Comparative efficacy between atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in the prevention of cardiovascular disease recurrence

Background: There is no randomized clinical trials with recurrence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) as a major outcome with rosuvastatin. In order to analyze potential differences in the clinical response to atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in secondary ASCVD prevention, we have analyzed the clinical evolution of those subjects of the Dyslipemia Registry of the Spanish Society of Arteriosclerosis (SEA) who at the time of inclusion in the Registry had already suffered an ASCVD. Methods: This observational, retrospective, multicenter, national study was designed to determine potential differences between the use of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in the ASCVD recurrence. Three different follow-up start-times were performed: time of inclusion in the registry; time of first event if this occurred after 2005, and time of first event without date restriction. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups. Among atorvastatin or rosuvastatin users, 89 recurrences of ASCVD were recorded (21.9%), of which 85.4% were coronary. At the inclusion of the subject in the registry, 345 participants had not suffered a recurrence yet. These 345 subjects accumulated 1050 person-years in a mean follow-up of 3 years. Event rates were 2.73 (95% CI: 1.63, 4.25) cases/100 person-years and 2.34 (95% CI: 1.17, 4.10) cases/100 person-years in the atorvastatin and rosuvastatin groups, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups independently of the follow-up start-time. Conclusions: This study does not find differences between high doses of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin in the recurrence of ASCVD, and supports their use as clinically equivalent in secondary prevention of ASCVD

Association of cholesterol and oxysterols in adipose tissue with obesity and metabolic syndrome traits

Adipose tissue stores a substantial amount of body cholesterol in humans. Obesity is associated with decreased concentrations of serum cholesterol. During weight gain, adipose tissue dysfunction might be one of the causes of metabolic syndrome. The aim of this study is to evaluate cholesterol storage and oxidized metabolites in adipose tissue and their relationship with metabolic clinical characteristics

Genetic predictors of weight loss in overweight and obese subjects

The aim of our study was to investigate a large cohort of overweight subjects consuming a homogeneous diet to identify the genetic factors associated with weight loss that could be used as predictive markers in weight loss interventions. We retrospectively recruited subjects (N = 788) aged over 18 years with a Body Mass Index (BMI) between 25 and 40 kg/m(2) who were treated at our lipid unit for at least one year from 2008 to 2016, and we also recruited a control group (168 patients) with normal BMIs. All participants received counselling from a nutritionist that included healthy diet and physical activity recommendations. We genotyped 25 single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in 25 genes that were previously associated with obesity and calculated genetic scores that were derived from 25 SNVs. The risk allele in CADM2 showed a higher frequency in overweight and obese subjects than in controls (p = 0.007). The mean follow-up duration was 5.58 +/- 2.68 years. Subjects with lower genetic scores showed greater weight loss during the follow-up period. The genetic score was the variable that best explained the variations in weight from the baseline. The genetic score explained 2.4% of weight change variance at one year and 1.6% of weight change variance at the end of the follow-up period after adjusting for baseline weight, sex, age and years of follow-up

Effect of bergamot on lipid profile in humans: A systematic review

Dyslipidemia is a well-established modifiable cardiovascular risk. Although statins can reduce LDLc by 50-60%, less than 20% of patients with high risk of CVD achieve LDL targets. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effect of the nutraceutical, bergamot (Citrus bergamia), on lipid parameters in humans. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched for interventional and observational studies investigating the effect of bergamot on lipid profile in humans. This systematic review retrieved a total of 442 studies of which 12 articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Based on data, 75% of studies showed a significant decrease in total cholesterol, triglycerides and LDLc. The decrease in total cholesterol varied from 12.3% to 31.3%, from 7.6% to 40.8% in LDLc and from 11.5% to 39.5% in triglycerides. Eight trials reported HDLc increase after intervention with bergamot. Overall, a dose-dependent and possible synergistic effect when administering with statins can be deducted from these trials. It is essential to point out that studies had heterogeneous designs and scientific quality of studies was quite limited. Promising findings reveal an alternative therapeutic option in dyslipidemia management with bergamot supplementation, especially in subjects with statins intolerance

Evaluation of lipoprotein(a) in the prevention and management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A survey among the Lipid Clinics Network

Background and aims: The European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) Lipid Clinics Network promoted a survey in order to identify and understand how and when lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is tested and clinically evaluated in lipid clinics throughout Europe, and the challenges that may prevent evaluation from being carried out. Methods: This survey was divided into three areas of inquiry: background and clinical setting information of clinicians, questions for doctors who claimed not to measure Lp(a), in order to understand what were the reasons for not ordering the test, and questions for doctors who measure Lp(a), to investigate the use of this value in the management of patients.Results: A total of 151 centres clinicians filled in the survey, out of 226 invited. The proportion of clinicians who declare to routinely measure Lp(a) in clinical practice was 75.5%. The most common reasons for not ordering the Lp(a) test were the lack of reimbursement or of treatment options, the non-availability of Lp(a) test, and the high cost of performing the laboratory test. The availability of therapies targeting this lipoprotein would result in a greater propensity of clinicians to start testing Lp(a). Among those who declared to routinely measure Lp(a), the Lp(a) measurement is mostly requested to further stratify patients' cardiovascular risk, and half of them recognized 50 mg/dL (approx. 110 nmol/L) as the threshold for increased cardiovascular risk due.Conclusions: These results warrant for a great deal of effort from scientific societies to address the barriers that limit the routine use of the measurement of Lp(a) concentration and to recognise the importance of Lp(a) as a risk factor

Evaluation of lipoprotein(a) in the prevention and management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A survey among the Lipid Clinics Network

Background and aims: The European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) Lipid Clinics Network promoted a survey in order to identify and understand how and when lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is tested and clinically evaluated in lipid clinics throughout Europe, and the challenges that may prevent evaluation from being carried out. Methods: This survey was divided into three areas of inquiry: background and clinical setting information of clinicians, questions for doctors who claimed not to measure Lp(a), in order to understand what were the reasons for not ordering the test, and questions for doctors who measure Lp(a), to investigate the use of this value in the management of patients. Results: A total of 151 centres clinicians filled in the survey, out of 226 invited. The proportion of clinicians who declare to routinely measure Lp(a) in clinical practice was 75.5%. The most common reasons for not ordering the Lp(a) test were the lack of reimbursement or of treatment options, the non-availability of Lp(a) test, and the high cost of performing the laboratory test. The availability of therapies targeting this lipoprotein would result in a greater propensity of clinicians to start testing Lp(a). Among those who declared to routinely measure Lp(a), the Lp(a) measurement is mostly requested to further stratify patients' cardiovascular risk, and half of them recognized 50 mg/dL (approx. 110 nmol/L) as the threshold for increased cardiovascular risk due. Conclusions: These results warrant for a great deal of effort from scientific societies to address the barriers that limit the routine use of the measurement of Lp(a) concentration and to recognise the importance of Lp(a) as a risk factor