Comparing remnant lipoprotein cholesterol measurement methods to evaluate efficacy of ezetimibe/statin vs statin therapy
Affiliation auteurs | !!!! Error affiliation !!!! |
Titre | Comparing remnant lipoprotein cholesterol measurement methods to evaluate efficacy of ezetimibe/statin vs statin therapy |
Type de publication | Journal Article |
Year of Publication | 2019 |
Auteurs | Toth PP, Bays HE, W. Brown V, Catapano AL, Davidson MH, Farnier M, Tomassini JE, Jensen E, Polls AB, Tershakovec AM |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL LIPIDOLOGY |
Volume | 13 |
Pagination | 997-1007 |
Date Published | DEC |
Type of Article | Article |
ISSN | 1933-2874 |
Mots-clés | ezetimibe, Immunoseparation, Remnant lipoprotein cholesterol, Statin, Vertical auto profile ultracentrifugation |
Résumé | BACKGROUND: Elevated remnant lipoprotein cholesterol (RLP-C) levels increase cardiovascular disease risk. However, RLP-C measurement methods are not standardized, leading to variations across studies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of ezetimibe (Eze) + statins vs statin monotherapy on RLP-C using immunoseparation (IM), vertical auto profile (VAP) ultracentrifugation, and calculated RLP-C measurement methods. METHODS: This post hoc analysis evaluated data pooled from 3 first-line (all-statin [simvastatin 10/20/40/80 mg] vs Eze + statin [Eze 10 mg + simvastatin]) and 2 second-line (statin [atorvastatin uptitrated to 40/80 mg] vs statin + Eze [atorvastatin 20/40 mg + Eze 10 mg]) studies. Similarity of RLP-C methods was evaluated using Pearson correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots. RLP-C changes and percent changes from baseline were measured by all 3 methods in first-line and VAP and calculated methods in second-line studies. RESULTS: Correlations between methods were generally moderate to strong for RLP-C levels, changes, and percent changes across treatment groups (r = 0.29-0.79) but with little evidence of agreement by Bland-Altman plots. Baseline RLP-C levels for Eze + statin vs all-statin groups were lower by IM (14.0 vs 14.0) compared with VAP (36.9 vs 35.9) and calculated (32.8 vs 33.3) methods. RLP-C changes (mg/dL) and percent changes from baseline were significantly greater (P<.01) with Eze + statins vs statins by VAP, calculated, and IM methods (between-treatment differences: -5.0 and -12.0, -2.0 and -5.4, and -1.5 and -12.1, respectively) in first-line, and VAP and calculated methods (between-treatment differences: -5.0 and -19.9 and -2.0 and -7.3) in second-line studies. CONCLUSION: Although the 3 methods showed little agreement, each supported Eze + statins for achieving greater RLP-C reductions vs statin monotherapy; variability of results reinforces urgent need to standardize RLP-C measurements. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of National Lipid Association. |
DOI | 10.1016/j.jacl.2019.09.001 |