cardiovascular disease [CVD], or with prevalent CVD, in the Data Supplement) at the time of their visit, who were then sequentially enrolled. Of 9788 eligible patients, n=7937 (81%) consented and enrolled in the study. Patients were then surveyed on statin use, perceived statin-related symptoms and response to symptoms, beliefs about statins and CVD, and sociodemographic characteristics (response rate 95.3%, in the Data Supplement). Clinical characteristics and medications were abstracted from the medical record by study coordinators. All patients had core laboratory lipid levels (LabCorp, Burlington, NC). Categorical variables were compared with Mantel–Haenszel χ2 tests and continuous variables using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate factors associated with symptoms using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within site, with backward model selection at P

In 10 clinical trials involving 4747 patients, among those who received the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab, antidrug antibodies developed in 5.1%, although no significant effect was seen on the reduction in LDL cholesterol levels.

Clinical lipidologists are often asked to manage patients with severely elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and other apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins. Statins at maximum doses and in combination with other drugs may not achieve adequate reductions in LDL-C in such patients. The most dramatic elevations are usually in patients with genetic abnormalities in the LDL receptor gene on both chromosome pairs. LDL-C values well in excess of 400 mg/dL are not fully responsive to current treatments. In the past few months, the Food and Drug Administration has approved 2 new drugs for special use in such patients; these are mipomersen and lomitapide. During the National Lipid Association's Scientific Sessions, 2 highly experienced clinician scientists who have completed research studies with these agents agreed to answer questions pertinent to the prescription use of these agents. These scientists are Dr Anne Goldberg from Washington University in St. Louis and Dr Daniel Rader from the University of Pennsylvania.

Microsomal triglyceride transfer protein, which is localized in the endoplasmic reticulum of enterocytes and hepatocytes, is necessary for the formation of chylomicron and very low-density lipoprotein particles. Lomitapide is a small molecule microsomal triglyceride transfer protein inhibitor that was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration as an adjunct to a low-fat diet and other lipid-lowering therapies for reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Results from clinical trials of lomitapide have demonstrated its ability to reduce atherogenic lipoprotein concentrations in this population. Most recently, in a phase 3 clinical trial of 29 men and women with homozygous FH (mean baseline LDL-C, 336 mg/dL) who were on stable doses of concomitant lipid therapies and a low-fat diet, lomitapide was gradually titrated over 26 weeks (from 5 to 60 mg/d), followed by 52 weeks at the maximum tolerated dose. LDL-C decreased from baseline by 50% at 26 weeks, and reductions were maintained through the end of the study. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequent side effects and the most common reason for failure to tolerate lomitapide dose escalation. Few patients had elevated aspartate or alanine aminotransferases; bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase levels were unaffected; and hepatic fat increased by ∼10 g/100 g. In conclusion, recent data support the LDL-C–lowering efficacy of low-dose titrated lomitapide in patients with homozygous FH; however, concerns regarding increased hepatic fat will need to be addressed in long-term safety studies.

The familial hypercholesterolemias (FH) are a group of genetic defects resulting in severe elevations of blood cholesterol levels and increased risk of premature coronary heart disease. FH is among the most commonly occurring congenital metabolic disorders. FH is a treatable disease. Aggressive lipid lowering is necessary to achieve the target LDL cholesterol reduction of at least 50% or more. Even greater target LDL cholesterol reductions may be necessary for FH patients who have other CHD risk factors. Despite the prevalence of this disease and the availability of effective treatment options, FH is both underdiagnosed and undertreated, particularly among children. Deficiencies in the diagnosis and treatment of FH indicate the need for greatly increased awareness and understanding of this disease, both on the part of the public and of healthcare practitioners. This document provides recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and treatment of FH in pediatric and adult patients developed by the National Lipid Association Expert Panel on Familial Hypercholesterolemia. This report goes beyond previously published guidelines by providing specific clinical guidance for the primary care clinician and lipid specialist with the goal of improving care of patients with FH and reducing their elevated risk for CHD.

Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) occurs with a frequency of about 1 in every 300 to 500 people and is therefore one of the most commonly occurring congenital metabolic disorders. It is estimated that at least 620,000 Americans are affected with FH. Unfortunately, large numbers of the populace with FH are undiagnosed and consequently remain at increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD). Furthermore, even though

Adherence to statin recommendations in the US remains suboptimal yet how this varies across practices is unknown. Variation in statin use and LDL-C levels was examined across 74 U.S. clinics enrolling ≥20 patients with known or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in

Editor–in–Chief, The Journal of Clinical Lipidology, Charles Howard Candler Professor of Internal Medicine Emeritus, Emory University School of Medicine, 3208 Habersham Road, Atlanta, GA 30305, USA (Dr. Brown); Louisville Metabolic and Atherosclerosis Research Center, Louisville, KY, USA (Dr. Bays); Clinical Professor and Director of Preventive Cardiology, and President, Chief Executive Officer and Executive Medical Director, Chicago Center for Clinical Research, Radiant Research, Chicago, IL, USA (Dr. Davidson); and Associate Professor of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA (Dr. Goldberg)

The combination of fibrate and statin therapies may be a treatment option for women with multiple lipid abnormalities. We, therefore, initiated the present safety and efficacy analysis to address the paucity of such data in women with mixed dyslipidemia. A total of 1,393 women with mixed dyslipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dl, triglycerides [TG] ≥ 150 mg/dl, high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol50 mg/dl), who had enrolled in any 1 of 3 randomized clinical trials, were evaluated. The eligible women were randomized to receive fenofibric acid plus a low- or moderate-dose statin (combination treatment); or low-, moderate-, or high-dose statin monotherapy; or fenofibric acid monotherapy. With low-dose combination treatment, the baseline HDL cholesterol level increased 20% and TG decreased 46% compared to an 8% HDL cholesterol increase and 20% TG decrease with low-dose statins alone. With the moderate-dose combination, the baseline HDL cholesterol increased 21% and TG decreased 44% compared to an 8% HDL cholesterol increase and 26% TG decrease with moderate-dose statins alone. The reduction in baseline LDL cholesterol with low-dose and moderate-dose combinations (37% and 39%, respectively) was comparable to the reduction with corresponding-dose statins (36% and 43%, respectively). High-dose statins decreased the baseline LDL cholesterol 47%; however, the increase in HDL cholesterol (9%) and decrease in TG (25%) were similar to the changes observed with lower doses of statins. The safety profiles of the combinations were comparable to those of the component therapies. In conclusion, these data suggest that a combination of fenofibric acid and a statin could be considered safe and efficacious for treating women with mixed dyslipidemia.

Statin and ezetimibe combination therapy may be insufficient to improve lipid and nonlipid parameters beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind study, a total of 543 patients with triglycerides ≥150 mg/dL and400 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)40 mg/dL (50 mg/dL for women), and LDL-C ≥130 mg/dL were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with fenofibric acid 135 mg (FA) or placebo, each coadministered with atorvastatin 40 mg + ezetimibe 10 mg (Atorva/Eze).Both treatment regimens lowered LDL-C by50%; however, FA + Atorva/Eze resulted in significantly (P.001) greater improvements in HDL-C (13.0% vs 4.2%), triglycerides (-57.3% vs -39.7%), non-HDL-C (-55.6% vs -51.0%), and apoprotein B (-49.1% vs -44.7%) compared with Atorva/Eze. Overall, adverse events were similar in the 2 treatment groups. No unexpected muscle, hepatic, or renal safety signals were identified with either treatment combination.In patients with mixed dyslipidemia, the combination of FA + Atorva/Eze significantly improved lipid and nonlipid parameters compared with Atorva/Eze and was generally well tolerated.

There is increasing recognition of the importance of community-associated Clostridium difficile infection (CA-CDI) despite little being known about its epidemiology. We performed routine, active laboratory surveillance for CDI at the Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center between January and December 2005 and extracted data from the electronic medical record for this investigation. Bivariable analyses were performed using the chi-square test, and continuous variables were compared using two sample t test and Wilcoxon rank sums. We identified 108 CDI cases during the study period; 38 (35%) had onset of disease in the community and, of these, 31 (82%) met the definition for CA-CDI. A comparison of CA- versus healthcare facility-associated (HCFA)-CDI revealed that CA-CDI patients were younger (median age 58 vs. 69 years, respectively; p = 0.01), with the majority being

Patients with mixed dyslipidemia often require combination therapy to manage multiple lipid abnormalities.To evaluate fenofibric acid in combination with a statin across three studies of patients with mixed dyslipidemia.As prospectively planned, data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, phase 3 studies of patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥130mg/dL, triglycerides (TG) ≥150mg/dL, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)40mg/dL (men) or50mg/dL (women). A total of 2715 patients were randomly assigned to 12-week treatment with fenofibric acid 135mg monotherapy; low-, moderate-, or high-dose statin (rosuvastatin, simvastatin, or atorvastatin, depending on study) monotherapy; or fenofibric acid + low- or moderate-dose statin. The primary efficacy comparisons were mean percent change in HDL-C and TG (combination therapy vs. statin) and LDL-C (combination therapy vs. fenofibric acid).Fenofibric acid + low-dose statin increased HDL-C (18.1% vs. 7.4%) and reduced TG (-43.9% vs. -16.8%) versus low-dose statin monotherapy and reduced LDL-C (-33.1% vs. -5.1%) versus fenofibric acid monotherapy (P.001 for all). Fenofibric acid + moderate-dose statin increased HDL-C (17.5% vs. 8.7%) and reduced TG (-42.0% vs. -23.7%) versus moderate-dose statin monotherapy and reduced LDL-C (-34.6% vs. -5.1%) versus fenofibric acid monotherapy (P.001 for all). Combination therapy was generally well tolerated, and safety profiles were similar to monotherapies. No rhabdomyolysis was reported.In patients with mixed dyslipidemia, combination therapy simultaneously improved multiple lipid abnormalities more effectively than fenofibric acid or statin monotherapies.

In patients with mixed dyslipidemia characterized by increased triglycerides (TG), decreased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and increased low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, monotherapy with lipid-altering drugs often fails to achieve all lipid targets. This multicenter, double-blind, active-controlled study evaluated ABT-335 (fenofibric acid) in combination with 2 doses of atorvastatin in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. A total of 613 patients with LDL cholesterol > or =130 mg/dl, TG > or =150 mg/dl, and HDL cholesterol

Recent data suggest that statin use may be associated with a reduced risk of advanced prostate cancer. However, the influence of statins on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and what effect this could potentially have on prostate cancer diagnosis are unknown.We conducted a longitudinal study of 1214 men who were prescribed a statin between 1990 and 2006 at the Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center who were free of prostate cancer, had not undergone prostate surgery or taken medications known to alter androgen levels and who had at least one PSA value within 2 years before and at least one PSA value within 1 year after starting a statin. The change in PSA from before to after statin treatment was analyzed as a continuous variable using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. The association between change in PSA and change in cholesterol parameters (low-density lipoprotein [LDL], high-density lipoprotein [HDL], and total cholesterol) was analyzed using multivariate linear regression. All statistical tests were two-sided.Mean (SD) age when starting statins was 60.3 (8.3) years; median prestatin PSA concentration was 0.9 (1.9) ng/mL; and mean prestatin LDL cholesterol concentration was 144 (34) mg/dL. After starting a statin, the median LDL decline was 27.5%, and the median PSA decline was 4.1% (P.001, for both comparisons). Changes in PSA concentration were strongly associated with statin dose and changes in LDL levels. For every 10% decrease in LDL after starting a statin, PSA levels declined by 1.64 (95 % confidence interval [CI] = 0.64% to 2.65%, p = .001). Among men most likely to be under consideration for prostate biopsy (prestatin PSA levelsor =2.5 ng/mL, n = 188), those with41% declines in LDL (highest quartile) after starting a statin experienced a 17.4% (95% CI = 10.0% to 24.9%) decline in serum PSA.PSA levels declined by a statistically significant extent after initiation of statin treatment. The reduction was most pronounced among men with the largest LDL declines and those with PSA levels that would make them candidates for prostate biopsy. By lowering PSA levels, statins may complicate cancer detection, although further studies are needed to quantify the clinical significance of this effect.