S-EPMC11319735 - Safety and Effectiveness of High-Intensity Statins Versus Low/Moderate-Intensity Statins Plus Ezetimibe in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease for Reaching LDL-C Goals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. - OmicsDI

Unknown

Dataset Information

Safety and Effectiveness of High-Intensity Statins Versus Low/Moderate-Intensity Statins Plus Ezetimibe in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease for Reaching LDL-C Goals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

It remains controversial whether adding ezetimibe to low/moderate-intensity statins has a more beneficial impact on the treatment efficacy and safety of patients with existing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared to high-intensity statin regimens.

Hypothesis

A combination of low/moderate-intensity statins plus ezetimibe might be more effective and safer than high-intensity statin monotherapy.

Methods

We searched databases for randomized controlled trials comparing lipid profile alterations, drug-related adverse events, and MACE components between high-intensity statin monotherapy and low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy. Pooled risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random-effects model.

Results

Our comprehensive search resulted in 32 studies comprising 6162 patients treated with monotherapy against 5880 patients on combination therapy. Combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels compared to monotherapy (MD = -6.6, 95% CI: -10.6 to -2.5); however, no significant differences were observed in other lipid parameters. Furthermore, the combination therapy group experienced a lower risk of myalgia (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.57) and discontinuation due to adverse events (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.51-0.74). The occurrence of MACE was similar between the two treatment groups.

Conclusions

Adding ezetimibe to low/moderate-intensity statins resulted in a greater reduction in LDL-C levels, a lower rate of myalgia, and less drug discontinuation compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with existing cardiovascular disease. However, according to our meta-analysis, the observed reduction in LDL-C levels in the combination group did not correlate with a reduction in MACE compared to the high-intensity statin group.

SUBMITTER: Soleimani H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11319735 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Safety and Effectiveness of High-Intensity Statins Versus Low/Moderate-Intensity Statins Plus Ezetimibe in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease for Reaching LDL-C Goals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Soleimani Hamidreza H Mousavi Asma A Shojaei Shayan S Tavakoli Kiarash K Salabat Dorsa D Farahani Rad Farid F Askari Mani K MK Nelson John J Ruzieh Mohammed M Hosseini Kaveh K

Clinical cardiology 20240801 8

<h4>Background</h4>It remains controversial whether adding ezetimibe to low/moderate-intensity statins has a more beneficial impact on the treatment efficacy and safety of patients with existing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared to high-intensity statin regimens.<h4>Hypothesis</h4>A combination of low/moderate-intensity statins plus ezetimibe might be more effective and safer than high-intensity statin monotherapy.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched databases for randomized control ...[more]

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStatins are the gold standard in the treatment of dyslipidemia, significantly reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease.ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of Moderate-intensity Rosuvastatin Plus Ezetimibe compared with High-intensity Rosuvastatin in treating Composite Cardiovascular Events.MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, China Knowledge Network, China Biological Literature Database, Wan Fang Database, and Weipu Database were searched to retrieve randomized controlled trials assessing the safety and efficacy of the two therapies from the time of construction to December 2023. The Jadad scale assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included literature, and Review Manager 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. The heterogeneity of outcomes was estimated by the I2 test, where we applied risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to assess dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI to present continuous outcomes. We used funnel plots to assess study publication bias and sensitivity analysis was used to address significant clinical heterogeneity.ResultsThe meta-analysis described 21 RCTs involving 24592 participants. The findings indicated that moderate-intensity statin combination therapy improved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (MD -8.06, 95% CI [-9.48, -6.64] p < 0.05), total cholesterol (TG) (MD -5.66, 95% CI [-8.51, -2.82] p < 0.05), and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) (MD -17.04, 95% CI [-29.55, -4.54] p < 0.05) to a greater extent and superior in achieving LDL-C <70 (RR1.26, 95% CI [1.22, 1.29] p < 0.05) and LDL-C <55 (RR1.66, 95% CI [1.56, 1.77] p < 0.05) ratios and in the incidence of adverse events than the high-intensity Rosuvastatin monotherapy group. However, there was no statistical difference between the two in improving HDL-C, total cholesterol (TC), and preventing long-term composite adverse cardiovascular events (ACE). Funnel plots indicated publication bias. Sensitivity analysis suggested instability in long-term composite cardiovascular events, HDL-C, and TC results.ConclusionsModerate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe with combination therapy had better efficacy and safety than high-intensity statins. Future validation is needed with more long-term high-quality large samples.

Project description:BackgroundThe importance of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk is strongly emphasized. If the LDL-C goals are not achieved with statin therapy, combination with ezetimibe is recommended. Studies revealed a substantial gap between obtained LDL-C levels and LDL-C target in ASCVD patients. However, little is known about the achievement of LDL-lowering treatment targets in ASCVD patients receiving ezetimibe in addition to statins.Materials and methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study based on EHR data from the regional health information system of Yinzhou, an eastern coastal area of China. ASCVD Patients stratified as very high risk, taking both statin and ezetimibe for lipid control, and had at least one lipid test after ezetimibe initiation were included between January 2013 and July 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the LDL-C values and target value (1.8 mmol/L according to the Chinese guideline, 1.4 mmol/L according to the European guideline) achievements. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore the influencing factors of target achievement rate.ResultsA total of 1,727 patients were included. The median follow-up time was 15.0 months. Taking 1.8 mmol/L as the target value, the achievement rates of LDL-C over the first 3 follow up years were 50.6, 31.3, and 30.3%, respectively. Taking 1.4 mmol/L as the target value, the achievement rates were 25.6, 15.5, and 16.5%, respectively. Multivariable analysis suggested that male patients (OR = 1.78, 95%CI: 1.27-2.49), combined use of atorvastatin or rosuvastatin with ezetimibe (vs other statins, OR = 4.64, 95% CI: 1.83-11.76), better medication adherence (OR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.04) and smoking cessation (vs smoking, OR = 2.26, 95% CI: 1.27-4.02) were associated with a higher achievement rate, while baseline LDL-C level (OR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.41-0.56) and treatment course of statin before ezetimibe (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.89-0.98) were negatively associated with achievement rate.ConclusionLong-term follow-up data based on a Chinese regional database shows that in very high-risk ASCVD patients taking ezetimibe in addition to statins, achievement rate of LDL-lowering treatment targets is still low and far from satisfactory in real-world setting. More efforts are needed to achieve optimal LDL-C levels.

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

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