Unpacking and understanding the impact of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors on apolipoprotein B metabolism

No abstract available

Effect of alirocumab on lipids and lipoproteins in individuals with metabolic syndrome without diabetes: Pooled data from 10 phase 3 trials.

AimsThis analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor, in patients with or without metabolic syndrome (MetS) using pooled data from 10 phase 3 ODYSSEY trials.Materials and methodsData from 4983 randomized patients (1940 with MetS; 1642 with diabetes excluded) were assessed in subgroups by MetS status. Efficacy data were analysed in 4 pools per study design: 2 placebo-controlled pools (1 using alirocumab 150 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W], 1 using 75/150 mg Q2W) with background statin, and 2 ezetimibe-controlled pools (both alirocumab 75/150 mg Q2W), 1 with and 1 without background statin. Alirocumab 75/150 mg indicates possible dose increase from 75 to 150 mg at Week 12 based on Week 8 LDL-C.ResultsLDL-C percentage reduction from baseline at Week 24 with alirocumab was 63.9% (MetS) and 56.8% (non-MetS) in the pool of alirocumab 150 mg Q2W, and 42.2% to 52.2% (MetS) and 45.0% to 52.6% (non-MetS) in 3 pools using 75/150 mg Q2W. Levels of other lipid and lipoprotein parameters were also improved with alirocumab treatment, including apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), lipoprotein(a) and HDL-C. Overall, the percentage change at Week 24 in LDL-C and other lipids and lipoproteins did not vary by MetS status. Adverse event rates were generally similar between treatment groups, regardless of MetS status; injection-site reactions occurred more frequently in alirocumab vs control groups.ConclusionsAcross study pools, alirocumab-associated reductions in LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, and non-HDL-C were significant vs control, and did not vary by MetS status

Glycaemic effects of non-statin lipid-lowering therapies

Since the publication of the JUPITER trial, attention has been focused on the adverse glycemic effects of statin therapy. Although the modest increase in the risk of new diabetes mellitus is outweighed by the reduction in cardiovascular events for statins, emerging biochemical and genetic links between lipid metabolism and glycemic control raise the prospect of a broader diabetogenic effect of lipid-lowering therapies. For the novel and powerful PCSK9-inhibitor class available evidence does not support a major glycaemic effect with the results of large scale trials awaited although preliminary genetic data does suggest a link. In contrast, there is clear evidence of a diabetogenic effect for the now outdated but well-studied niacin. For ezetimibe and fibrates, evidence is scarce but currently broadly unconcerning. For now, the glycemic effects of lipid-lowering therapies should have a limited influence on clinical decision-making. Further study in this topical area is needed

Variation in PCSK9 and HMGCR and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease and Diabetes

BACKGROUND: Pharmacologic inhibitors of proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) are being evaluated in clinical trials for the treatment of cardiovascular disease. The effect of lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels by inhibiting PCSK9 on the risk of cardiovascular events or diabetes is unknown. METHODS: We used genetic scores consisting of independently inherited variants in the genes encoding PCSK9 and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR; the target of statins) as instruments to randomly assign 112,772 participants from 14 studies, with 14,120 cardiovascular events and 10,635 cases of diabetes, to groups according to the number of LDL cholesterol-lowering alleles that they had inherited. We compared the effects of lower LDL cholesterol levels that were mediated by variants in PCSK9, HMGCR, or both on the risk of cardiovascular events and the risk of diabetes. RESULTS: Variants in PCSK9 and HMGCR were associated with nearly identical protective effects on the risk of cardiovascular events per decrease of 10 mg per deciliter (0.26 mmol per liter) in the LDL cholesterol level: odds ratio for cardiovascular events, 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 0.89) for PCSK9 and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.90) for HMGCR. Variants in these two genes were also associated with very similar effects on the risk of diabetes: odds ratio for each 10 mg per deciliter decrease in LDL cholesterol, 1.11 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.19) for PCSK9 and 1.13 (95% CI, 1.06 to 1.20) for HMGCR. The increased risk of diabetes was limited to persons with impaired fasting glucose levels for both scores and was lower in magnitude than the protective effect against cardiovascular events. When present together, PCSK9 and HMGCR variants had additive effects on the risk of both cardiovascular events and diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, variants in PCSK9 had approximately the same effect as variants in HMGCR on the risk of cardiovascular events and diabetes per unit decrease in the LDL cholesterol level. The effects of these variants were independent and additive

A study in high-risk, maximally pretreated patients to determine the potential use of PCSK9 inhibitors at various thresholds of total and LDL cholesterol levels

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Statins and ezetimibe reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors lower LDL-c by 50%-70% and might be useful in refractory patients. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal guidance (TAG) recommends use of these drugs in secondary prevention and familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) at differing LDL-c thresholds. We have estimated the proportion of patients in whom this third-line drug might be useful. STUDY DESIGN: We used data from a lipid-lowering audit programme to study 72 with FH and/or CVD of 271 patients referred over 12 months who failed to achieve target total cholesterol (TC) and LDL-c levels. All 72 patients were treated with ezetimibe, and 69 cases also received statins. We used LDL-c thresholds 1.5-5.5 mmol/L to estimate how many of these refractory patients could benefit from PCSK9 inhibitors. RESULTS: In 72 patients, TC and LDL-c targets were not met by 64 and 53 patients, respectively. We judged using the NICE TAG that only one patient (1.4% ezetimibe requiring and 0.4% total referrals) required a PCSK9 inhibitor. CONCLUSIONS: We determined that the proportion of patients eligible for a PCSK9 inhibitor at various TC and LDL-c levels is modest. This may reflect the use of all available statins in UK lipid clinics often at non-daily frequency. We suggest that cost-effective use of PCSK9 inhibitors requires prescribing being restricted to clinicians working in specialised lipid clinics

Systematic review and network meta-analysis on the efficacy of evolocumab and other therapies for the management of lipid levels in hyperlipidemia

Background: The proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors evolocumab and alirocumab substantially reduce low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) when added to statin therapy in patients who need additional LDL‐C reduction. Methods and Results: We conducted a systematic review and network meta‐analysis of randomized trials of lipid‐lowering therapies from database inception through August 2016 (45 058 records retrieved). We found 69 trials of lipid‐lowering therapies that enrolled patients requiring further LDL‐C reduction while on maximally tolerated medium‐ or high‐intensity statin, of which 15 could be relevant for inclusion in LDL‐C reduction networks with evolocumab, alirocumab, ezetimibe, and placebo as treatment arms. PCSK9 inhibitors significantly reduced LDL‐C by 54% to 74% versus placebo and 26% to 46% versus ezetimibe. There were significant treatment differences for evolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks at the mean of weeks 10 and 12 versus placebo (−74.1%; 95% credible interval −79.81% to −68.58%), alirocumab 75 mg (−20.03%; 95% credible interval −27.32% to −12.96%), and alirocumab 150 mg (−13.63%; 95% credible interval −22.43% to −5.33%) at ≥12 weeks. Treatment differences were similar in direction and magnitude for PCSK9 inhibitor monthly dosing. Adverse events were similar between PCSK9 inhibitors and control. Rates of adverse events were similar between PCSK9 inhibitors versus placebo or ezetimibe. Conclusions: PCSK9 inhibitors added to medium‐ to high‐intensity statin therapy significantly reduce LDL‐C in patients requiring further LDL‐C reduction. The network meta‐analysis showed a significant treatment difference in LDL‐C reduction for evolocumab versus alirocumab

Efficacy and tolerability of evolocumab vs. ezetimibe in patients with muscle-related statin intolerance: the GAUSS-3 randomized clinical trial

Importance: Muscle-related statin intolerance is reported by 5% to 20% of patients. Objective: To identify patients with muscle symptoms confirmed by statin rechallenge and compare lipid-lowering efficacy for 2 nonstatin therapies, ezetimibe and evolocumab. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two-stage randomized clinical trial including 511 adult patients with uncontrolled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and history of intolerance to 2 or more statins enrolled in 2013 and 2014 globally. Phase A used a 24-week crossover procedure with atorvastatin or placebo to identify patients having symptoms only with atorvastatin but not placebo. In phase B, after a 2-week washout, patients were randomized to ezetimibe or evolocumab for 24 weeks. Interventions: Phase A: atorvastatin (20 mg) vs placebo. Phase B: randomization 2:1 to subcutaneous evolocumab (420 mg monthly) or oral ezetimibe (10 mg daily). Main Outcome and Measures: Coprimary end points were the mean percent change in LDL-C level from baseline to the mean of weeks 22 and 24 levels and from baseline to week 24 levels. Results: Of the 491 patients who entered phase A (mean age, 60.7 [SD, 10.2] years; 246 women [50.1%]; 170 with coronary heart disease [34.6%]; entry mean LDL-C level, 212.3 [SD, 67.9] mg/dL), muscle symptoms occurred in 209 of 491 (42.6%) while taking atorvastatin but not while taking placebo. Of these, 199 entered phase B, along with 19 who proceeded directly to phase B for elevated creatine kinase (N = 218, with 73 randomized to ezetimibe and 145 to evolocumab; entry mean LDL-C level, 219.9 [SD, 72] mg/dL). For the mean of weeks 22 and 24, LDL-C level with ezetimibe was 183.0 mg/dL; mean percent LDL-C change, −16.7% (95% CI, −20.5% to −12.9%), absolute change, −31.0 mg/dL and with evolocumab was 103.6 mg/dL; mean percent change, −54.5% (95% CI, −57.2% to −51.8%); absolute change, −106.8 mg/dL (P < .001). LDL-C level at week 24 with ezetimibe was 181.5 mg/dL; mean percent change, −16.7% (95% CI, −20.8% to −12.5%); absolute change, −31.2 mg/dL and with evolocumab was 104.1 mg/dL; mean percent change, −52.8% (95% CI, −55.8% to −49.8%); absolute change, −102.9 mg/dL (P < .001). For the mean of weeks 22 and 24, between-group difference in LDL-C was −37.8%; absolute difference, −75.8 mg/dL. For week 24, between-group difference in LDL-C was −36.1%; absolute difference, –71.7 mg/dL. Muscle symptoms were reported in 28.8% of ezetimibe-treated patients and 20.7% of evolocumab-treated patients (log-rank P = .17). Active study drug was stopped for muscle symptoms in 5 of 73 ezetimibe-treated patients (6.8%) and 1 of 145 evolocumab-treated patients (0.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with statin intolerance related to muscle-related adverse effects, the use of evolocumab compared with ezetimibe resulted in a significantly greater reduction in LDL-C levels after 24 weeks. Further studies are needed to assess long-term efficacy and safety

Prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia: the role of PCSK9 inhibitors

Familial hypercholesterolaemia is an autosomal dominant inherited disorder characterised by elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and consequently an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Familial hypercholesterolaemia is relatively common, but is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Cardiologists are likely to encounter many individuals with familial hypercholesterolaemia; however, patients presenting with premature ASCVD are rarely screened for familial hypercholesterolaemia and fasting lipid levels are infrequently documented. Given that individuals with familial hypercholesterolaemia and ASCVD are at a particularly high risk of subsequent cardiac events, this is a missed opportunity for preventive therapy. Furthermore, because there is a 50% chance that first-degree relatives of individuals with familial hypercholesterolaemia will also be affected by the disorder, the underdiagnosis of familial hypercholesterolaemia among patients with ASCVD is a barrier to cascade screening and the prevention of ASCVD in affected relatives. Targeted screening of patients with ASCVD is an effective strategy to identify new familial hypercholesterolaemia index cases. Statins are the standard treatment for individuals with familial hypercholesterolaemia; however, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets are not achieved in a large proportion of patients despite treatment. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors have been shown to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels considerably in individuals with familial hypercholesterolaemia who are concurrently receiving the maximal tolerated statin dose. The clinical benefit of PCSK9 inhibitors must, however, also be considered in terms of their cost-effectiveness. Increased awareness of familial hypercholesterolaemia is required among healthcare professionals, particularly cardiologists and primary care physicians, in order to start early preventive measures and to reduce the mortality and morbidity associated with familial hypercholesterolaemia and ASCVD

PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of effective drug therapies that reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (LDL-C), cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains an important cause of mortality and morbidity. Therefore, additional LDL-C reduction may be warranted, especially for patients who are unresponsive to, or unable to take, existing LDL-C-reducing therapies. By inhibiting the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) enzyme, monoclonal antibodies (PCSK9 inhibitors) may further reduce LDL-C, potentially reducing CVD risk as well. OBJECTIVES: Primary To quantify short-term (24 weeks), medium-term (one year), and long-term (five years) effects of PCSK9 inhibitors on lipid parameters and on the incidence of CVD. Secondary To quantify the safety of PCSK9 inhibitors, with specific focus on the incidence of type 2 diabetes, cognitive function, and cancer. Additionally, to determine if specific patient subgroups were more or less likely to benefit from the use of PCSK9 inhibitors. SEARCH METHODS: We identified studies by systematically searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. We also searched Clinicaltrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and screened the reference lists of included studies. We identified the studies included in this review through electronic literature searches conducted up to May 2016, and added three large trials published in March 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: All parallel-group and factorial randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up time of at least 24 weeks were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently reviewed and extracted data. When data were available, we calculated pooled effect estimates. MAIN RESULTS: We included 20 studies with data on 67,237 participants (median age 61 years; range 52 to 64 years). Twelve trials randomised participants to alirocumab, three trials to bococizumab, one to RG7652, and four to evolocumab. Owing to the small number of trials using agents other than alirocumab, we did not differentiate between types of PCSK9 inhibitors used. We compared PCSK9 inhibitors with placebo (thirteen RCTs), ezetimibe (two RCTs) or ezetimibe and statins (five RCTs).Compared with placebo, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased LDL-C by 53.86% (95% confidence interval (CI) 58.64 to 49.08; eight studies; 4782 participants; GRADE: moderate) at 24 weeks; compared with ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased LDL-C by 30.20% (95% CI 34.18 to 26.23; two studies; 823 participants; GRADE: moderate), and compared with ezetimibe and statins, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased LDL-C by 39.20% (95% CI 56.15 to 22.26; five studies; 5376 participants; GRADE: moderate).Compared with placebo, PCSK9 inhibitors decreased the risk of CVD events, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.91% (odds ratio (OR) of 0.86, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.92; eight studies; 59,294 participants; GRADE: moderate). Compared with ezetimibe and statins, PCSK9 inhibitors appeared to have a stronger protective effect on CVD risk, although with considerable uncertainty (RD 1.06%, OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.75; three studies; 4770 participants; GRADE: very low). No data were available for the ezetimibe only comparison. Compared with placebo, PCSK9 probably had little or no effect on mortality (RD 0.03%, OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.14; 12 studies; 60,684 participants; GRADE: moderate). Compared with placebo, PCSK9 inhibitors increased the risk of any adverse events (RD 1.54%, OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.12; 13 studies; 54,204 participants; GRADE: low). Similar effects were observed for the comparison of ezetimibe and statins: RD 3.70%, OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.34; four studies; 5376 participants; GRADE: low. Clinical event data were unavailable for the ezetimibe only comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Over short-term to medium-term follow-up, PCSK9 inhibitors reduced LDL-C. Studies with medium-term follow-up time (longest median follow-up recorded was 26 months) reported that PCSK9 inhibitors (compared with placebo) decreased CVD risk but may have increased the risk of any adverse events (driven by SPIRE-1 and -2 trials). Available evidence suggests that PCSK9 inhibitor use probably leads to little or no difference in mortality. Evidence on relative efficacy and safety when PCSK9 inhibitors were compared with active treatments was of low to very low quality (GRADE); follow-up times were short and events were few. Large trials with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate PCSK9 inhibitors versus active treatments as well as placebo. Owing to the predominant inclusion of high-risk patients in these studies, applicability of results to primary prevention is limited. Finally, estimated risk differences indicate that PCSK9 inhibitors only modestly change absolute risks (often to less than 1%)