Search

We present a 37-year-old man diagnosed with familial dysbetalipoproteinemia who presented with the severe hyperlipidemic phenotype. None of the usual metabolic triggers were found to explain his severe lipid abnormalities. Genetic analysis revealed the expected APOE E2/E2 genotype, but no other mutations were found to explain any monogenic dyslipidemia or syndrome. Polygenic risk scores for quantitative lipid traits did reveal scores placing the patient in the >99th percentile for the general population concerning polygenic susceptibility for both high cholesterol and triglycerides. Owing to his gastrointestinal intolerance to two high-intensity statins, he was treated with both ezetimibe 10 mg a day and evolocumab 140 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks. All measures of potentially atherogenic lipids were markedly improved and remained so for more than 10 months of follow-up. This case report shows an unusual trigger for severe hyperlipidemia with familial dysbetalipoproteinemia and a favorable therapeutic response to the combination of ezetimibe and evolocumab., (Copyright © 2019 National Lipid Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

These 4 hypothetical cases highlight some of the new features in the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology multisociety cholesterol management guidelines. Topics include management issues in a secondary prevention patient judged to be at very high risk of another event, a patient with familial hypercholesterolemia with a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of 190 mg/dL or greater (to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0259), a primary prevention patient with intermediate (7.5%-19.9%) 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk, and a patient who has statin-associated adverse effects. A multiple-choice format is used to engage clinicians in selecting the best choice based on guidance from the new 2018 cholesterol management guidelines.

Purpose: While statins are used as first-line treatments for high-risk patients with hypercholesterolemia, statin monotherapy is often insufficient to achieve target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Second-line treatment options include up-titration of statin dose, switching to a more potent statin, or combination therapy, e.g., with ezetimibe. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of adding ezetimibe to simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin monotherapy versus doubling the dosage or switching to a higher-potency statin in a population of patients with hypocholesterolemia at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and who had been previously treated with a statin., Methods: A systematic literature search was performed and evidence bases were established for populations of atorvastatin-, simvastatin-, and rosuvastatin-experienced patients using eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Based on the available data, we constructed networks of evidence and conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) within each statin population. The primary outcome of interest was percent change from baseline in LDL-C. Changes in total cholesterol were explored as a secondary outcome., Findings: Across all patient populations, 35 RCTs were identified and included in the evidence base. Among patients on simvastatin therapy, the addition of ezetimibe resulted in a mean difference (MD) in LDL-C of - 13.62% (95% CrI - 19.99, - 6.91; see table below) compared to doubling the starting dose of simvastatin. In the population of patients on atorvastatin therapy, the addition of ezetimibe resulted in an MD in LDL-C of - 14.71% (95% CrI - 16.46, - 12.95) compared to doubling the starting dose of atorvastatin. The addition of ezetimibe to rosuvastatin resulted in an MD in LDL-C of - 14.96% (95% CrI - 17.79, - 12.11), compared to doubling the starting rosuvastatin dose. Similar trends were observed for changes in total cholesterol., Implications: Given the available data, the addition of ezetimibe to ongoing simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin monotherapy offers greater reduction in LDL-C among patients at high risk of CVD compared to doubling the initial statin dose.

Introduction: Tolerability problems in treating hypercholesterolemic patients undergoing statin treatment are of growing concern to physicians and patients, thus underlining the need for an agent with a similar mechanism but minimal side effects. A drug with a somewhat similar mechanism to statins but free of muscular side effects is ETC-1002 (bempedoic acid). It inhibits cholesterol biosynthesis at a step preceding HMG-CoA reductase, i.e. ATP citrate lyase (ACLY). A prodrug, ETC-1002 is converted to the active agent only in liver, not in skeletal muscle, and this may prevent any myotoxic activity. Area covered: The mechanism of ETC-1002 activity is described in detail, considering that ACLY inhibition markedly attenuated atherosclerosis in animal models. Clinical studies are also reported. Expert opinion: Present day LDL-C lowering treatments lead to significant reductions of cardiovascular (CV) events but, at times, the need to interrupt statin treatment appears to be dangerous due to a rapid rise in CV risk. The excellent tolerability of ETC-1002 makes it a useful alternative, either alone or as an adjunct to ezetimibe, for patients with statin intolerance needing to achieve significant CV risk reduction. ETC-1002 is also associated with a marked fall in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein.

Evolocumab and ezetimibe, were both proven to significantly reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), in type 2 diabetes patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol >70 mg/dl despite statin therapy. Providing evolocumab for all such patients may be a significant burden on healthcare systems. Therefore, we analyzed the treatment cost of ezetimibe versus evolocumab to prevent 1 MACE. We extracted the number needed to treat (NNT) with evolocumab or with ezetimibe for avoiding MACE from the published FOURIER and IMPROVE-IT trials respectively. Drug costs were based on 2018 US prices. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to overcome variances in terms of population risk, efficacy of therapies, and costs. In FOURIER, the 1-year NNT for avoiding MACE with evolocumab was 104 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 66 to 235). In IMPROVE-IT, the 1-year NNT with ezetimibe was 124 (95% CI 73 to 288). The annual cost of evolocumab and ezetimibe is $6,540 and $88, respectively. Therefore, the cost to prevent 1 MACE in the FOURIER and IMPROVE-IT trials would have been $678,981 (95% CI $429,810 to $1,537,910,149) and $10,870 (95% CI $6,384 to $25,322), respectively. Ezetimibe was consistently a cost-saving strategy compared with evolocumab, in all analyses performed, except for the case where evolocumab price is significantly reduced and the branded ezetimibe is used. In conclusion, treatment with ezetimibe seems to be a major cost-saving strategy for preventing MACE in this patient population., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Risk prediction following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains challenging. Data-driven machine-learning algorithms can potentially identify patients at high risk of clinical events. The Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial randomized 18,144 post-ACS patients to ezetimibe + simvastatin or placebo + simvastatin. We performed hierarchical cluster analysis to identify patients at high risk of adverse events. Associations between clusters and outcomes were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, unstable angina hospitalization, or coronary revascularization ≥30 days after randomization. We evaluated ezetimibe's impact on outcomes across clusters and the ability of the cluster analysis to discriminate for outcomes compared with the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score. Five clusters were identified. In cluster 1 (n = 13,252), most patients experienced a non-STEMI (54.8%). Cluster 2 patients (n = 2,719) had the highest incidence of unstable angina (n = 83.3%). Cluster 3 patients (n = 782) all identified as Spanish descent, whereas cluster 4 patients (n = 803) were primarily from South America (56.2%). In cluster 5 (n = 587), all patients had ST elevation. Cluster analysis identified patients at high risk of adverse outcomes (log-rank p <0.0001); Cluster 2 (vs 1) patients had the highest risk of outcomes (hazards ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.24 to 1.43). Compared with GRACE risk, cluster analysis did not provide superior outcome discrimination. A consistent ezetimibe treatment effect was identified across clusters (interaction p = 0.882). In conclusion, cluster analysis identified significant difference in risk of outcomes across cluster groups. Data-driven strategies to identify patients who may differentially benefit from therapies and for risk stratification require further evaluation., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In a population with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, previous research indicated that approximately 86% can achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of <70 mg/dL with oral lipid-lowering therapies (LLT) only, whereas 14% would require a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor. We aim to estimate these values accounting for varying levels of statin intolerance. A simulation model described previously was used to estimate the utilization of LLT needed to achieve LDL-C <70 mg/dL via an intensification algorithm which maximized statins before adding ezetimibe or a PCSK9 inhibitor. The current analysis took into account varying background rates of statin intolerance. We defined statin intolerance as either partial (inability to tolerate high-intensity statin) or full (inability to tolerate any statin). With treatment intensification and 10% of patients having partial statin intolerance, the use of ezetimibe (± statin ± PCSK9 inhibitor) increased from 32.7% to 34.9%, and the need for a PCSK9 inhibitor (+ ezetimibe ± statin) increased from 14.0% to 15.5%. If, instead, 10% were fully statin intolerant, the use of ezetimibe (± statin ± PCSK9 inhibitor) increased from 32.7% to 38.5%, and the use of a PCSK9 inhibitor (+ ezetimibe ± statin) increased from 14.0% to 19.7%. In conclusion, in our simulation-based study, partial statin intolerance increased the need for nonstatins only modestly (by an absolute 2.2%), whereas having 10% of patients with full statin intolerance increased the need for PCSK9 inhibitors from 14% overall to approximately 20%., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: The 2018 ACC/AHA Multisociety blood cholesterol guidelines provide updated recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the management of serum cholesterol for the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events. This review discusses clinically important topics in the new guidelines related to secondary ASCVD prevention., Recent Findings: Since the 2013 ACC/AHA blood cholesterol guidelines, several large randomized control trials involving ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors (evolocumab and alirocumab) have been published. The trials provided evidence that these non-statin, LDL-cholesterol lowering agents are efficacious in reducing risk for ASCVD events in patients with clinical ASCVD. The 2018 guidelines incorporate these new findings into updated clinical recommendations on therapeutic strategies related to the use of ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors. The guidelines also recommend risk stratification of secondary prevention patients to identify those at very high-risk of ASCVD events as these patients would derive the most absolute risk reduction from the addition of non-statin therapies. While high-intensity statins remain the first-line treatment to prevent recurrent ASCVD events in secondary prevention patients, ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors are evidence-based non-statin agents that can be used when residual on top of maximally tolerated statin therapy in patients deemed to be at very-high risk of recurrent ASCVD events.

Objective: To assess the control of cLDL in diabetic patients, to measure the impact on such control of inertia with lipid-lowering agents and to explore factors that allow for predicting this inertia., Methods: Study of historical cohorts of diabetic patients. The proportion of patients who achieved the target cLDL levels was estimated. Therapeutic inertia was considered when the dose of the lipid-lowering agents was not adjusted, or a lipid-lowering agent was not changed or added in patients with initial cLDL outside the target. Change in cLDL from the first to the last visit and inertia with lipid-lowering drugs were analyzed according to comorbidities, cardiovascular risk factors and treatments used., Results: The study simple consisted of 639 patients (mean follow-up time 11.1±11.2 months), of whom 27.5% achieved target cLDL levels. Inertia occurred in 43,6% of patients with initial cLDL outside the target. Independent predictors of inertia were the initial cLDL (P<0.001), polyneuropathy (P=0.014), adjustment of antihypertensive agents (P=0.002), adequacy of lipid-lowering agents (P<0.001), use of ezetimibe (P=0.001) and adherence to lipid-lowering drugs (P=0.015)., Conclusions: Inertia with lipid-lowering agents in a diabetic patient is less frequent in the presence of higher cLDL values, in cases of polyneuropathy, when antihypertensive agents are adjusted or changed, and when non-adherence is detected. The adequate initial prescription of statins and the association with ezetimibe decrease the likelihood of committing inertia., (Copyright © 2018 SEEN y SED. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Given the novelty of proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i), little is known regarding overall implementation or clinical characteristics among patients who initiate treatment. We aimed to assess the total number of patients initiated on PCSK9i along with a description of the clinical characteristics and lipid lowering treatment (LLT) of such patients., Setting: A register-based descriptive cohort study of patients receiving a PCSK9i in the time period from 01 January 2016 to 31 March 2017 using a cross linkage between three nationwide Danish registers. Information regarding PCSK9i prescriptions, patient demographics, concurrent pharmacotherapy, comorbidities and previous coronary procedures was identified., Results: Overall, 137 patients initiated treatment with PCSK9i in the study period from 11 in the first quarter of 2016 to 40 in the first quarter of 2017. The majority had a history of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) (67.9%) with ischaemic stroke and diabetes mellitus being present in 7.3% and 16.8% of patients, respectively. All patients initiated on PCSK9i had been previously prescribed statin treatment with atorvastatin and simvastatin being most frequently prescribed in 53% and 36% of patients, respectively. The majority of patients had received both statins and ezetimibe (94.9%) and approximately half of these patients had also received bile acid sequestrant (45.3%). Clinical characteristics mainly differed in patients receiving triple LLT compared with patients not receiving triple LLT in the regards of heart failure., Conclusion: Patients treated with PCSK9i were rare, characterised by having IHD and had received various and intensive conventional LLT prior to PCSK9i initiation in agreement with current international guidelines., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose of Review: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is caused by elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Although statins significantly reduce ASCVD risk, there remains a high degree of residual risk in statin-treated patients. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibition has emerged as a significant therapeutic target for further lowering of LDL-C when used in combination with statins. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on recent evidence supporting the use of PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with ASCVD., Recent Findings: Alirocumab and evolocumab were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2015. Multiple phase II and III studies have demonstrated that these agents reduce LDL-C levels by up to 60% and are relatively safe, with the exception of injection site reactions. Additionally, two randomized controlled clinical trials have demonstrated that both alirocumab and evolocumab reduce ASCVD events when used in combination with statin therapy compared to statin alone. In light of this evidence, the 2018 Cholesterol Guideline incorporated PCSK9 inhibitors into the treatment algorithm for select secondary prevention patients unable to achieve an LDL-C below 70 mg/dL despite maximally tolerated statin plus ezetimibe. Although PCSK9 inhibitors provide substantial reductions in LDL-C levels and reduce ASCVD events in secondary prevention populations, the cost-effectiveness of alirocumab and evolocumab limit widespread use. Additional research is needed to explore the role of PCSK9 inhibitors in other populations, including primary prevention, patients unable to tolerate statins, and acute myocardial infarction.

Objective: This study evaluates the efficacy of statin-ezetimibe co-therapy compared to statin monotherapy in reducing cardiovascular and/or cerebrovascular disease (CVD) prevalence in diabetes and non-diabetes patients., Patients and Methods: Literature search was conducted in electronic databases and study selection was based on pre-determined eligibility criteria. Random-effects metanalyses were performed to examine the risk of CVD incidence between statin-ezetimibe co-therapy and statin monotherapy and subgroups were performed to examine the significance of differences between diabetic and non-diabetic individuals. A pooled analysis of hazard ratios of statin-ezetimibe combination versus statin monotherapy in the prevalence of CVD reported by the individual studies was also performed., Results: 8 studies (136893 individuals; 80790 diabetics, 85555 non-diabetics; age 63.5 years [95% confidence interval (CI) 61.2, 65.8]; 61.5% [95% CI 55.2, 67.8] males) were included. Follow-up duration was 45 months [95% CI 27.5, 62.5]. Risk of CVD prevalence was significantly less with ezetimibe-statin than with statin alone in both diabetes (RR 0.69 [95% CI 0.67, 0.73]; p<0.00001) and in non-diabetes (RR 0.68 [95% CI 0.52, 0.90]; p=0.006) subjects (subgroup difference: chi2=0.00; p=0.97). Risk of prevalence of stroke was significantly less with ezetimibe-statin than with statin monotherapy in diabetes (RR 0.74 [95% CI 0.56, 0.98]; p=0.03) but non-significantly less in non-diabetes patients (RR 0.74 [95% CI 0.39, 1.41]; p=0.39) and this sub-group difference was also not statistically significant (chi2=0.00; p=0.99)., Conclusions: Statin-ezetimibe co-therapy is found more efficacious than statin monotherapy in reducing the incidence of CVD with no significant difference between diabetic and non-diabetic individuals.

Background/aims: A number of clinical trials reported varying effects of cholesterol lowering agents in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) patients. We, therefore, assessed the changes in hepatic steatosis and NAFLD activity score (NAS) after treatment with cholesterol lowering agents in NAFLD patients by metaanalysis., Methods: The Cochrane Library, the MEDLINE, and the Embase databases were searched until May 2015, without any language restrictions, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies (NRSs). Additional references were obtained from review of bibliography of relevant articles. The quality of evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation guidelines., Results: Three RCTs (n = 98) and two NRSs (n = 101) met our study inclusion criteria (adult, NAFLD, liver biopsy). Liver biopsy was performed in all five studies, but only the three studies reported NAS. Ezetimibe significantly decreased NAS (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.57 to -0.03) but not hepatic steatosis in RCT (SMD, -0.1; 95% CI, -0.53 to 0.32), while the effect was significant for both NAS and intrahepatic content in NRSs (SMD, -3.0; 95% CI, -6.9 to 0.91)., Conclusion: Ezetimibe decreased NAS without improving hepatic steatosis.

Several new or emerging drugs for dyslipidemia owe their existence, in part, to human genetic evidence, such as observations in families with rare genetic disorders or in Mendelian randomization studies. Much effort has been directed to agents that reduce LDL (low-density lipoprotein) cholesterol, triglyceride, and Lp[a] (lipoprotein[a]), with some sustained programs on agents to raise HDL (high-density lipoprotein) cholesterol. Lomitapide, mipomersen, AAV8.TBG.hLDLR, inclisiran, bempedoic acid, and gemcabene primarily target LDL cholesterol. Alipogene tiparvovec, pradigastat, and volanesorsen primarily target elevated triglycerides, whereas evinacumab and IONIS-ANGPTL3-L Rx target both LDL cholesterol and triglyceride. IONIS-APO(a)-L Rx targets Lp(a).

Background: Lipoprotein apheresis effectively lowers lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) by approximately 60%-70%. The rebound of LDL and Lp(a) particle concentrations following lipoprotein apheresis allows the determination of fractional catabolic rate (FCR) and hence production rate (PR) during non-steady state conditions. We aimed to investigate the kinetics of Lp(a) and LDL apolipoprotein B-100 (apoB) particles in patients with elevated Lp(a) and coronary artery disease undergoing regular apheresis., Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in 13 patients with elevated Lp(a) concentration (>500 mg/L) and coronary artery disease. Lp(a) and LDL-apoB metabolic parameters, including FCR and PR were derived by the fit of a compartment model to the Lp(a) and LDL-apoB concentration data following lipoprotein apheresis., Results: The FCR of Lp(a) was significantly lower than that of LDL-apoB (0.39 [0.31, 0.49] vs 0.57 [0.46, 0.71] pools/day, P = 0.03) with no significant differences in the corresponding PR (14.80 [11.34, 19.32] vs 15.73 [11.93, 20.75] mg/kg/day, P = 0.80). No significant associations were observed between the FCR and PR of Lp(a) and LDL-apoB., Conclusions: In patients with elevated Lp(a), the fractional catabolism of Lp(a) is slower than that of LDL-apoB particles, implying that different metabolic pathways are involved in the catabolism of these lipoproteins. These findings have implications for new therapies for lowering apolipoprotein(a) and apoB to prevent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease., (© 2018 Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation.)

Background: The comparative efficacy and safety of PCSK9 inhibitors, statins, and ezetimibe to lower lipid levels in patients with hypercholesterolemia remain unknown. We aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of the lipid-lowering agents in these patients., Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2000 to June 1, 2018 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Frequentist network meta-analysis was used to pool all estimates. Ranking probabilities were used to rank the comparative effects of all drugs against placebo., Results: Eighty-four RCTs enrolled 246,706 patients were included. Most of the included were assessed as low risk of bias. The probabilities of PCSK9 inhibitors that ranked first in improving lipid outcomes were all 100%. The probability of statins that ranked first in reducing the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events was 60.6%, and the probability of PCSK9 inhibitor was 37.1%, while no significant difference of efficacy in reducing CV events was observed between the 2 agents (odds ratios [OR] 0.98, 95% CI 0.87-1.11). Statin ranked first in reducing all-cause and CV death. Compared with placebo, statins were associated with reduced risks of all-cause (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.96) and CV death (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.91) while PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe were not. No agents caused adverse events (including neurocognitive events), except that statins therapy significantly increases the levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.42-2.51) and creatine kinase (CK) (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.09-1.93) and the incidence of diabetes (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.26)., Conclusions: PCSK9 inhibitors were the most effective lipid-lowering agents in improving lipid levels. Furthermore, PCSK9 inhibitors achieved similar CV benefits like statins, while PCSK9 inhibitors were not associated with any increased risk of statin-related side-effects. Thus, PCSK9 inhibitors may also be recommended as promisingly first-line lipid-lowering treatment for patients with hypercholesterolemia, especially for these with statins intolerance or resistance.

A 40-year-old Japanese man presented with child-onset hypertriglyceridemia recently complicated by diabetes mellitus. The patient's diabetes mellitus was maintained, but he had persistent insulin resistance. The patient also had persistent severe hypertriglyceridemia (1,224-4,104 mg/dL), despite the administration of bezafibrate and ezetimibe. Type V dyslipidemia was revealed by agarose gel electrophoresis and the refrigerator test, and a significantly reduced post-heparin lipoprotein lipase mass of 26 ng/mL was confirmed. Genetic testing confirmed two heterozygous LPL variants, p.Tyr88X and p.Gly215Glu in trans; thus, the patient was diagnosed with lipoprotein lipase deficiency. Lipoprotein lipase deficiency typically arises in type I dyslipidemia, but is latent in type V dyslipidemia.

High-dose statin (HDS) therapy is recommended to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C); however, some patients are unable to tolerate the associated side effects. Nutraceuticals have shown efficacy in lowering LDL-C. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the combination of low-dose statin (LDS) plus ezetimibe (EZE) or LDS plus nutraceutical (Armolipid Plus [ALP] containing red yeast rice, policosanol, and berberine) can lead to a higher proportion of high-risk patients achieving target LDL-C. A secondary objective was to assess the efficacy of triple combination LDS + EZE + ALP in resistant patients (LDL-C >70 mg/dl). A randomized, prospective, parallel-group, single-blind study was conducted in patients with coronary artery disease (n = 100) who had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention in the preceding 12 months, were HDS-intolerant, and were not at LDL-C target (<70 mg/dl) with LDS alone. Patients received either LDS + EZE or LDS + ALP. Of the 100 patients, 33 patients (66%) treated with LDS + EZE and 31 patients (62%) treated with LDS + ALP achieved target LDL-C after 3 months, which was maintained at 6 months. Patients who did not achieve the therapeutic goal received a triple combination of LDS + EZE + ALP for a further 3 months. At 6 months, 28 of 36 patients (78%) achieved LDL-C target. Overall, 92% of patients enrolled in this study were at target LDL-C at 6 months. No patients in any group experienced major side effects. In conclusion, in HDS-intolerant coronary artery disease patients, the combination of LDS plus EZE and/or ALP represents a valuable therapeutic option allowing most patients to reach target LDL-C within 3 to 6 months., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Due to the myopathic adverse events of statins, safer alternatives are being studied. Bempedoic acid (ETC-1002) is a novel low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)-lowering agent, currently under trial in hypercholesterolaemic patients., Aim: To investigate the tolerability and efficacy of ETC-1002 in hypercholesterolaemic patients through a systematic review of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs)., Methods: Five databases were searched for RCTs that investigated the safety and efficacy of ETC-1002 in hypercholesterol-aemic patients. The retrieved search results were screened, and then data were extracted and analysed (as mean difference [MD] or odds ratio [OR]) using the RevMan software., Results: Five RCTs (625 hypercholesterolaemic patients) were identified. ETC-1002 was superior to placebo in terms of percent-age changes from baseline in serum levels of LDL-C (MD -26.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] -35.50 to -17.66, p < 0.0001), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD -21.54, 95% CI -28.48 to -14.6, p < 0.00001), and apolipoprotein-B (MD -15.97, 95% CI -19.36 to -12.57, p < 0.0001). When compared to ezetimibe, ETC-1002 was superior in reducing LDL-C (-30.1 ± 1.3 vs. -21.1 ± 1.3). Regarding safety, ETC-1002 did not increase the risk of all adverse events (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.91, p = 0.02) and arthralgia (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.81, p = 0.02) compared to placebo. All other adverse events including myalgia, headache, and urinary tract infections were similar between ETC-1002 and placebo groups. The evidence certainty in the assessed outcomes was moderate to high except for lipoprotein(a), free fatty acids, and very low-density lipoprotein particle number (very low certainty)., Conclusions: ETC-1002 is a safe and effective lipid-lowering agent and may be a suitable alternative in statin-intolerant pa-tients. Well-designed studies are needed to explore the long-term safety and efficacy of ETC-1002 in these patients.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a well-established risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Statins remain the first-line therapy for patients with elevated LDL-C and increased risk. However, many at-risk patients do not achieve adequate LDL-C lowering with statin monotherapy or do not tolerate statins because of side effects. Recent cardiovascular outcome trials involving ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy of nonstatin therapies in further reducing LDL-C levels and ASCVD risk. This review highlights the available nonstatin therapeutic options and explores important novel therapeutic approaches currently under development., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Disclosure: Dr. Ballantyne is a formal advisor for Akcea, Amarin, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Matinas BioPharma Inc., Merck, Novartis, Regeneron, and Sanofi-Synthelabo and conducts research on behalf of Akcea, Amarin, Amgen, Esperion, Novartis, Regeneron, and Sanofi-Synthelabo.

LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering is a primary objective in cardiovascular prevention. Recent studies demonstrated clinical benefit when proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin-9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) were added to the treatment in patients who had not achieved the LDL-C goal despite being treated with high intensity statins and ezetimibe, however the use of these drugs is limited by their cost. The American College of Cardiology, the Argentine Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Cardiology recommend an LDL-C goal less than 70 mg/dl in secondary prevention, determining thresholds of LDL-C to start treatment with PCSK9i of 70, 100 or 140 mg/dl respectively. In order to evaluate the lipid-lowering regimen prescribed in patients hospitalized for acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularization and analyze the proportion of eligible to be treated with PCSK9i in a real and simulated scenario, we conducted a study that included 351 patients with coronary disease collected from an electronic database of a university hospital. The 48.4% received high intensity statins, 11.4% ezetimibe and 54.7% did not achieve the LDL-C goal of less than 70 mg/dL. Using a simulation model in which all would be treated with high intensity statins and ezetimibe, the eligibility to prescribe PCSK9i was 31.1%, 12.8% and 9.1% according to the C- LDL thresholds determined by the three scientific societies. Our study demonstrated a gap between the consensus recommendations for LDL-C lowering and the current practice that should be minimized to optimize the cost/effectiveness ratio in secondary prevention.

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and hyperlipidemia are with high risk of myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary death events. The combined use of ezetimibe and atorvastatin could improve treatment efficacy and safety. To explore the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe in combination with atorvastatin for the treatment of patients with T2DM and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This was a non-randomized cohort study of 95 consecutive, treatment-naïve patients with T2DM and ACS treated at the Quanzhou First Hospital of Fujian Province between February 2014 and March 2016. According to the treatment strategy they selected, the patients were categorized into the atorvastatin (n = 46) and atorvastatin + ezetimibe (n = 49) groups. The patients were followed up at 2 weeks and 12 months. The primary endpoints included the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events and changed in blood lipids and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP). At 12 months, serum total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were significantly lower, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels were significantly higher in the atorvastatin + ezetimibe (EZ) group than in the atorvastatin group (all p < 0.05). The LDL-C control rate at 12 months was significantly higher in the atorvastatin + EZ group compared with the atorvastatin group (p = 0.006). Seven patients in the atorvastatin group were re-hospitalized for angina pectoris, while only one patient in the atorvastatin + EZ group was re-hospitalized for angina pectoris (p = 0.02). The efficacy of atorvastatin + EZ in treating T2DM patients accompanied with ACS was significantly higher than using atorvastatin alone. This combined strategy has good safety profile, and could be recommended for clinical application.

Coronary heart disease (CHD) remains the leading cause of disability and death in industrialized Countries. Among many conditions, which contribute to the etiology and progression of CHD, the presence of high low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels represents the major risk factor. Therefore, the reduction of LDL-C levels plays a key role in the management of patients with high or very high cardiovascular risk. Although statins represent the gold standard therapy for the reduction of cholesterol levels, these drugs do not allow to achieve target levels of LDL-C in all patients. Indeed, a significant number of patients resulted intolerants, especially when the dosage increased. The availability of new lipid-lowering drugs, such as ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors, may represent an important alternative or complement to the conventional lipid-lowering therapies. However, long-term studies are still needed to define both efficacy and safety of use of these latter new drugs. Some nutraceuticals may become an adequate and effective support in the management of some patients. To date, several nutraceuticals with different mechanism of actions that provide a good tolerability are available as lipidlowering agents. In particular, the most investigated are red yeast rice, phytosterols, berberine, beta-glucans and soy. The aim of this review was to report recent data on the efficacy and safety of principle hypocholesterolemic drugs available and to evaluate the possible role of some nutraceuticals as support therapy in the management of patients with dyslipidemias., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events is one of the major CKD patients' treatment targets. Dyslipidaemia is the important modifiable risk factor in general population. Each 1.0 mmol reduction in LDL cholesterol with statins reduces annual rate of heart attack, coronary revascularization or ischemic stroke by 20% leading to 10% reduction of all-cause mortality. Adding ezetimibe, an inhibitor of intestinal lipids absorption, further reduces LDL cholesterol by 20%. Optimal lipid lowering treatment for CKD patients remains unclear. Cardiovascular risk reduction observed with statins therapy decreases together with a progression of the disease, moreover patients with advanced CKD treated with high doses of statins have an increased risk of adverse events. These patients might benefit from adding ezetimibe to moderate dose statin therapy for prevention of cardiovascular events.

Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD), the most common liver disease, is characterized by accumulation of fat (>5% of the liver tissue), in the absence of alcohol abuse or other chronic liver diseases. Its prevalence is increasing because of obesity, metabolic syndrome or Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). NAFLD can cause liver inflammation and progress to Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis (NASH), fibrosis, cirrhosis or Hepatocellular Cancer (HCC). Nevertheless, Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in NAFLD/NASH patients. Current guidelines suggest the use of pioglitazone both in patients with T2DM and in those without. The newer antidiabetic drugs such as Glucagon Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RA), Sodium-Glucose co- Transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), and statins plus ezetimibe, are considered safe by the guidelines, and may have a beneficial effect on NAFLD/NASH as well as Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Future drugs seem to have a potential for holding down the evolution of NAFLD and reduce liver- and CVD-related morbidity and mortality, but they will take some years to be approved for routine use. Until then pioglitazone, GLP-1 RA, SGLT2i, and statins plus ezetimibe, especially in combination might be useful for treating the huge number of patients with NAFLD/NASH., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

This study aimed to conduct a network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of different doses of alirocumab in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. In the present study, a total of 16 studies were selected, published between January 2012 and October 2016. Pair-wise and network meta-analyses was used to carry out a direct and indirect comparison of the three treatment strategies of alirocumab in patients with hypercholesterolemia. The efficacy and safety of these different treatment strategies were analyzed. Results revealed that alirocumab could significantly reduce LDL-c levels, compared with placebo (relative effect 95 % CI: -71.45 [-91.16, -50.44], -74.32 [-90.40, -58.63] and -77.28 [-92.21, -61.90]) and ezetimibe (EZE) (relative effect 95 % CI: -37.2 [-61.21, -12.41], -40.07 [-56.92, -24.22] and -43.00 [-68.39, -17.91]). The comparison of the three treatment strategies of alirocumab indicated no significant differences in reducing the levels of LDL-c, TGs, TC, Lp (a), Apo B and SAEs, LTTD, IST, ACE, MD and NC. For the probabilities of 75 mg, 75-150 mg and 150 mg of alirocumab, the best treatment for EZE and placebo were 50 %, 68 %, 82 %, 1 % and 0 %, according to LDL-c level. The results of the benefit-risk analysis of efficacy and safety revealed that the logarithmic scale was 0.016 for 75 mg vs. 75-150 mg of alirocumab and 0.125 for 75-150 mg vs. 150 mg of alirocumab. The PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab presents a significantly greater reducing effect on the levels of LDL-c compared with EZE, and the different doses of alirocumab exhibited no significant difference in the efficacy of LDL-c for hypercholesterolemia. An alirocumab dose of 75-150 mg Q2W might be the best choice due to its most favorable balance between efficacy and safety.

Importance: Both adherence and treatment intensity can alter the effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy in routine clinical practice., Objective: To evaluate the association of adherence and treatment intensity with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with documented cardiovascular disease (CVD), type 2 diabetes without CVD or chronic kidney disease (CKD), and CKD without CVD., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink from January 2010 through February 2016. United Kingdom primary care was the setting. Participants were newly treated patients who received their first statin and/or ezetimibe prescription between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013, plus an additional prescription for statins and/or ezetimibe during the following year., Exposures: Adherence was assessed annually using the proportion of days covered, with adherent defined as a proportion of days covered of 80% or higher. Treatment intensity was classified according to guidelines based on the expected percentage of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction as low (<30% reduction), moderate (30% to <50% reduction), or high (≥50% reduction). Adherence and treatment intensity were multiplied to create a combined measure, reflecting treatment intensity after accounting for adherence., Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite end point of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ischemic stroke, heart failure, or revascularization. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated against patients not treated for 1 year or longer., Results: Among a total of 29 797 newly treated patients, there were 16 701, 12 422, and 674 patients with documented CVD, type 2 diabetes without CVD or CKD, and CKD without CVD, respectively; mean (SD) ages were 68.3 (13.2), 59.3 (12.4), and 67.3 (15.1) years, and male proportions were 60.6%, 55.0%, and 47.0%. In the documented CVD cohort, patients receiving high-intensity therapy were more likely to be adherent over time (84.1% in year 1 and 72.3% in year 6) than patients receiving low-intensity therapy (57.4% in year 1 and 48.4% in year 6). Using a combined measure of adherence and treatment intensity, a graded association was observed with both LDL-C reduction and CVD outcomes: each 10% increase in the combined measure was associated with a 10% lower risk (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94). Adherent patients receiving a high-intensity regimen had the lowest risk (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.54-0.68) vs patients untreated for 1 year or longer. Findings in the other 2 cohorts were similar., Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study demonstrate that the lowest cardiovascular risk was observed among adherent patients receiving high-intensity therapy, and the highest cardiovascular risk was observed among nonadherent patients receiving low-intensity therapy. Strategies that improve adherence and greater use of intensive therapies could substantially improve cardiovascular risk.

Introduction and Objectives: To analyze the cost-effectiveness ratio and budget impact of treatment with evolocumab (PCSK9 inhibitor) for patients in secondary prevention in the Spanish National Health System., Methods: A budget impact analysis, decision tree and Markov models were designed under the public health system perspective, based on the only study with morbidity and mortality data (FOURIER). The alternatives compared were evolocumab vs statins, and dual therapy with ezetimibe in 5% of the population. The measure of effectiveness used was the number of cardiovascular events avoided. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed., Results: The average annual cost of patients receiving evolocumab was 11 134.78€ and 393.83€ for standard treatment (statins plus ezetimibe). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was > 600 000 € per avoided cardiovascular event for both assessed outcomes (first: cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and hospitalization due to unstable angina or coronary revascularization; second: includes the first 3 events). To perform the 10-year Markov model, the average cost of standard treatment was 13 948.45€ vs 471 417.37€ with evolocumab. Treatment with evolocumab for patients with familial hypercholesterolemia would cost between 3 and 6.1 million euros, assuming a difference of 2.5 and 5.1 million euros with the standard treatment (2017). This difference would be between 204.3 and 1364.7 million euros (2021) for those with nonfamiliar hypercholesterolemia (secondary prevention)., Conclusions: Treatment with evolocumab is associated with a lower frequency of cardiovascular events, but is inefficient for patients suitable to receive this drug in the Spanish National Health System., (Copyright © 2018 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Inherited disorders of lipid metabolism may cause a heavy burden of cardiovascular disease early in life. Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) with abnormalities of LDL metabolism results in marked LDL elevations and accelerated, multivessel atherosclerosis presenting in teenage or young adulthood. We describe the case of a 33-year-old woman who presented with exertional angina in the setting of pregnancy who was found post-partum to have severe triple-vessel disease including left main disease on coronary angiography (Figs. 1 and 2). She was also noted to have a typical supravalvular "hourglass" [1] abnormality of the aortic root (Fig. 3), and heavy calcification of the proximal aorta precluding conventional aortic cross clamping and bypass surgery. After discussion with the multidisciplinary team, her disease was felt to be amenable to a beating-heart coronary bypass technique with an anaortic approach to minimise the possibility of cerebral embolism. Significant extracranial cerebrovascular disease, a major risk for cardiopulmonary bypass, reinforced the beating-heart technique. Her ongoing management has consisted of medical therapy with cessation of breast feeding, statins, ezetimibe, and introduction of PCSK9-inhibitor therapy. This case illustrates a number of the difficulties associated with management of widespread atherosclerotic disease associated with FH, in which an excellent outcome was achieved with the assistance of a multi-disciplinary team., (Crown Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Achievement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal is the most important for the patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) who received lipid-lowering therapy. It is unclear that whether combination of ezetimibe with statin is superior to double-dose of statin regarding both of the lipid-lowering efficacy and improvement of inflammation in Chinese patients with ASCVD. Therefore, this study was performed to compare the effects of these two regimes on lipid profiles and inflammation markers., Methods: In this randomized control study, ninety eight patients with ASCVD, who were naïve to statins or other lipid-lowering agents, were enrolled into the study, and randomly assigned into two groups, A40 group (atorvastatin 40 mg/d, n = 50), A20E10 group (atorvastatin 20 mg/d combined with ezetimibe 10 mg/d, n = 48).The patients were followed up at week 4 and week 12 after treatment. The lipid profiles and oxidative low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (ox-LDL) were measured at the end of study., Results: There were no differences in clinical characteristics including lipid, ox-LDL and hypersensitive C reactive protein (Hs-CRP) among groups at baseline. However, the average level of LDL-C was lower in group A20E10 than that in group A40 significantly (1.59 ± 0.44 mmol/L vs 1.99 ± 0.56 mmol/L, p = 0.001) during follow-up at week 12 after treatment. Importantly, the higher rate of achievement of LDL-C goal was attained at group of combination statin with ezetimibe (79.2% in group A20E10 vs 50.0% in group A40, p = 0.016). The difference of the level of ox-LDL between both the groups after 12 weeks treatment had not statistical significance (3.63 ± 1.13 U/L in group A20E10 vs 4.14 ± 1.32 U/L in group A40, p = 0.077).Similarly, the level of Hs-CRP between both the groups after treatment was not significantly different (p > 0.05)., Conclusions: In this randomized study, the data showed that a combination of moderate statin and ezetimibe achieved more reduction of LDL-C compared to the double-dose statin but similar impact on inflammation markers.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains an important cause of mortality and morbidity, and high levels of blood cholesterol are thought to be the major modifiable risk factors for CVD. The use of statins is the preferred treatment strategy for the prevention of CVD, but some people at high-risk for CVD are intolerant to statin therapy or unable to achieve their treatment goals with the maximal recommended doses of statin. Ezetimibe is a selective cholesterol absorption inhibitor, whether it has a positive effect on CVD events remains uncertain. Results from clinical studies are inconsistent and a thorough evaluation of its efficacy and safety for the prevention of CVD and mortality is necessary., Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe for the prevention of CVD and all-cause mortality., Search Methods: We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science on 27 June 2018, and two clinical trial registry platforms on 11 July 2018. We checked reference lists from primary studies and review articles for additional studies. No language restrictions were applied., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ezetimibe versus placebo or ezetimibe plus other lipid-modifying drugs versus other lipid-modifying drugs alone in adults, with or without CVD, and which had a follow-up of at least 12 months., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and contacted trialists to obtain missing data. We performed statistical analyses according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and used the GRADE to assess the quality of evidence., Main Results: We included 26 RCTs randomising 23,499 participants. All included studies assessed effects of ezetimibe plus other lipid-modifying drugs compared with other lipid-modifying drugs alone or plus placebo. Our findings were driven by the largest study (IMPROVE-IT), which had weights ranging from 41.5% to 98.4% in the different meta-analyses.Ezetimibe with statins probably reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with statins alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 0.98; a decrease from 284/1000 to 267/1000, 95% CI 256 to 278; 21,727 participants; 10 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Trials reporting all-cause mortality used ezetimibe with statin or fenofibrate and found they have little or no effect on this outcome (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.05; 21,222 participants; 8 studies; high-quality evidence). Adding ezetimibe to statins probably reduces the risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95; a decrease from 105/1000 to 92/1000, 95% CI 85 to 100; 21,145 participants; 6 studies; moderate-quality evidence) and non-fatal stroke (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.97; a decrease 32/1000 to 27/1000, 95% CI 23 to 31; 21,205 participants; 6 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Trials reporting cardiovascular mortality added ezetimibe to statin or fenofibrate, probably having little or no effect on this outcome (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.12; 19457 participants; 6 studies; moderate-quality evidence). The need for coronary revascularisation might be reduced by adding ezetimibe to statin (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.99; a decrease from 196/1000 to 184/1000, 95% 175 to 194; 21,323 participants; 7 studies); however, no difference in coronary revascularisation rate was observed when a sensitivity analysis was limited to studies with a low risk of bias.In terms of safety, adding ezetimibe to statins may make little or no difference in the risk of hepatopathy (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.35; 20,687 participants; 4 studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether ezetimibe increase or decrease the risk of myopathy (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.38; 20,581 participants; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence) and rhabdomyolysis, given the wide CIs and low event rate. Little or no difference in the risk of cancer, gallbladder-related disease and discontinuation due to adverse events were observed between treatment groups. For serum lipids, adding ezetimibe to statin or fenofibrate might further reduce the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol and triglyceride levels and likely increase the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels; however, substantial heterogeneity was detected in most analyses.None of the included studies reported on health-related quality of life., Authors' Conclusions: Moderate- to high-quality evidence suggests that ezetimibe has modest beneficial effects on the risk of CVD endpoints, primarily driven by a reduction in non-fatal MI and non-fatal stroke, but it has little or no effect on clinical fatal endpoints. The cardiovascular benefit of ezetimibe might involve the reduction of LDL-C, total cholesterol and triglycerides. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether ezetimibe increases the risk of adverse events due to the low and very low quality of the evidence. The evidence for beneficial effects was mainly obtained from individuals with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD, predominantly with acute coronary syndrome) administered ezetimibe plus statins. However, there is limited evidence regarding the role of ezetimibe in primary prevention and the effects of ezetimibe monotherapy in the prevention of CVD, and these topics thus requires further investigation.

This study aimed to explore the feasible effect of ezetimibe for postprandial hyperlipidemia (PPHP).Sixty participants were included in this study. Of these, 30 subjects in the intervention group received ezetimibe, while the remaining 30 participants in the control group did not undergo ezetimibe. All patients in intervention group were treated for a total of 2 weeks. Primary endpoints consisted of serum levels of total cholesterol (Total-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglyceride (TG). Secondary endpoints included apoB-48, remnant lipoprotein cholesterol (RLP-C), blood glucose, insulin, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and monocyte chemotactic protein (MCP). All outcomes were measured before and after 2-week treatment.After 2-week treatment, participants in the intervention group did not show better outcomes in primary endpoints of Total-C, LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG; and secondary endpoints of apoB-48, RLP-C, blood glucose, insulin, HbA1c, and MCP, compared with subjects in the control group.The results of this study showed that ezetimibe may be not efficacious for participants with PPHP after 2-week treatment.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Familial Hypercholesterolemia Abstract. Familial hypercholesterolemia secondary to heterozygous mutations in the LDL receptor, Apolipoprotein B or PCSK9 gene is characterized by 2- to 3-fold elevated LDL cholesterol levels, premature atherosclerosis and extravascular cholesterol deposits (tendon xanthomata, corneal arcus). The same phenotype may occur if a person carries several LDL cholesterol rising polymorphisms (polygenic FH). Primary prevention with statins has been shown to dramatically reduce the cardiovascular burden in patients with the disease. However, it is estimated that less than 10 % of affected subjects in Switzerland have received the diagnosis, and undertreatment is frequent. Thus, clinical cardiovascular events are still the first manifestation of the disease in many cases. A correct diagnosis in index patients and cascade screening of families are mandatory to identify and treat patients before they suffer the sequelae of untreated severe hypercholesterolemia. In patients with clinical cardiovascular disease combination lipid lowering treatment with potent statins, ezetimibe and the newly available PCSK9 inhibitors will successfully lower LDL cholesterol to normal or even target levels.

Objective: The nonalcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score (NFS) is comprised of unique metabolic risk indicators that may accurately predict residual cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with established coronary disease and metabolic dysfunction., Methods: We applied the NFS prospectively to 14,819 post-ACS patients randomized to ezetimibe/simvastatin (E/S) or placebo/simvastatin (P/S), in the IMPROVE-IT trial, using validated NFS cutoffs. The primary endpoint included CV death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, revascularization or stroke. Outcomes were compared between NFS categories and treatment arms using frequency of events, KM rates and adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. The ability of the NFS to predict recurrent CV events was independently validated in 5395 placebo-treated patients enrolled in the SOLID-TIMI 52 trial., Results: Among 14,819 patients enrolled in IMPROVE-IT, 14.2% (N = 2106) were high-risk (NFS > 0.67). The high-risk group had a 30% increased risk of recurrent major CV events, compared to the low-risk NFS group (HR 1.30 [1.19-1.43]; p < 0.001). Among high-risk patients, ezetimibe/simvastatin conferred a 3.7% absolute reduction in risk of recurrent CV events, compared to placebo/simvastatin (HR 0.85 [0.74-0.98]), translating to a number-needed-to-treat of 27. Similar benefit was not found in the low-risk group (HR ezetimibe/simvastatin vs. placebo/simvastatin, 1.01 [0.91-1.12]; p-interaction = 0.053). The relationship between NFS category and recurrent CV events was independently validated in patients enrolled in SOLID-TIMI 52 (HR for NFS > 0.67 vs. NFS < -1.455 = 1.55 [1.32-1.81]; p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Stratification of cardiovascular risk by NFS identifies an independent population of patients who are at highest risk of recurrent events, and most likely to benefit from dual lipid-lowering therapy. Clinical trials.gov: NCT00202878., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although there were many studies reporting the combination therapy of Ezetimibe and Atorvastatin's efficacy and Atorvastatin monotherapy's, the conclusions were controversial. Therefore, a systematic review and meta analysis of combination therapy and monotherapy were conducted., Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched for studies of the combination therapy of Ezetimibe and Atorvastatin and Atorvastatin monotherapy published up to October 20, 2017. Two investigators assessed the articles for eligibility and evaluated quality.The changed values and the efficacy of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), Total Cholesterol (TC) and Triglyceride (TG) indicators were the outcomes. Four doses of the comparisons were included: the combination therapy of Ezetimibe (10 mg) and Atorvastatin (10 mg) (E10 + A10) versus Atorvastatin (20 mg) monotherapy (A20); E10 + A10 vs. A10; E10 + A20 vs. A40; E10 + A40 vs. A80. Review manager software 5.1 was used for quality assessment and Stata version 12.0 software was used for statistical analysis., Results: eventeen studies (11 publications) were included in the meta analysis. Compared with Atorvastatin monotherapy, the overall efficacy of combination therapy of Ezetimibe and Atorvastatin on lowering LDL-C (MD = - 15.38, 95% CI: -16.17 to - 14.60; I 2  = 26.2%, n = 17), TC (MD = - 9.51, 95% CI: -10.28 to - 8.74; I 2  = 33.7%, n = 17) and TG (MD = - 6.42, 95% CI: -7.78 to - 5.06; I 2  = 0%, n = 15) and raising HDL-C (MD = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.57; I 2  = 0%, n = 17) was significant. The efficacy of the comparison on HDL-C was largely significant for the different doses., Conclusions: The overall efficacy and subgroup's efficacy of combination therapy of Ezetimibe and Atorvastatin on lowering LDL-C, TC and TG was significantly better than Atorvastatin monotherapy's. The overall and the E10 + A10/A20 group's effectiveness of combination therapy on rasing HDL-C were significantly.

Purpose of Review: Dyslipidemia in patients with T2DM confers significant additional risk of adverse outcomes to patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). These patients carry residual risk of adverse outcomes despite optimal management with conventional therapy such as lifestyle changes and statin therapy. The role of both nonstatin monotherapy in statin-intolerant patients and combination therapy with statins in patients with high risk of CVD events has been well studied. We sought to review the role of newer therapies in risk reduction in these patients., Recent Findings: Traditionally, non-statin options have included medications such as niacin, ezetimibe, fenofibrate, and n-3 fatty acids. Recently, drugs such as ezetimibe, inclisiran, and PCSK9 inhibitors have been studied with favorable results without an increased risk of developing new-onset diabetes. These medications hold the promise of increasing options to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with T2DM. The role of newer non-statin therapies in patients with diabetic dyslipidemia in combination with statins needs to be further explored.

Background and Aims: We aimed to assess the disease burden and to study the molecular genetic characteristics of heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) patients within the Uzbek population to develop a program of early disease detection and effective treatment measures., Methods: 201 patients were included in the study, of whom 57 with chronic stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) and HeFH, and 144 with SCAD without HeFH belonging to the control group, and divided into two subgroups: A, statin free before the study (n = 63) and B (n = 81), who took statin outpatiently. We applied the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network Criteria (DLCN) to diagnose HeFH. Serum level of PCSK-9 was measured with the ELISA Kit. The genetic typing at PCSK9 E670G (rs505151) polymorphism was performed with the PCR-RFLP method., Results: Underestimation of early lipid studies and inadequate treatment in HeHF patients within the Uzbek population are accompanied by a 1.8-time increase of more frequent history of myocardial infarction (p < 0.05), a 3-time stroke (p < 0.05) and 2-time percutaneous coronary intervention (p < 0.05). The study of genotypes and alleles of PCSK9 E670G (rs505151) polymorphism allowed to state that сarriage of the «damaging » allele G in SCAD and HeHF patients was 2 times higher (11.4%), than in non HeHF (6.0%) and 3 times (3.0%) than in healthy ones, but the differences were not significant. Herewith, G-carriership is accompanied by a higher incidence of myocardial infarction (p < 0.05) and stroke (p < 0.05), coronary artery bypass grafting in anamnesis (p < 0.001), and number of plaques in carotids (p < 0.05). In group I of SCAD patients with HeFH, 18 (31.6%) cases of diabetes mellitus were observed, which did not exceed their number in group II (48, 33.3%). However, most of them were carriers of the G allele (82.0%, p < 0.001). Despite treatment with rosuvastatin 20-40 mg/day, in HeHF patients after 3 months, the level of total cholesterol (p < 0.001) and LDL-C (p < 0.001) was significantly higher than in the control group., Conclusions: Improvement of early diagnosis of FH, including genetic confirmation, and preventional high-intensity statin therapy or a combination of statins with ezetimibe to achieve the target level of LDL-C, is the closest tactical objective for prevention of MACE within the Uzbek population., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a genetic disorder resulting from mutations in genes encoding proteins involved in the metabolism of low density lipoproteins (LDL) and characterized by premature cardiovascular disease due to the exposure to high levels of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) from birth. Thus, the early identification of FH subjects, followed by appropriate treatment is essential to prevent or at least delay the onset of cardiovascular events. However, FH is largely underdiagnosed; in addition, FH patients are frequently not adequately treated, despite the availability of several pharmacological therapies to significantly reduce LDL-C levels. Current guidelines recommend LDL-C targets for FH (either heterozygotes [HeFH] or homozygotes [HoFH]) <100 mg/dL (<2.6 mmol/L) for adults or <70 mg/dL (<1.8 mmol/L) for adults with CHD or diabetes, and <135 mg/dL (<3.5 mmol/L) for children. With the pharmacological options now available, which include statins as a first approach, ezetimibe, and the recently approved monoclonal antibodies targeting PCSK9, the guideline recommended LDL-C target levels can be achieved in the majority of heterozygous FH subjects, while for the most severe forms of homozygous FH, the addition of therapies such as lomitapide either with or without apheresis may be required., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Patients with hyperlipidemia who are unable to tolerate optimal statin therapy are at increased cardiovascular risk due to ongoing elevations in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). The objective of CLEAR Tranquility (NCT03001076) was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid when added to background lipid-modifying therapy in patients with a history of statin intolerance who require additional LDL-C lowering., Methods: This phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled patients with a history of statin intolerance and an LDL-C ≥100 mg/dL while on stable lipid-modifying therapy. After a 4-week ezetimibe 10 mg/day run-in period, patients were randomized 2:1 to treatment with bempedoic acid 180 mg or placebo once daily added to ezetimibe 10 mg/day for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percent change from baseline to week 12 in LDL-C., Results: The study population comprised 269 patients (181 bempedoic acid, 88 placebo). Bempedoic acid added to background lipid-modifying therapy that included ezetimibe reduced LDL-C by 28.5% more than placebo (p < 0.001; -23.5% bempedoic acid, +5.0% placebo). Significant reductions in secondary endpoints, including non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-23.6%), total cholesterol (-18.0%), apolipoprotein B (-19.3%), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (-31.0%), were observed with bempedoic acid vs. placebo (p < 0.001). Bempedoic acid was well tolerated; rates of treatment-emergent adverse events, muscle-related adverse events, and discontinuations were similar in the bempedoic acid and placebo treatment groups., Conclusions: Bempedoic acid may provide an oral therapeutic option complementary to ezetimibe in statin intolerant patients who require additional LDL-C lowering., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Despite the high prevalence of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and available effective lipid-lowering therapy, most of the individuals with this disorder remain undiagnosed and undertreated. The aim of the PLANET registry was to assess the real-life attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) therapeutic target level in patients with heterozygous FH, to characterize prescribed lipid-lowering therapy with assessment of its efficiency according to the attainment of the target LDL-C level, and to characterize cardiovascular events observed in this patient population again in relation to LDL-C target level attainment., Methods: PLANET registry was designed as a non-interventional, retrospective, cross-sectional, multicentre disease registry for adult patients with heterozygous FH in the Czech Republic and Slovakia., Results: Overall, 1755 patients were enrolled at 32 sites specialized in FH treatment. 15.4% of patients attained the target LDL-C value. The proportion of patients with LDL-C goal achievement increased to 17.3% in the subgroup of patients receiving high-intensity statin therapy (54.6% of study population). Out of 55 patients receiving inhibitors of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9), 61.8% reached the LDL-C treatment goal. Of all cardiovascular events reported, 14.0% occurred in patients attaining the LDL-C goal, while it was 86.0% in the not-at-target group. It was documented (p=0.004) that the longer is the patient in care at the specialized FH centre, the higher is the probability that he/she will attain the target LDL-C level., Conclusions: Although target LDL-C level attainment remains relatively low, the likelihood of LDL-C goal attainment increases with duration of specialized care., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is characterized by markedly increased LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) and premature cardiovascular disease (CVD). LDL-C lowering is the cornerstone of therapy. The aim of our study was to evaluate LDL-C target achievement and explore reasons for not reaching target in FH patients attending a public-sector lipid clinic at Groote Schuur Hospital in Cape Town, South Africa., Methods: We reviewed clinical records of patients with genetically confirmed heterozygous FH (heFH) retrospectively. For patients seen after 2013, when new guidelines were published, we determined reasons for use of submaximal therapy., Results: Our study population consisted of 776 adult heFH patients. A substantial proportion (41%) of those younger than 50 years of age had already experienced a cardiovascular event. The mean (±SD) untreated and best achieved LDL-C values during follow up were 8.1 ± 2.1 and 4.0 ± 1.5 mmol/l, respectively. Despite a mean LDL-C reduction of 50%, only 140 (25%) achieved an LDL-C ≤ 3.0 mmol/l. Of the 164 participants with follow up after 2013, 42 did not reach LDL-C < 3.0 mmol/l and did not use maximal therapy (26%). The commonest reasons for not using maximum therapy were statin side-effects (n = 15, 36%) and acceptance by the patient (n = 9, 22%) or the physician (n = 8, 19%) of the control achieved., Conclusions: The heFH population in Cape Town is characterized by high baseline LDL-C, a high prevalence of CVD at presentation and low rates of achieving an LDL-C target of 3.0 mmol/l., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Individuals with both diabetes mellitus (DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) are at very high risk of cardiovascular events. This post-hoc analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab among 984 individuals with DM and ASCVD pooled from 9 ODYSSEY Phase 3 trials., Materials and Methods: Changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and other lipids from baseline to Week 24 were analysed (intention-to-treat) in four pools by alirocumab dosage (150 mg every 2 weeks [150] or 75 mg with possible increase to 150 mg every 2 weeks [75/150]), control (placebo/ezetimibe) and background statin usage (yes/no)., Results: At Week 24, LDL-C changes from baseline in pools with background statins were -61.5% with alirocumab 150 (vs -1.0% with placebo), -46.4% with alirocumab 75/150 (vs +6.3% with placebo) and -48.7% with alirocumab 75/150 (vs -20.6% with ezetimibe), and -54.9% with alirocumab 75/150 (vs +4.0% with ezetimibe) without background statins. A greater proportion of alirocumab recipients achieved LDL-C < 70 and < 55 mg/dL at Week 24 vs controls. Alirocumab also resulted in significant reductions in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B and lipoprotein(a) vs controls. Alirocumab did not appear to affect glycaemia over 78-104 weeks. Overall safety was similar between treatment groups, with a higher injection-site reaction frequency (mostly mild) with alirocumab., Conclusion: Alirocumab significantly reduced LDL-C and other atherogenic lipid parameters, and was generally well tolerated in individuals with DM and ASCVD., (© 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Rationale: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a common inherited cause of coronary heart disease (CHD) and premature death in an early age. Nevertheless, an ischemic heart failure (IHF) associated with FH seems to be rare, and an early diagnosis and therapy could influence the prognosis., Patient Concerns: In this 13-year-old girl, multiple xanthomas began to develop from the first day of birth. Until June, 2017, she was admitted to our center due to edema, oliguria, and dyspnea during exertion, which was attributed to a recent respiratory infection., Diagnosis: Homozygous FH (HoFH), CHD, and IHF., Interventions: The patient has been treated with statin, ezetimibe, aspirin, and traditional heart failure (HF) medications. In addition, the beta-blocker was simultaneously administered., Outcomes: Genotypes of this proband indicated homozygous mutations of low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) and some co-segregated mutations, such as von Willebrand factor (VWF) and fibroblast growth factor receptors. At 6-month follow-up, we found a decreased level of plasma lipid profile, in addition to a significant improvement in 6-minute walk distance and functional class. Echocardiography indicated nonsignificant improvements in the structure and function of the heart., Lessons: This case report indicates that HoFH can lead to dramatically progressive endothelial damages and ventricular remodeling, severe atherosclerosis, even IHF. Genetic outcomes indicate IHF with HoFH could possibly result from LDLR mutations and some co-segregated mutations influencing endothelial function and cardiovascular remodeling. In a short-term follow-up, a combination of statins, ezetimibe, aspirin, and traditional HF agents is safe and effective for IHF with HoFH, and there is a need for further identification of drugs to ameliorate endothelial function and cardiovascular remodeling which may play an important role in long-term treatment.

Background and Aims: Maximal doses of potent statins are the cornerstone of treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Despite this, a substantial proportion of FH patients are either under-treated or not treated at all. The aim of this work was to evaluate, in a retrospective study, the treatment of FH patients, the proportion of FH patients reaching low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals, and reasons for not reaching LDL-C goals, in 8 lipid clinics in Slovakia dealing with FH patients., Methods: 201 heterozygous FH patients (50.8 ± 14.9 years, 55% females) who attended the lipid clinics at least three times were included in the study., Results: At the first visit, 31.3% of patients were treated with statins and the most common dose was 20 mg of atorvastatin, rosuvastatin and simvastatin. At the third visit, 78.1% of patients were treated with statins and 24.4% with ezetimibe. The majority of patients were treated with atorvastatin (75.8%) and rosuvastatin (18.5%) and 31.3% of all patients were treated with atorvastatin 80 mg or rosuvastatin 40 mg with/without ezetimibe. However, only 11.9% of patients with the LDL-C goal level <2.5 mmol/l and 6.9% with the goal <1.8 mmol/l reached the level. Reasons for not reaching the goal levels were evaluated by physicians in each patient. Insufficient LDL-C lowering effect of treatment, side-effects of therapy and non-compliance of patients were responsible for 46%, 18% and 30% of cases, respectively., Conclusions: Referral of FH patients to lipid clinics in Slovakia leads to improvement in the treatment; however, almost 22% of the patients are still without statin treatment and the majority of patients do not reach the LDL-C goal level., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a genetic disorder causing accelerated atherosclerosis and premature cardiovascular disease (CVD). This retrospective observational study examined the clinical characteristics and management of FH subjects in Bulgaria over a 12-month period., Materials and Methods: Twelve cardiology sites participated in this study from May 2015 to May 2016. Eligible subjects had at least two routine low-density lipo-protein cholesterol (LDL C) measurements and a prescription for lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) at the start of the observation period. Mean values for gender, age and cardiovascular (CV) event history at baseline and LDL-C over time were estimated., Results: Of the 220 eligible subjects, 196 fulfilled the criteria for FH diagnosis: 27 definite, 94 probable and 75 possible. Mean age at enrolment was 54.4 years and 64.1% of subjects were male. Mean CV risk classification at baseline was 26.8% high-risk (HR) and 73.2% very high-risk (VHR). Mean LDL-C was 5.6 mmol/L at enrolment and 4.1 mmol/L at last observation visit (12 months). The ESC/EAS Guideline LDL-C targets (applicable at the time of the study) were achieved by 14.5% of HR and 5.0% of VHR subjects. Most subjects (n=219) received statins. One subject was statin intolerant (ezetimibe therapy). Intensive statin treatment (atorvastatin 40-80 mg/daily and rosuvastatin 20-40 mg/daily) was used in 38.6% of individuals during the observation period and 10% of subjects received combination therapy (statin plus ezetimibe or other LLT)., Conclusions: Most subjects with FH do not reach the ESC/EAS defined LDL-C targets. Early identification and physician education may improve FH management.

Background: Current guidelines recommend an intensive lipid-lowering therapy to achieve the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target in patients with high risk of cardiovascular disease. Former studies suggested adding ezetimibe to statin therapy in the above setting may promote plaque changes; however, this effect has not been consistently reported., Methods: Electronic searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library on November 30, 2017 to identify prospective trials assessing the effects of combined ezetimibe and statin therapy versus statin therapy alone on atheroma volume using intravascular ultrasound. The effect size between treatment groups within individual studies was assessed by weighted mean difference (MD) using a random-effects model., Results: Eight studies were obtained for systematic review and 6 of them compromising total of 583 subjects that meet the criteria were meta-analyzed. There was a significant reduction from baseline to follow-up in total atheroma volume with an MD of -3.71 mm 3 (95% confidence interval: -5.98 to -1.44, P < .001), whereas analysis for percent atheroma volume demonstrated weighted MD of - 0.77% (-1.68 to 0.14, P = .10). A substantial decrease in LDL-C was observed with MD -16.75 mg/dL (-20.89 to -12.60, P < .00001)., Conclusion: The addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy is effective in reducing total atheroma volume assessed by intravascular ultrasound and also resulted in effective reduction of plasma LDL-C levels., (Crown Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The objective of this study was to review available health economic evaluations of PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) inhibitors. These drugs reduce low-density lipid cholesterol levels and cardiovascular risk, but their cost effectiveness has been questioned. We searched Medline and Embase for economic evaluations in any language at any time. Studies were included if they analysed any PCSK9 inhibitor compared with either statin alone or in combination with ezetimibe or any other therapy considered standard prior to the introduction of PCSK9 inhibitors. We found ten full health economic evaluations of PCSK9 inhibitors, two from Europe and eight from the United States (US). Six of the eight from the US were from two different consortia that analysed PCSK9 inhibitors at different stages through the development of evidence. All studies generally reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios above suggested thresholds for cost effectiveness, except one study from Spain. The results of this review indicate that PCSK9 inhibitors in general are not cost effective at the current prices, but lower prices may change the results.