Obesity, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disease: A joint expert review from the Obesity Medicine Association and the National Lipid Association 2024.

Background: This joint expert review by the Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) and National Lipid Association (NLA) provides clinicians an overview of the pathophysiologic and clinical considerations regarding obesity, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Methods: This joint expert review is based upon scientific evidence, clinical perspectives of the authors, and peer review by the OMA and NLA leadership. Results: Among individuals with obesity, adipose tissue may store over 50% of the total body free cholesterol. Triglycerides may represent up to 99% of lipid species in adipose tissue. The potential for adipose tissue expansion accounts for the greatest weight variance among most individuals, with percent body fat ranging from less than 5% to over 60%. While population studies suggest a modest increase in blood low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels with excess adiposity, the adiposopathic dyslipidemia pattern most often described with an increase in adiposity includes elevated triglycerides, reduced high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), increased non-HDL-C, elevated apolipoprotein B, increased LDL particle concentration, and increased small, dense LDL particles. Conclusions: Obesity increases CVD risk, at least partially due to promotion of an adiposopathic, atherogenic lipid profile. Obesity also worsens other cardiometabolic risk factors. Among patients with obesity, interventions that reduce body weight and improve CVD outcomes are generally associated with improved lipid levels. Given the modest improvement in blood LDL-C with weight reduction in patients with overweight or obesity, early interventions to treat both excess adiposity and elevated atherogenic cholesterol (LDL-C and/or non-HDL-C) levels represent priorities in reducing the risk of CVD.

A focused update to the 2019 NLA scientific statement on use of lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice.

Since the 2019 National Lipid Association (NLA) Scientific Statement on Use of Lipoprotein(a) in Clinical Practice was issued, accumulating epidemiological data have clarified the relationship between lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level and cardiovascular disease risk and risk reduction. Therefore, the NLA developed this focused update to guide clinicians in applying this emerging evidence in clinical practice. We now have sufficient evidence to support the recommendation to measure Lp(a) levels at least once in every adult for risk stratification. Individuals with Lp(a) levels <75 nmol/L (30 mg/dL) are considered low risk, individuals with Lp(a) levels ≥125 nmol/L (50 mg/dL) are considered high risk, and individuals with Lp(a) levels between 75 and 125 nmol/L (30-50 mg/dL) are at intermediate risk. Cascade screening of first-degree relatives of patients with elevated Lp(a) can identify additional individuals at risk who require intervention. Patients with elevated Lp(a) should receive early, more-intensive risk factor management, including lifestyle modification and lipid-lowering drug therapy in high-risk individuals, primarily to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved an indication for lipoprotein apheresis (which reduces both Lp(a) and LDL-C) in high-risk patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and documented coronary or peripheral artery disease whose Lp(a) level remains ≥60 mg/dL [∼150 nmol/L)] and LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL on maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy. Although Lp(a) is an established independent causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and despite the high prevalence of Lp(a) elevation (∼1 of 5 individuals), measurement rates are low, warranting improved screening strategies for cardiovascular disease prevention.

Obesity, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disease: A joint expert review from the Obesity Medicine Association and the National Lipid Association 2024.

BACKGROUND: This joint expert review by the Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) and National Lipid Association (NLA) provides clinicians an overview of the pathophysiologic and clinical considerations regarding obesity, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. METHODS: This joint expert review is based upon scientific evidence, clinical perspectives of the authors, and peer review by the OMA and NLA leadership. RESULTS: Among individuals with obesity, adipose tissue may store over 50% of the total body free cholesterol. Triglycerides may represent up to 99% of lipid species in adipose tissue. The potential for adipose tissue expansion accounts for the greatest weight variance among most individuals, with percent body fat ranging from less than 5% to over 60%. While population studies suggest a modest increase in blood low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels with excess adiposity, the adiposopathic dyslipidemia pattern most often described with an increase in adiposity includes elevated triglycerides, reduced high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), increased non-HDL-C, elevated apolipoprotein B, increased LDL particle concentration, and increased small, dense LDL particles. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity increases CVD risk, at least partially due to promotion of an adiposopathic, atherogenic lipid profile. Obesity also worsens other cardiometabolic risk factors. Among patients with obesity, interventions that reduce body weight and improve CVD outcomes are generally associated with improved lipid levels. Given the modest improvement in blood LDL-C with weight reduction in patients with overweight or obesity, early interventions to treat both excess adiposity and elevated atherogenic cholesterol (LDL-C and/or non-HDL-C) levels represent priorities in reducing the risk of CVD.

Lipoprotein(a) Blood Levels and Cardiovascular Risk Reduction With Icosapent Ethyl.

BACKGROUND: Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) concentrations are associated with increased cardiovascular event risk even in the presence of well-controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, but few treatments are documented to reduce this residual risk. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this post hoc analysis of REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial) was to explore the cardiovascular benefit of icosapent ethyl (IPE) across a range of Lp(a) levels. METHODS: A total of 8,179 participants receiving statin therapy with established cardiovascular disease or age ≥50 years with diabetes and ≥1 additional risk factor, fasting triglyceride 1.69 to 5.63 mmol/L, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 1.06 to 2.59 mmol/L were randomized to receive 2 g twice daily of IPE or matching placebo. Relationships between continuous baseline Lp(a) mass concentration and risk for first and total (first and subsequent) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were analyzed, along with the effects of IPE on first MACE among those with Lp(a) concentrations ≥50 or <50 mg/dL. RESULTS: Among 7,026 participants (86% of those randomized) with baseline Lp(a) assessments, the median concentration was 11.6 mg/dL (Q1-Q3: 5.0-37.4 mg/dL). Lp(a) had significant relationships with first and total MACE (P < 0.0001), while event reductions with IPE did not vary across the range of Lp(a) (interaction P > 0.10). IPE significantly reduced first MACE in subgroups with concentrations ≥50 and <50 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline Lp(a) concentration was prognostic for MACE among participants with elevated triglyceride levels receiving statin therapy. Importantly, IPE consistently reduced MACE across a range of Lp(a) levels, including among those with clinically relevant elevations.

Cost-Effectiveness of Icosapent Ethyl in REDUCE-IT USA: Results From Patients Randomized in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In 3146 REDUCE-IT USA (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl Intervention Trial USA) participants, icosapent ethyl (IPE) reduced first and total cardiovascular events by 31% and 36%, respectively, over 4.9 years of follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used participant-level data from REDUCE-IT USA, 2021 US costs, and IPE costs ranging from $4.59 to $11.48 per day, allowing us to examine a range of possible medication costs. The in-trial analysis was participant-level, whereas the lifetime analysis used a Markov model. Both analyses considered value from a US health sector perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (incremental costs divided by incremental quality-adjusted life-years) of IPE compared with standard care (SC) was the primary outcome measure. There was incremental gain in quality-adjusted life-years with IPE compared with SC using in-trial (3.28 versus 3.13) and lifetime (10.36 versus 9.83) horizons. Using an IPE cost of $4.59 per day, health care costs were lower with IPE compared with SC for both in-trial ($29 420 versus $30 947) and lifetime ($216 243 versus $219 212) analyses. IPE versus SC was a dominant strategy in trial and over the lifetime, with 99.7% lifetime probability of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. At a medication cost of $11.48 per day, the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was $36 208 in trial and $9582 over the lifetime. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, at $4.59 per day, IPE offers better outcomes than SC at lower costs in trial and over a lifetime and is cost-effective at $11.48 per day for conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds. Treatment with IPE should be strongly considered in US patients like those enrolled in REDUCE-IT USA. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01492361.

Effectiveness of icosapent ethyl on first and total cardiovascular events in patients with metabolic syndrome, but without diabetes: REDUCE-IT MetSyn.

Aims: Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) is associated with high risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, irrespective of statin therapy. In the overall REDUCE-IT study of statin-treated patients, icosapent ethyl (IPE) reduced the risk of the primary composite endpoint (CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization) and the key secondary composite endpoint (CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke). Methods and results: REDUCE-IT was an international, double-blind trial that randomized 8179 high CV risk statin-treated patients with controlled LDL cholesterol and elevated triglycerides, to IPE 4 g/day or placebo. The current study evaluated the pre-specified patient subgroup with a history of MetSyn, but without diabetes at baseline. Among patients with MetSyn but without diabetes at baseline (n = 2866), the majority (99.8%) of this subgroup was secondary prevention patients. Icosapent ethyl use was associated with a 29% relative risk reduction for the first occurrence of the primary composite endpoint [hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-0.84; P < 0.0001, absolute risk reduction (ARR) = 5.9%; number needed to treat = 17] and a 41% reduction in total (first plus subsequent) events [rate ratio: 0.59; (95% CI: 0.48-0.72); P < 0.0001] compared with placebo. The risk for the key secondary composite endpoint was reduced by 20% (P = 0.05) and a 27% reduction in fatal/non-fatal MI (P = 0.03), 47% reduction in urgent/emergent revascularization (P < 0.0001), and 58% reduction in hospitalization for unstable angina (P < 0.0001). Non-statistically significant reductions were observed in cardiac arrest (44%) and sudden cardiac death (34%). Conclusion: In statin-treated patients with a history of MetSyn, IPE significantly reduced the risk of first and total CV events in REDUCE-IT. The large relative and ARRs observed supports IPE as a potential therapeutic consideration for patients with MetSyn at high CV risk. Registration REDUCE-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01492361.

The importance of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurement and control as performance measures: A joint clinical perspective from the National Lipid Association and the American Society for Preventive Cardiology.

Despite the established role of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) as a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), and the persistence of CVD as the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, national quality assurance metrics no longer include LDL-C measurement as a required performance metric. This clinical perspective reviews the history of LDL-C as a quality and performance metric and the events that led to its replacement. It also presents patient, healthcare provider, and health system rationales for re-establishing LDL-C measurement as a performance measure to improve cholesterol control in high-risk groups and to stem the rising tide of CVD morbidity and mortality, cardiovascular care disparities, and related healthcare costs.

The importance of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurement and control as performance measures: A joint Clinical Perspective from the National Lipid Association and the American Society for Preventive Cardiology.

Despite the established role of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) as a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), and the persistence of CVD as the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, national quality assurance metrics no longer include LDL-C measurement as a required performance metric. This clinical perspective reviews the history of LDL-C as a quality and performance metric and the events that led to its replacement. It also presents patient, healthcare provider, and health system rationales for re-establishing LDL-C measurement as a performance measure to improve cholesterol control in high-risk groups and to stem the rising tide of CVD morbidity and mortality, cardiovascular care disparities, and related healthcare costs.

Cardiovascular Benefits of Icosapent Ethyl in Patients With and Without Atrial Fibrillation in REDUCE-IT.

Background In REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial), icosapent ethyl (IPE) versus placebo) reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization, but was associated with increased atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF) hospitalization (3.1% IPE versus 2.1% placebo; P=0.004). Methods and Results We performed post hoc efficacy and safety analyses of patients with or without prior AF (before randomization) and with or without in-study time-varying AF hospitalization to assess relationships of IPE (versus placebo) and outcomes. In-study AF hospitalization event rates were higher in patients with prior AF (12.5% versus 6.3%, IPE versus placebo; P=0.007) versus without prior AF (2.2% versus 1.6%, IPE versus placebo; P=0.09). Serious bleeding rates trended higher in patients with (7.3% versus 6.0%, IPE versus placebo; P=0.59) versus without prior AF (2.3% versus 1.7%, IPE versus placebo; P=0.08). With IPE, serious bleeding trended higher regardless of prior AF (interaction P value [Pint]=0.61) or postrandomization AF hospitalization (Pint=0.66). Patients with prior AF (n=751, 9.2%) versus without prior AF (n=7428, 90.8%) had similar relative risk reductions of the primary composite and key secondary composite end points with IPE versus placebo (Pint=0.37 and Pint=0.55, respectively). Conclusions In REDUCE-IT, in-study AF hospitalization rates were higher in patients with prior AF especially in those randomized to IPE. Although serious bleeding trended higher in those randomized to IPE versus placebo over the course of the study, serious bleeding was not different regardless of prior AF or in-study AF hospitalization. Patients with prior AF or in-study AF hospitalization had consistent relative risk reductions across primary, key secondary, and stroke end points with IPE. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01492361; Unique Identifier: NCT01492361.

Potential effects of icosapent ethyl on cardiovascular outcomes in cigarette smokers: REDUCE-IT smoking.

AIMS: Cigarette smoking is among the most well-established risk factors for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. We sought to determine whether icosapent ethyl (IPE), a highly purified form of eicosapentaenoic acid with antiatherothrombotic properties, may reduce the excessive risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) attributable to smoking. METHODS AND RESULTS: Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl Trial (REDUCE-IT) was a multinational, double-blind trial that randomized 8179 statin-treated patients with elevated triglycerides and CV risk to IPE or placebo, with a median follow-up period of 4.9 years. Icosapent ethyl reduced the primary composite endpoint [CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina] by 25% (P < 0.0001). In the current analyses, the effect of IPE was evaluated in REDUCE-IT using post hoc analyses based on smoking history. Groups were classified as current smokers (n = 1241), former smokers (n = 3672), and never smokers (n = 3264). Compared with placebo, IPE use in combined current and former smokers (n = 4913) was associated with significant reductions in time to the primary composite endpoint {hazard ratio: 0.77 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-0.87]; P < 0.0001} and in total events [rate ratio: 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.82); P < 0.0001]. These benefits remained significant when subdivided into current and former smokers (P = 0.04, P = 0.005), with reductions in the key secondary composite endpoint (P < 0.0001) and in the individual components of CV death or non-fatal MI (P = 0.04, P = 0.01) and fatal or non-fatal MI (P = 0.009, P = 0.01), respectively. Benefits were consistent and significant in non-smokers as well. Overall, there were similar estimated rates of first occurrences of primary CVD endpoints in current smokers (23.8%) and former smokers (23.0%) assigned to IPE compared with never smokers on placebo (25.7%). CONCLUSION: In REDUCE-IT, IPE treatment was associated with a reduced risk of CV events in current and former smokers to levels observed in never smokers. While smoking cessation should always be recommended, these data raise the possibility that IPE treatment may attenuate CV hazards attributable to smoking.

Assessment and management of statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS): A clinical perspective from the National Lipid Association.

Statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS) are the most common form of statin intolerance and are associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events that manifest from statin underutilization and discontinuation. The reported frequencies of SAMS are divergent in the literature. The writing group estimates the prevalence of SAMS, namely all muscle symptoms temporally related to statin use but without regard to causality, to be about 10% (range 5% to 25%), and the prevalence of pharmacological SAMS, specifically muscle symptoms resulting from pharmacological properties of the statin, to be about 1-2% (range 0.5% to 4%). In clinical practice, SAMS are likely to result from a combination of pharmacological and nonpharmacological effects, however this does not make the symptoms any less clinically relevant. Regardless of the etiology, SAMS need to be addressed in accordance with patients' preferences and experiences. This clinical perspective reviews the epidemiology and underlying pathophysiology of SAMS, and the cardiovascular consequences resulting from statin discontinuation. We present patient-centered clinical and communication strategies to mitigate SAMS and improve medication adherence and outcomes among statin users. Treatment strategies include 1) optimizing lifestyle interventions, 2) modulating risk factors that may contribute to muscle symptoms, 3) optimizing statin tolerability by dose reduction, decreased dosing frequency, or use of an alternate statin with more favorable pharmacokinetic properties, and 4) use of non-statins, emphasizing those with evidence for atherosclerotic risk reduction, either in combination with or in place of statin therapy depending on the patient's circumstances. The focus of this clinical perspective is sustainable lipoprotein goal achievement, which is important for cardiovascular risk reduction.

Use of Lipoprotein(a) in clinical practice: A biomarker whose time has come. A scientific statement from the National Lipid Association.

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a well-recognized, independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with elevated levels estimated to be prevalent in 20% of the population. Observational and genetic evidence strongly support a causal relationship between high plasma concentrations of Lp(a) and increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease-related events, such as myocardial infarction and stroke, and valvular aortic stenosis. In this scientific statement, we review an array of evidence-based considerations for testing of Lp(a) in clinical practice and the utilization of Lp(a) levels to inform treatment strategies in primary and secondary prevention.

NLA scientific statement on statin intolerance: a new definition and key considerations for ASCVD risk reduction in the statin intolerant patient.

Although statins are generally well tolerated, statin intolerance is reported in 5-30% of patients and contributes to reduced statin adherence and persistence, as well as higher risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. This Scientific Statement from the National Lipid Association was developed to provide an updated definition of statin intolerance and to inform clinicians and researchers about its identification and management. Statin intolerance is defined as one or more adverse effects associated with statin therapy which resolves or improves with dose reduction or discontinuation and can be classified as a complete inability to tolerate any dose of a statin or partial intolerance with inability to tolerate the dose necessary to achieve the patient-specific therapeutic objective. To classify a patient as having statin intolerance, a minimum of two statins should have been attempted, including at least one at the lowest approved daily dosage. This Statement acknowledges the importance of identifying modifiable risk factors for statin intolerance and recognizes the possibility of a "nocebo" effect (patient expectation of harm resulting in perceived side effects). To identify a tolerable statin regimen it is recommended that clinicians consider using several different strategies (e.g., different statin, dose, and/or dosing frequency). Non-statin therapy may be required for patients who cannot reach therapeutic objectives with lifestyle and maximal tolerated statin therapy. If so, therapies with outcomes data from randomized trials showing reduced cardiovascular events are favored. In high and very high risk patients who are statin intolerant, clinicians should consider initiating non-statin therapy while additional attempts are made to identify a tolerable statin in order to limit the time of exposure to elevated levels of atherogenic lipoproteins.

Effects of Randomized Treatment With Icosapent Ethyl and a Mineral Oil Comparator on Interleukin-1ß, Interleukin-6, C-Reactive Protein, Oxidized Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol, Homocysteine, Lipoprotein(a), and Lipoprotein-Associated Phospholipase A2: A REDUCE-IT Biomarker Substudy.

BACKGROUND: REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial) reported a 25% relative risk reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events with use of icosapent ethyl compared with pharmaceutical grade mineral oil. The mechanisms underlying this benefit remain uncertain. We explored whether treatment allocation in REDUCE-IT might affect a series of biomarkers in pathways known to associate with atherosclerosis risk. METHODS: Serum levels of interleukin-1ß, interleukin-6, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, oxidized low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, homocysteine, lipoprotein(a), and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) were measured at baseline, at 12 months, at 24 months, and at the end-of-study visit among REDUCE-IT participants with triglyceride levels ≥135 mg/dL and <500 mg/dL who were randomly allocated to treatment with either 4 grams daily of icosapent ethyl or mineral oil used as a comparator. RESULTS: At baseline, median levels of each biomarker were similar in the 2 treatment groups. The levels of biomarkers associated with atherosclerosis increased over time among those allocated to mineral oil treatment; in this group at 12 months, the median percent increases from baseline were 1.5% for homocysteine, 2.2% for lipoprotein(a), 10.9% for oxidized low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, 16.2% for interleukin-6, 18.5% for lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2, 21.9% for high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and 28.9% for interleukin-1ß (all P values <0.001), with similar changes at 24 months. In the icosapent ethyl group, there were minimal changes in these biomarkers at 12 and 24 months. As such, at study conclusion, between-group treatment differences largely reflected increases in the mineral oil group with median percent differences of 2.4% for lipoprotein(a), 3.0% for homocysteine, 4.2% for oxidized low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, 19.8% for interleukin-6, 26.2% for Lp-PLA2, 38.5% for high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and 48.7% for interleukin-1ß (all P values ≤0.007). These data are consistent with previous REDUCE-IT results in which the median percent change for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol at 12 months was -1.2% among those allocated to icosapent ethyl and 10.9% among those allocated to the mineral oil comparator. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants in REDUCE-IT, allocation to icosapent ethyl had minimal effects on a series of biomarkers associated with atherosclerotic disease, whereas levels increased among those allocated to mineral oil. The effect of these findings on interpretation of the overall risk reductions in clinical events observed within REDUCE-IT is uncertain. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01492361.

Impact of Icosapent Ethyl on Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Patients With Heart Failure in REDUCE-IT.

Background Patients with heart failure (HF) are at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Studies of atherothrombotic treatments in this population have been disappointing to date. Icosapent ethyl reduced the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease among a broad array of statin-treated patients at elevated risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Whether the treatment benefits of icosapent ethyl are consistent among those with HF is unknown. Methods and Results REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial) randomized 8179 participants, including 1446 (17.7%) patients with a history of HF (icosapent ethyl, N=703; and placebo, N=743). The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina. We used Cox regression to estimate the risk of outcomes of participants with and without HF. We estimated the placebo-controlled change in triglycerides and hs-CRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein) from baseline to 2 years. Among 1446 patients with HF, median age was 63.0 years, median body mass index was 31.0 kg/m2, and more were men (69.3%). Icosapent ethyl reduced triglycerides (median reduction, 33.5 mg/dL, or 15.4%; P<0.0001) and hs-CRP (35.1%; P<0.0001) compared with placebo, similar to patients without HF (P-interaction>0.90). The treatment effect on the primary end point in patients with HF history (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.70-1.08) was consistent with the effects observed in patients without HF history (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.65-0.81) (P-interaction=0.13). Conclusions In REDUCE-IT, icosapent ethyl provided similar improvements in triglyceride levels and hs-CRP as well as similar cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with and without HF. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01492361.

Prevention of Cardiovascular Events and Mortality With Icosapent Ethyl in Patients With Prior Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: REDUCE-IT was a double-blind trial that randomized 8,179 statin-treated patients with controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and moderately elevated triglycerides to icosapent ethyl (IPE) or placebo. There was a significant reduction in the primary endpoint, including death from cardiovascular (CV) causes. The specific impact of IPE among patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) was unknown. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to examine the benefit of IPE on ischemic events among patients with prior MI in REDUCE-IT. METHODS: We performed post hoc analyses of patients with prior MI. The primary endpoint was CV death, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina. The key secondary endpoint was CV death, MI, or stroke. RESULTS: A total of 3,693 patients had a history of prior MI. The primary endpoint was reduced from 26.1% to 20.2% with IPE vs placebo; HR: 0.74 (95% CI: 0.65-0.85; P = 0.00001). The key secondary endpoint was reduced from 18.0% to 13.3%; HR: 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61-0.84; P = 0.00006). There was also a significant 35% relative risk reduction in total ischemic events (P = 0.0000001), a 34% reduction in MI (P = 0.00009), a 30% reduction in CV death (P = 0.01), and a 20% lower rate of all-cause mortality (P = 0.054), although there was a slight increase in atrial fibrillation. Sudden cardiac death and cardiac arrest were also significantly reduced by 40% and 56%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a history of prior MI in REDUCE-IT treated with IPE demonstrated large and significant relative and absolute risk reductions in ischemic events, including CV death. (A Study of AMR101 to Evaluate Its Ability to Reduce Cardiovascular Events in High Risk Patients With Hypertriglyceridemia and on Statin. The Primary Objective is to Evaluate the Effect of 4 g/Day AMR101 for Preventing the Occurrence of a First Major Cardiovascular Event. [REDUCE-IT]; NCT01492361).

Treatment With Icosapent Ethyl to Reduce Ischemic Events in Patients With Prior Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From REDUCE-IT PCI.

Background Patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at increased risk for recurrent cardiovascular events despite aggressive medical therapy. Methods and Results This post hoc analysis focused on the subset of patients with prior PCI enrolled in REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial), a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of icosapent ethyl versus placebo. Icosapent ethyl was added to statins in patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL and fasting triglycerides 135-499 mg/dL. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization. There were 8179 patients randomized in REDUCE-IT followed for a median of 4.9 years, and 3408 (41.7%) of them had a prior PCI with a median follow-up of 4.8 years. These patients were randomized a median of 2.9 years (11 days to 30.7 years) after PCI. Among patients treated with icosapent ethyl versus placebo, there was a 34% reduction in the primary composite end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.58-0.76; P<0.001; number needed to treat4.8 years=12) and a 34% reduction in the key secondary composite end point of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.79; P<0.001; NNT4.8 years=19) versus placebo. Similarly, large reductions occurred in total coronary revascularizations and revascularization subtypes. There was also a 39% reduction in total events (rate ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52-0.72; P<0.001). Conclusions Among patients treated with statins with elevated triglycerides and a history of prior PCI, icosapent ethyl substantially reduced the risk of recurrent events during an average of ~5 years of follow-up with a number needed to treat of only 12. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01492361.

Cost-effectiveness of Icosapent Ethyl for High-risk Patients With Hypertriglyceridemia Despite Statin Treatment.

Importance: The Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) demonstrated the efficacy of icosapent ethyl (IPE) for high-risk patients with hypertriglyceridemia and known cardiovascular disease or diabetes and at least 1 other risk factor who were treated with statins. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of IPE compared with standard care for high-risk patients with hypertriglyceridemia despite statin treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: An in-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using patient-level study data from REDUCE-IT, and a lifetime analysis was performed using a microsimulation model and data from published literature. The study included 8179 patients with hypertriglyceridemia despite stable statin therapy recruited between November 21, 2011, and May 31, 2018. Analyses were performed from a US health care sector perspective. Statistical analysis was performed from March 1, 2018, to October 31, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to IPE, 4 g/d, or placebo and were followed up for a median of 4.9 years (IQR, 3.5-5.3 years). The cost of IPE was $4.16 per day after rebates using SSR Health net cost (SSR cost) and $9.28 per day with wholesale acquisition cost (WAC). Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total direct health care costs (2019 US dollars), and cost-effectiveness. Results: A total of 4089 patients (2927 men [71.6%]; median age, 64.0 years [IQR, 57.0-69.0 years]) were randomly assigned to receive IPE, and 4090 patients (2895 men [70.8%]; median age, 64.0 years [IQR, 57.0-69.0 years]) were randomly assigned to receive standard care. Treatment with IPE yielded more QALYs than standard care both in trial (3.34 vs 3.27; mean difference, 0.07 [95% CI, 0.01-0.12]) and over a lifetime projection (10.59 vs 10.35; mean difference, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.15-0.33]). In-trial, total health care costs were higher with IPE using either SSR cost ($18 786) or WAC ($24 544) than with standard care ($17 273; mean difference from SSR cost, $1513 [95% CI, $155-$2870]; mean difference from WAC, $7271 [95% CI, $5911-$8630]). Icosapent ethyl cost $22 311 per QALY gained using SSR cost and $107 218 per QALY gained using WAC. Over a lifetime, IPE was projected to be cost saving when using SSR cost ($195 276) compared with standard care ($197 064; mean difference, -$1788 [95% CI, -$9735 to $6159]) but to have higher costs when using WAC ($202 830) compared with standard care (mean difference, $5766 [95% CI, $1094-$10 438]). Compared with standard care, IPE had a 58.4% lifetime probability of costing less and being more effective when using SSR cost and an 89.4% probability of costing less than $50 000 per QALY gained when using SSR cost and a 72.5% probability of costing less than $50 000 per QALY gained when using WAC. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that, both in-trial and over the lifetime, IPE offers better cardiovascular outcomes than standard care in REDUCE-IT participants at common willingness-to-pay thresholds.