cholesterol, LDL

Evaluating the Association Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment

RPR Commentary: A review of familial hypercholesterolemia. The heterozygotic form is common enough to be important in primary care. The best screening test is the family history. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a family of genetic disorders characterized by impaired hepatic clearance of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles, due to pathogenic variants that impair LDL receptor function.1,2 Lifelong elevation of LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) results in accelerated atherosclerosis and increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Worldwide, heterozygous FH affects approximately 1 in 250 to 350 individuals, based on genetic epidemiology studies of pathogenic variants in FH-associated genes.1-3 Homozygous FH is rare, occurring in approximately 1 in 160 000 to 500 000 individuals.2 Among people with untreated heterozygous FH, approximately half of men develop fatal or nonfatal coronary events by age 50 years and approximately one-third of women by age 60 years.

Author/s:

James H. Stein, Matthew C. Tattersall

Evaluating the Association Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment

Rowan Hutchins — Sat, 06 May 2023 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

May 6, 2023

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Intern Med

Publisher:

JAMA

Publication Date:

March 14, 2022

Issue:

Volume:

182

URL:

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.0134

Keywords

adult

stroke prevention

PMID (1):

35285850

MeSH

Cardiovascular Disease

Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors* / therapeutic use

myocardial infarction

The modest reduction in all-cause mortality affected by statins is largely independent of the amount of LDL cholesterol reduction suggesting a somewhat lipid independent anti-inflammatory effect. Two caveats: 1)The 0.8% absolute risk reduction is per around 3 years, so longer term treatment will have more impact; 2) absolute risk reduction is directly proportional to baseline risk, so higher risk individuals will benefit more. James W. Mold, MD, MPH.

Free full text

View

Importance The association between statin-induced reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and the absolute risk reduction of individual, rather than composite, outcomes, such as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke, is unclear.

Objective To assess the association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels with treatment with statin therapy and all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke to facilitate shared decision-making between clinicians and patients and inform clinical guidelines and policy.

Data Sources PubMed and Embase were searched to identify eligible trials from January 1987 to June 2021.

Study Selection Large randomized clinical trials that examined the effectiveness of statins in reducing total mortality and cardiovascular outcomes with a planned duration of 2 or more years and that reported absolute changes in LDL-C levels. Interventions were treatment with statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) vs placebo or usual care. Participants were men and women older than 18 years.

Data Extraction and Synthesis Three independent reviewers extracted data and/or assessed the methodological quality and certainty of the evidence using the risk of bias 2 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Any differences in opinion were resolved by consensus. Meta-analyses and a meta-regression were undertaken.

Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome: all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes: myocardial infarction, stroke.

Findings Twenty-one trials were included in the analysis. Meta-analyses showed reductions in the absolute risk of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.2%) for all-cause mortality, 1.3% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.7%) for myocardial infarction, and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.6%) for stroke in those randomized to treatment with statins, with associated relative risk reductions of 9% (95% CI, 5%-14%), 29% (95% CI, 22%-34%), and 14% (95% CI, 5%-22%) respectively. A meta-regression exploring the potential mediating association of the magnitude of statin-induced LDL-C reduction with outcomes was inconclusive.

Conclusions and Relevance The results of this meta-analysis suggest that the absolute risk reductions of treatment with statins in terms of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke are modest compared with the relative risk reductions, and the presence of significant heterogeneity reduces the certainty of the evidence. A conclusive association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels and individual clinical outcomes was not established, and these findings underscore the importance of discussing absolute risk reductions when making informed clinical decisions with individual patients.

Author/s:

Byrne, P., Demasi, M., Jones, M.

Evaluating the Association Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Saige Blanchard — Thu, 10 Mar 2022 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

March 22, 2022

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Internal Medicine

Publisher:

American Medical Association

Publication Date:

March 14, 2022

URL:

Evaluating the Association Between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction and Relative and Absolute Effects of Statin Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.0134

Keywords

PMID (1):

35285850

MeSH

male

female

Efficacy and safety of lowering LDL cholesterol in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Numbers Needed to Treat

The relatively small reductions in risk of CV events and death by statins appears to be unrelated to LDL cholesterol lowering. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

Importance: The association between statin-induced reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and the absolute risk reduction of individual, rather than composite, outcomes, such as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke, is unclear.

Objective: To assess the association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels with treatment with statin therapy and all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke to facilitate shared decision-making between clinicians and patients and inform clinical guidelines and policy.

Data sources: PubMed and Embase were searched to identify eligible trials from January 1987 to June 2021.

Study selection: Large randomized clinical trials that examined the effectiveness of statins in reducing total mortality and cardiovascular outcomes with a planned duration of 2 or more years and that reported absolute changes in LDL-C levels. Interventions were treatment with statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) vs placebo or usual care. Participants were men and women older than 18 years.

Data extraction and synthesis: Three independent reviewers extracted data and/or assessed the methodological quality and certainty of the evidence using the risk of bias 2 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Any differences in opinion were resolved by consensus. Meta-analyses and a meta-regression were undertaken.

Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcome: all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes: myocardial infarction, stroke.

Findings: Twenty-one trials were included in the analysis. Meta-analyses showed reductions in the absolute risk of 0.8% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.2%) for all-cause mortality, 1.3% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.7%) for myocardial infarction, and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.6%) for stroke in those randomized to treatment with statins, with associated relative risk reductions of 9% (95% CI, 5%-14%), 29% (95% CI, 22%-34%), and 14% (95% CI, 5%-22%) respectively. A meta-regression exploring the potential mediating association of the magnitude of statin-induced LDL-C reduction with outcomes was inconclusive.

Conclusions and relevance: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that the absolute risk reductions of treatment with statins in terms of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke are modest compared with the relative risk reductions, and the presence of significant heterogeneity reduces the certainty of the evidence. A conclusive association between absolute reductions in LDL-C levels and individual clinical outcomes was not established, and these findings underscore the importance of discussing absolute risk reductions when making informed clinical decisions with individual patients.

Author/s:

Byrne, P., Demasi, M., Jones, M., Smith, S. M., O'Brien, K. K., DuBroff, R.

Efficacy and safety of lowering LDL cholesterol in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Devin Evans — Mon, 23 Nov 2020 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

November 23, 2020

Journal/Publication:

The Lancet

Publication Date:

November 21, 2020

Issue:

10263

Volume:

396

Pages:

1637-1643

URL:

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32332-1

Keywords

Cardiovascular Diseases

Clinical Protocols

PMID (1):

33186535

MeSH

Ezetimibe

Lipids and Lipoproteins in 2020

Lipids

Statins appear to be as effective for reducing CV events in those over 75 as in younger patients. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Background: The clinical benefit of LDL cholesterol lowering treatment in older patients remains debated. We aimed to summarise the evidence of LDL cholesterol lowering therapies in older patients.

Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE and Embase for articles published between March 1, 2015, and Aug 14, 2020, without any language restrictions. We included randomised controlled trials of cardiovascular outcomes of an LDL cholesterol-lowering drug recommended by the 2018 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines, with a median follow-up of at least 2 years and data on older patients (aged ≥75 years). We excluded trials that exclusively enrolled participants with heart failure or on dialysis because guidelines do not recommend lipid-lowering therapy in such patients who do not have another indication. We extracted data for older patients using a standardised data form for aggregated study-level data. We meta-analysed the risk ratio (RR) for major vascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or other acute coronary syndrome, stroke, or coronary revascularisation) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol.

Findings: Data from six articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, which included 24 trials from the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration meta-analysis plus five individual trials. Among 244 090 patients from 29 trials, 21 492 (8·8%) were aged at least 75 years, of whom 11 750 (54·7%) were from statin trials, 6209 (28·9%) from ezetimibe trials, and 3533 (16·4%) from PCSK9 inhibitor trials. Median follow-up ranged from 2·2 years to 6·0 years. LDL cholesterol lowering significantly reduced the risk of major vascular events (n=3519) in older patients by 26% per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol (RR 0·74 [95% CI 0·61-0·89]; p=0·0019), with no statistically significant difference with the risk reduction in patients younger than 75 years (0·85 [0·78-0·92]; pinteraction=0·37). Among older patients, RRs were not statistically different for statin (0·82 [0·73-0·91]) and non-statin treatment (0·67 [0·47-0·95]; pinteraction=0·64). The benefit of LDL cholesterol lowering in older patients was observed for each component of the composite, including cardiovascular death (0·85 [0·74-0·98]), myocardial infarction (0·80 [0·71-0·90]), stroke (0·73 [0·61-0·87]), and coronary revascularisation (0·80 [0·66-0·96]).

Interpretation: In patients aged 75 years and older, lipid lowering was as effective in reducing cardiovascular events as it was in patients younger than 75 years. These results should strengthen guideline recommendations for the use of lipid-lowering therapies, including non-statin treatment, in older patients.

Author/s:

Gencer, Baris, Marston, Nicholas A., Im, KyungAh, Cannon, Christopher P., Sever, Peter, Keech, Anthony, Braunwald, Eugene, Giugliano, Robert P., Sabatine, Marc S.

Lipids and Lipoproteins in 2020

Brian Desmarais — Wed, 29 Jul 2020 15:09:04 +0000

Date Added:

July 29, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association

Publication Date:

July 22, 2020

URL:

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.5685

MeSH

low density lipoprotein triglyceride

Triglycerides

A brief update on the relationships between LDL-C, triglycerides, and Apo-B, which has some implications for reducing CV event risk currently but more implications as new drugs become available. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

Not available.

Author/s:

Ference, B.A., J.J.P., Kastelein, Catapano, A.L.

Reduction in Saturated Fat Intake for Cardiovascular Disease

Brian Desmarais — Fri, 12 Jun 2020 19:42:30 +0000

Date Added:

June 12, 2020

Journal/Publication:

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Publication Date:

May 19, 2020

URL:

Reduction in Saturated Fat Intake for Cardiovascular Disease

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1002/14651858.CD011737.pub2.

MeSH

6-dimethylaminodibenzopyriodonium citrate

body mass index

Dietary replacement of saturated fatty acids with polyunsaturated fatty acids or carbohydrates for at least 2 years, appears to reduce the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

Abstract

Background: Reducing saturated fat reduces serum cholesterol, but effects on other intermediate outcomes may be less clear. Additionally, it is unclear whether the energy from saturated fats eliminated from the diet are more helpfully replaced by polyunsaturated fats, monounsaturated fats, carbohydrate or protein.

Objectives: To assess the effect of reducing saturated fat intake and replacing it with carbohydrate (CHO), polyunsaturated (PUFA), monounsaturated fat (MUFA) and/or protein on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity, using all available randomised clinical trials.

Search methods: We updated our searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid) on 15 October 2019, and searched Clinicaltrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 17 October 2019.

Selection criteria: Included trials fulfilled the following criteria: 1) randomised; 2) intention to reduce saturated fat intake OR intention to alter dietary fats and achieving a reduction in saturated fat; 3) compared with higher saturated fat intake or usual diet; 4) not multifactorial; 5) in adult humans with or without cardiovascular disease (but not acutely ill, pregnant or breastfeeding); 6) intervention duration at least 24 months; 7) mortality or cardiovascular morbidity data available.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed inclusion, extracted study data and assessed risk of bias. We performed random-effects meta-analyses, meta-regression, subgrouping, sensitivity analyses, funnel plots and GRADE assessment.

Main results: We included 15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (16 comparisons, ~59,000 participants), that used a variety of interventions from providing all food to advice on reducing saturated fat. The included long-term trials suggested that reducing dietary saturated fat reduced the risk of combined cardiovascular events by 21% (risk ratio (RR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.93, 11 trials, 53,300 participants of whom 8% had a cardiovascular event, I² = 65%, GRADE moderate-quality evidence). Meta-regression suggested that greater reductions in saturated fat (reflected in greater reductions in serum cholesterol) resulted in greater reductions in risk of CVD events, explaining most heterogeneity between trials. The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) was 56 in primary prevention trials, so 56 people need to reduce their saturated fat intake for ~four years for one person to avoid experiencing a CVD event. In secondary prevention trials, the NNTB was 32. Subgrouping did not suggest significant differences between replacement of saturated fat calories with polyunsaturated fat or carbohydrate, and data on replacement with monounsaturated fat and protein was very limited. We found little or no effect of reducing saturated fat on all-cause mortality (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03; 11 trials, 55,858 participants) or cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.12, 10 trials, 53,421 participants), both with GRADE moderate-quality evidence. There was little or no effect of reducing saturated fats on non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.07) or CHD mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.16, both low-quality evidence), but effects on total (fatal or non-fatal) myocardial infarction, stroke and CHD events (fatal or non-fatal) were all unclear as the evidence was of very low quality. There was little or no effect on cancer mortality, cancer diagnoses, diabetes diagnosis, HDL cholesterol, serum triglycerides or blood pressure, and small reductions in weight, serum total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and BMI. There was no evidence of harmful effects of reducing saturated fat intakes.

Authors' conclusions: The findings of this updated review suggest that reducing saturated fat intake for at least two years causes a potentially important reduction in combined cardiovascular events. Replacing the energy from saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat or carbohydrate appear to be useful strategies, while effects of replacement with monounsaturated fat are unclear. The reduction in combined cardiovascular events resulting from reducing saturated fat did not alter by study duration, sex or baseline level of cardiovascular risk, but greater reduction in saturated fat caused greater reductions in cardiovascular events.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00000611 NCT02062424 NCT00692536 NCT01954472 NCT01005498 NCT01634841 NCT03354377.

Author/s:

Hopper, L., Martin, N., Jimoh, O.F., Kirk, C., Foster, E., Abdelhamid, A.

Association of Nonfasting vs Fasting Lipid Levels With Risk of Major Coronary Events in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial–Lipid Lowering Arm

Tracy Ashby — Thu, 30 May 2019 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

May 30, 2019

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publisher:

American Medical Association

Publication Date:

May 28, 2019

URL:

Association of Nonfasting vs Fasting Lipid Levels With Risk of Major Coronary Events in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial–Lipid Lowering Arm

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0392

Keywords

PMID (1):

31135812

MeSH

fasting

risk factors

2018 Cholesterol Clinical Practice Guidelines: Synopsis of the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Multisociety Cholesterol Guideline.

myocardial infarction

coronary disease

For purposes of risk assessment and decisions about risk reduction, non-fasting lipid levels seem to be fine (no real need to obtain fasting lipid levels). James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

IMPORTANCE:

Recent guidelines have recommended nonfasting for routine testing of lipid levels based on comparisons of nonfasting and fasting populations. However, no previous study has examined the association of cardiovascular outcomes with fasting vs nonfasting lipid levels measured in the same individuals.

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the association of nonfasting and fasting lipid levels with prospectively ascertained coronary and vascular outcomes and to evaluate whether a strategy of using nonfasting instead of fasting lipid level measurement would result in misclassification of risk for individuals undergoing evaluation for initiation of statin therapy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

This post hoc prospective follow-up of a randomized clinical trial included 8270 of 10 305 participants from the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA) with nonfasting and fasting lipid levels measured 4 weeks apart (including 6855 participants with no prior vascular disease) (median follow-up, 3.3 years; interquartile range, 2.8-3.6 years). Data were collected from February 1, 1998, to December 31, 2002, and analyzed from February 1, 2016, to November 30, 2018. Multivariable Cox models, adjusted for cardiovascular risk factors, were calculated for 40-mg/dL (1-mmol/L) higher values of nonfasting and fasting lipids.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

The trial's primary end point consisted of major coronary events (nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI] and fatal coronary heart disease [212 events]). Secondary analyses examined atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events (including MI, stroke, and ASCVD death [351 events]).

RESULTS:

Among the 8270 participants (82.1% male; mean [SD] age, 63.4 [8.5] years), nonfasting samples had modestly higher triglyceride levels and similar cholesterol levels compared to fasting samples. Associations of nonfasting lipid levels with coronary events were similar to those for fasting lipid levels. For example, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) per 40-mg/dL of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were 1.32 (95% CI, 1.08-1.61; P = .007) for nonfasting levels and 1.28 (95% CI, 1.07-1.55; P = .008) for fasting levels. For the primary prevention group, adjusted HRs were 1.42 (95% CI, 1.13-1.78; P = .003) for nonfasting levels and 1.37 (95% CI, 1.11-1.69; P = .003) for fasting levels. Results were consistent by randomized treatment arm (atorvastatin calcium, 10 mg/d, or placebo) and similar for ASCVD events. Concordance of fasting and nonfasting lipid levels for classifying participants into appropriate ASCVD risk categories was high (94.8%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

Measurement of nonfasting and fasting lipid levels yields similar results in the same individuals for association with incident coronary and ASCVD events. These results suggest that routine measurement of nonfasting lipid levels may help facilitate ASCVD risk screening and treatment, including consideration of when to initiate statin therapy.

Author/s:

Mora, Samia, Chang, C. Lan, Moorthy, M. Vinayaga, Sever, Peter S.

2018 Cholesterol Clinical Practice Guidelines: Synopsis of the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Multisociety Cholesterol Guideline

Tracy Ashby — Wed, 29 May 2019 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

May 29, 2019

Journal/Publication:

Annals of Internal Medicine

Publisher:

The American College of Physicians

Publication Date:

May 28, 2019

URL:

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.7326/M19-0365

Keywords

primary prevention

cardiovascular disease

statin therapy

risk factors

PMID (1):

31132793

MeSH

Management of Blood Cholesterol

secondary prevention

This is the 2018 version of the AHA/ACC Guideline on cholesterol management. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Description:

In November 2018, the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) released a new clinical practice guideline on cholesterol management. It was accompanied by a risk assessment report on primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

Methods:

A panel of experts free of recent and relevant industry-related conflicts was chosen to carry out systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined cardiovascular outcomes. High-quality observational studies were used for estimation of ASCVD risk. An independent panel systematically reviewed RCT evidence about the benefits and risks of adding nonstatin medications to statin therapy compared with receiving statin therapy alone in persons who have or are at high risk for ASCVD.

Recommendation:

The guideline endorses a heart-healthy lifestyle beginning in childhood to reduce lifetime risk for ASCVD. It contains several new features compared with the 2013 guideline. For secondary prevention, patients at very high risk may be candidates for adding nonstatin medications (ezetimibe or proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 [PCSK9] inhibitors) to statin therapy. In primary prevention, a clinician–patient risk discussion is still strongly recommended before a decision is made about statin treatment. The AHA/ACC risk calculator first triages patients into 4 risk categories. Those at intermediate risk deserve a focused clinician–patient discussion before initiation of statin therapy. Among intermediate-risk patients, identification of risk-enhancing factors and coronary artery calcium testing can assist in the decision to use a statin. Compared with the 2013 guideline, the new guideline gives more attention to percentage reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol as a treatment goal and to long-term monitoring of therapeutic efficacy. To simplify monitoring, nonfasting lipid measurements are allowed.

Author/s:

Grundy, Scott M, Stone, Neil J., Guideline Writing Committee for the 2018 Cholesterol Guidelines

Management of Blood Cholesterol

Jeffrey Wilson — Tue, 05 Feb 2019 20:01:21 +0000

Date Added:

February 5, 2019

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publisher:

American Medical Association

Publication Date:

February 4, 2019

URL:

DOI (1):

doi:10.1001/jama.2019.0015

Keywords

MeSH

myocardial infarction

Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in older people: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from 28 randomised controlled trials

This is an update to the 2013 blood cholesterol guidelines developed by the AHA, ACC and others. It re-adds LDL targets and the addition of cholesterol-lowering agents other than statins when necessary.

Pharmacologically lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) consistently reduces ASCVD events (myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death), and the principle that lower LDL-C is better was reaffirmed by trials that added ezetimibe or proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors to statin therapy. The 2013 guideline removed specific LDL-C treatment targets, but high-quality trials since offered the opportunity to reintroduce such goals based on risk gradations.

Author/s:

Alenghat, Francis J., Davis, Andrew M.

Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in older people: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from 28 randomised controlled trials

Tracy Ashby — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

February 18, 2019

Journal/Publication:

The Lancet

Publisher:

Elsevier Inc.

Publication Date:

February 2, 2019

Issue:

10170

Volume:

393

Pages:

407-415

URL:

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31942-1

Keywords

statin

statin therapy

PMID (1):

30712900

MeSH