Reduction in arterial wall strain with aggressive lipid-lowering therapy in patients with carotid artery disease

Background: Inflammation and biomechanical factors have been associated with the development of vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques. Lipid-lowering therapy has been shown to be effective in stabilizing them by reducing plaque inflammation. Its effect on arterial wall strain, however, remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to investigate the role of high- and low-dose lipid-lowering therapy using an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, atorvastatin, on arterial wall strain. Methods and Results: Forty patients with carotid stenosis >40% were successfully followed up during the Atorvastatin Therapy: Effects on Reduction Of Macrophage Activity (ATHEROMA; ISRCTN64894118) Trial. All patients had plaque inflammation as shown by intraplaque accumulation of ultrasmall super paramagnetic particles of iron oxide on magnetic resonance imaging at baseline. Structural analysis was performed and change of strain was compared between high- and low-dose statin at 0 and 12 weeks. There was no significant difference in strain between the 2 groups at baseline (P=0.6). At 12 weeks, the maximum strain was significantly lower in the 80-mg group than in the 10-mg group (0.085±0.033 vs. 0.169±0.084; P=0.001). A significant reduction (26%) of maximum strain was observed in the 80-mg group at 12 weeks (0.018±0.02; P=0.01). Conclusions: Aggressive lipid-lowering therapy is associated with a significant reduction in arterial wall strain. The reduction in biomechanical strain may be associated with reductions in plaque inflammatory burden.

Comparing impact and cost-effectiveness of primary prevention strategies for lipid-lowering.

BACKGROUND: Lipid-lowering therapy is costly but effective at reducing coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness and public health impact of Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines and compare with a range of risk- and age-based alternative strategies. DESIGN: The CHD Policy Model, a Markov-type cost-effectiveness model. DATA SOURCES: National surveys (1999 to 2004), vital statistics (2000), the Framingham Heart Study (1948 to 2000), other published data, and a direct survey of statin costs (2008). TARGET POPULATION: U.S. population age 35 to 85 years. Time Horizon: 2010 to 2040. PERSPECTIVE: Health care system. INTERVENTION: Lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins). OUTCOME MEASURE: Incremental cost-effectiveness. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Full adherence to ATP III primary prevention guidelines would require starting (9.7 million) or intensifying (1.4 million) statin therapy for 11.1 million adults and would prevent 20,000 myocardial infarctions and 10,000 CHD deaths per year at an annual net cost of $3.6 billion ($42,000/QALY) if low-intensity statins cost $2.11 per pill. The ATP III guidelines would be preferred over alternative strategies if society is willing to pay $50,000/QALY and statins cost $1.54 to $2.21 per pill. At higher statin costs, ATP III is not cost-effective; at lower costs, more liberal statin-prescribing strategies would be preferred; and at costs less than $0.10 per pill, treating all persons with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels greater than 3.4 mmol/L (>130 mg/dL) would yield net cost savings. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Results are sensitive to the assumptions that LDL cholesterol becomes less important as a risk factor with increasing age and that little disutility results from taking a pill every day. LIMITATION: Randomized trial evidence for statin effectiveness is not available for all subgroups. CONCLUSION: The ATP III guidelines are relatively cost-effective and would have a large public health impact if implemented fully in the United States. Alternate strategies may be preferred, however, depending on the cost of statins and how much society is willing to pay for better health outcomes. FUNDING: Flight Attendants' Medical Research Institute and the Swanson Family Fund. The Framingham Heart Study and Framingham Offspring Study are conducted and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Effects of lipid-lowering drugs on reverse cholesterol transport gene expressions in peripheral blood mononuclear and HepG2 cells

Aims: The ATP-binding cassette transporters, ABCA1 and ABCG1, are LXR-target genes that play an important role in reverse cholesterol transport. We examined the effects of inhibitors of the cholesterol absorption (ezetimibe) and synthesis (statins) on expression of these transporters in HepG2 cells and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of individuals with primary (and nonfamilial) hypercholesterolemia (HC). Materials & methods: A total of 48 HC individuals were treated with atorvastatin (10 mg/day/4 weeks) and 23 were treated with ezetimibe (10 mg/day/4 weeks), followed by simvastatin (10 mg/day/8 weeks) and simvastatin plus ezetimibe (10 mg of each/day/4 weeks). Gene expression was examined in statin- or ezetimibe-treated and control HepG2 cells as well as PBMCs using real-time PCR. Results: In PBMCs, statins and ezetimibe downregulated ABCA1 and ABCG1 mRNA expression but did not modulate NR1H2 (LxR-beta) and NR1H3 (LXR-alpha) levels. Positive correlations of ABCA1 with ABCG1 and of NR1H2 with NR1H3 expressions were found in all phases of the treatments. In HepG2 cells, ABCA1 mRNA levels remained unaltered while ABCG1 expression was increased by statin (1.0-10.0 mu M) or ezetimibe (5.0 mu M) treatments. Atorvastatin upregulated NR1H2 and NR1H3 only at 10.0 mu M, meanwhile ezetimibe (1.0-5.0 mu M) downregulated NR1H2 but did not change NR1H3 expression. Conclusion: Our findings reveal that lipid-lowering drugs downregulate ABCA1 and ABCG1 mRNA expression in PBMCs of HC individuals and exhibit differential effects on HepG2 cells. Moreover, they indicate that the ABCA1 and ABCG1 transcript levels were not correlated directly to LXR mRNA expression in both cell models treated with lipid-lowering drugs.

Hydroxychloroquine reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in systemic lupus erythematosus: a longitudinal evaluation of the lipid-lowering effect

The influence of antimalarials on lipids in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) has been identified in several studies but not in many prospective cohorts. The aim of this study was to longitudinally determine the effect of antimalarials on the lipoprotein profile in SLE. Patients and methods: Fasting total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) plasma levels were determined at entry and after 3 months of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) treatment in a longitudinal evaluation of 24 patients with SLE. Results: a significant decrease in TC (198 +/- 33.7 vs. 183 +/- 30.3 mg/dl, p = 0.023) and LDL levels (117 +/- 31.3 vs. 101 +/- 26.2 mg/dl, p = 0.023) were detected after the 3 months of HCQ therapy. The reduction of 7.6% in TC (p = 0.055) and 13.7% in LDL levels (p = 0.036) determined a significant decrease in the frequency of dyslipidemia (26% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.013) after HCQ therapy. Conclusion: This longitudinal study demonstrated the beneficial effect of antimalarials on lipids in SLE since this therapy induced a reduction of atherogenic lipoproteins. Lupus (2012) 21, 1178-1182.

Current cardiovascular risk management patterns with special focus on lipid lowering in daily practice in Switzerland

There may be a considerable gap between LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) and blood pressure (BP) goal values recommended by the guidelines and results achieved in daily practice.

Effect of intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin on renal function in patients with coronary heart disease: the Treating to New Targets (TNT) study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Data suggest that atorvastatin may be nephroprotective. This subanalysis of the Treating to New Targets study investigated how intensive lipid lowering with 80 mg of atorvastatin affects renal function when compared with 10 mg in patients with coronary heart disease. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, ; MEASUREMENTS: A total of 10,001 patients with coronary heart disease and LDL cholesterol levels of <130 mg/dl were randomly assigned to double-blind therapy with 10 or 80 mg/d atorvastatin. Estimated GFR using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation was compared at baseline and at the end of follow-up in 9656 participants with complete renal data. RESULTS: Mean estimated GFR at baseline was 65.6 +/- 11.4 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in the 10-mg group and 65.0 +/- 11.2 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in the 80-mg group. At the end of follow-up (median time to final creatinine measurement 59.5 months), mean change in estimated GFR showed an increase of 3.5 +/- 0.14 ml/min per 1.73 m2 with 10 mg and 5.2 +/- 0.14 ml/min per 1.73 m2 with 80 mg (P < 0.0001 for treatment difference). In the 80-mg arm, estimated GFR improved to > or = 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in significantly more patients and declined to < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in significantly fewer patients than in the 10-mg arm. CONCLUSIONS: The expected 5-yr decline in renal function was not observed. Estimated GFR improved in both treatment groups but was significantly greater with 80 mg than with 10 mg, suggesting this benefit may be dosage related.

[Dyslipidemia - when are lipid lowering medications useful in clinical practice?]

Dyslipidemia is one of the main modifiable cardiovascular risk factors. There is strong evidence for the efficacy of lipid-lowering drugs in secondary prevention, as well as in primary prevention for patients at high cardiovascular risk. In primary prevention, indication for lipid-lowering interventions should be based on an individual assessment of the cardiovascular risk and on the LDL cholesterol level, despite less strong evidence for the efficacy of drug-based interventions in low risk patients. Treatment consists of statins, as well as lifestyle modifications such as body weight control and increased physical exercise. The latter constitute the primary intervention in patients at low cardiovascular risk. Secondary dyslipidemias due to an underlying medical condition and familial dyslipidemias such as Familial Hypercholesterolemia and Familial Combined Hyperlipidemia should be identified and treated accordingly, taking into account that the risk scoring systems are not appropriate in these situations.