Continued Treatment With Tirzepatide for Maintenance of Weight Reduction in Adults With Obesity: The SURMOUNT-4 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effect of continued treatment with tirzepatide on maintaining initial weight reduction is unknown. Objective: To assess the effect of tirzepatide, with diet and physical activity, on the maintenance of weight reduction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3, randomized withdrawal clinical trial conducted at 70 sites in 4 countries with a 36-week, open-label tirzepatide lead-in period followed by a 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period included adults with a body mass index greater than or equal to 30 or greater than or equal to 27 and a weight-related complication, excluding diabetes. Interventions: Participants (n = 783) enrolled in an open-label lead-in period received once-weekly subcutaneous maximum tolerated dose (10 or 15 mg) of tirzepatide for 36 weeks. At week 36, a total of 670 participants were randomized (1:1) to continue receiving tirzepatide (n = 335) or switch to placebo (n = 335) for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the mean percent change in weight from week 36 (randomization) to week 88. Key secondary end points included the proportion of participants at week 88 who maintained at least 80% of the weight loss during the lead-in period. Results: Participants (n = 670; mean age, 48 years; 473 [71%] women; mean weight, 107.3 kg) who completed the 36-week lead-in period experienced a mean weight reduction of 20.9%. The mean percent weight change from week 36 to week 88 was -5.5% with tirzepatide vs 14.0% with placebo (difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -21.2% to -17.7%]; P < .001). Overall, 300 participants (89.5%) receiving tirzepatide at 88 weeks maintained at least 80% of the weight loss during the lead-in period compared with 16.6% receiving placebo (P < .001). The overall mean weight reduction from week 0 to 88 was 25.3% for tirzepatide and 9.9% for placebo. The most common adverse events were mostly mild to moderate gastrointestinal events, which occurred more commonly with tirzepatide vs placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: In participants with obesity or overweight, withdrawing tirzepatide led to substantial regain of lost weight, whereas continued treatment maintained and augmented initial weight reduction. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04660643.

Safety of bempedoic acid in patients at high cardiovascular risk and with statin intolerance.

BACKGROUND: Bempedoic acid is an oral adenosine triphosphate citrate lyase (ACL) inhibitor that lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) blood levels. The Cholesterol Lowering via Bempedoic acid, an ACL-Inhibiting Regimen (CLEAR) Outcomes study demonstrated that bempedoic acid reduced cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients at high risk for CV events who were unwilling or unable to take guideline-recommended doses of statins. OBJECTIVE: To describe detailed safety information from CLEAR Outcomes, including events in the United States (US) prescribing information based on previous phase 3 hyperlipidemia studies. METHODS: CLEAR Outcomes was a double-blind trial conducted in 13,970 patients randomized to oral bempedoic acid 180 mg daily or placebo and followed for a median of 3.4 years. RESULTS: In patients who received at least one dose (7,001 bempedoic acid, 6,964 placebo), treatment emergent adverse events (AE) occurred in 86.3 % and 85 % of patients, respectively. COVID-19 was the most frequently reported AE in both groups. Changes in serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, hemoglobin, aminotransaminases, and uric acid were consistent with the known safety profile of bempedoic acid. Gout or gouty arthritis occurred in 3.2 % of bempedoic acid and 2.2 % of placebo patients. AE associated with tendinopathies, including tendon rupture, occurred in 2 % of patients in both treatment groups. Cholelithiasis occurred in 2.2 % of bempedoic acid and 1.2 % of placebo patients; AE related to gallbladder disease were similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bempedoic acid was well-tolerated compared with placebo. Safety data from the long-term CLEAR Outcomes study reinforce the positive benefit-risk profile of bempedoic acid.

Obesity and hypertension: Obesity medicine association (OMA) clinical practice statement (CPS) 2023.

Background: This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) provides an overview of the mechanisms and treatment of obesity and hypertension. Methods: The scientific support for this CPS is based upon published citations, clinical perspectives of OMA authors, and peer review by the Obesity Medicine Association leadership. Results: Mechanisms contributing to obesity-related hypertension include unhealthful nutrition, physical inactivity, insulin resistance, increased sympathetic nervous system activity, renal dysfunction, vascular dysfunction, heart dysfunction, increased pancreatic insulin secretion, sleep apnea, and psychosocial stress. Adiposopathic factors that may contribute to hypertension include increased release of free fatty acids, increased leptin, decreased adiponectin, increased renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activation, increased 11 beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1, reduced nitric oxide activity, and increased inflammation. Conclusions: Increase in body fat is the most common cause of hypertension. Among patients with obesity and hypertension, weight reduction via healthful nutrition, physical activity, behavior modification, bariatric surgery, and anti-obesity medications mostly decrease blood pressure, with the greatest degree of weight reduction generally correlated with the greatest degree of blood pressure reduction.

Obesity, diabetes mellitus, and cardiometabolic risk: An Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) 2023.

Background: This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is intended to provide clinicians an overview of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), an obesity-related cardiometabolic risk factor. Methods: The scientific support for this CPS is based upon published citations and clinical perspectives of OMA authors. Results: Topics include T2DM and obesity as cardiometabolic risk factors, definitions of obesity and adiposopathy, and mechanisms for how obesity causes insulin resistance and beta cell dysfunction. Adipose tissue is an active immune and endocrine organ, whose adiposopathic obesity-mediated dysfunction contributes to metabolic abnormalities often encountered in clinical practice, including hyperglycemia (e.g., pre-diabetes mellitus and T2DM). The determination as to whether adiposopathy ultimately leads to clinical metabolic disease depends on crosstalk interactions and biometabolic responses of non-adipose tissue organs such as liver, muscle, pancreas, kidney, and brain. Conclusions: This review is intended to assist clinicians in the care of patients with the disease of obesity and T2DM. This CPS provides a simplified overview of how obesity may cause insulin resistance, pre-diabetes, and T2DM. It also provides an algorithmic approach towards treatment of a patient with obesity and T2DM, with "treat obesity first" as a priority. Finally, treatment of obesity and T2DM might best focus upon therapies that not only improve the weight of patients, but also improve the health outcomes of patients (e.g., cardiovascular disease and cancer).

Mesenteric fat cryolipolysis attenuates insulin resistance in the Ossabaw swine model of the metabolic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The rising prevalence of insulin resistance (IR), metabolic syndrome, and type 2 diabetes are associated with increases in abdominal mesenteric fat. Adipocytes are sensitive to low temperatures, making cryolipolysis of mesenteric fat an attractive treatment modality to potentially reduce IR. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine whether (1) cryolipolysis is safe in reducing the volume of the mesenteric fat and (2) reduction in mesenteric fat volume reduces indices of IR and glycemic dysfunction. SETTING: Indiana University School of Medicine. METHODS: A novel cooling device and method delivered cryolipolysis in a controlled manner to avoid tissue ablative temperatures. Ossabaw pigs (n = 8) were fed a high-fat diet for 9 months to develop visceral obesity, IR, and metabolic syndrome. Following laparotomy, mesenteric fat cryolipolysis (MFC) was performed in 5 pigs, while 3 served as sham surgery controls. The volume of the mesenteric fat was measured by computed tomography and compared with indices of glucose intolerance before and at 3 and 6 months postprocedure. RESULTS: MFC safely reduced mesenteric fat volume by ∼30% at 3 months, which was maintained at 6 months. Body weight did not change in either the MFC or sham surgery control groups. Measure of glycemic control, insulin sensitivity, and blood pressure significantly improved after MFC compared with sham controls. CONCLUSION: MFC reduces the volume of mesenteric fat and improves glycemic control in obese, IR Ossabaw pigs, without adverse effects.

Obesity and cardiovascular disease: mechanistic insights and management strategies. A joint position paper by the World Heart Federation and World Obesity Federation.

The ongoing obesity epidemic represents a global public health crisis that contributes to poor health outcomes, reduced quality of life, and >2.8 million deaths each year. Obesity is relapsing, progressive, and heterogeneous. It is considered a chronic disease by the World Obesity Federation (WOF) and a chronic condition by the World Heart Federation (WHF). People living with overweight/obesity are at greater risk for cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality. Increased adiposity (body fat), particularly visceral/abdominal fat, is linked to CV risk and CV disease (CVD) via multiple direct and indirect pathophysiological mechanisms. The development of CVD is driven, in part, by obesity-related metabolic, endocrinologic, immunologic, structural, humoral, haemodynamic, and functional alterations. The complex multifaceted nature of these mechanisms can be challenging to understand and address in clinical practice. People living with obesity and CVD often have concurrent chronic physical or psychological disorders (multimorbidity) requiring multidisciplinary care pathways and polypharmacy. Evidence indicates that intentional weight loss (particularly when substantial) lowers CVD risk among people with overweight/obesity. Long-term weight loss and maintenance require ongoing commitment from both the individual and those responsible for their care. This position paper, developed by the WOF and the WHF, aims to improve understanding of the direct and indirect links between overweight/obesity and CVD, the key controversies in this area and evidence relating to cardiometabolic outcomes with available weight management options. Finally, an action plan for clinicians provides recommendations to help in identifying and addressing the risks of obesity-related CVD (recognizing resource and support variances between countries).

Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors - 2022.

The American Society for Preventive Cardiology (ASPC) "Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors - 2022" is a summary document regarding cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. This 2022 update provides summary tables of ten things to know about 10 CVD risk factors and builds upon the foundation of prior annual versions of "Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors" published since 2020. This 2022 version provides the perspective of ASPC members and includes updated sentinel references (i.e., applicable guidelines and select reviews) for each CVD risk factor section. The ten CVD risk factors include unhealthful dietary intake, physical inactivity, dyslipidemia, pre-diabetes/diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, considerations of select populations (older age, race/ethnicity, and sex differences), thrombosis (with smoking as a potential contributor to thrombosis), kidney dysfunction and genetics/familial hypercholesterolemia. Other CVD risk factors may be relevant, beyond the CVD risk factors discussed here. However, it is the intent of the ASPC "Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors - 2022" to provide a tabular overview of things to know about ten of the most common CVD risk factors applicable to preventive cardiology and provide ready access to applicable guidelines and sentinel reviews.

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Bempedoic Acid in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease and/or Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia (from the CLEAR Harmony Open-Label Extension Study).

Limited data exist on the long-term safety and efficacy of bempedoic acid, an adenosine triphosphate-citrate lyase inhibitor, for lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). This 78-week, phase 3, open-label extension (OLE) study followed the CLEAR Harmony phase 3 study, in which patients were randomized 2:1 to bempedoic acid or placebo for 52 weeks; during the OLE, patients who received bempedoic acid continued treatment (≤130 weeks) and patients who received placebo initiated bempedoic acid (≤78 weeks). Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events, adverse events of special interest, and clinical laboratory abnormalities. Efficacy assessments included % change from the parent study baseline in LDL-C, other lipid parameters, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP). Of 1,462 patients who enrolled in the OLE study, 970 received bempedoic acid in the parent study; laboratory abnormalities and reductions in LDL-C, other lipid parameters, and hsCRP observed in the parent study remained stable through 130 weeks of treatment. On initiation of bempedoic acid treatment, 492 patients who received placebo in the parent study experienced reductions in LDL-C, other lipid parameters, and hsCRP, mirroring reductions observed in patients who received bempedoic acid in the parent study who remained stable through 78 weeks of therapy. During the OLE, incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and adverse events of special interest were comparable in patients who received 130 weeks (78%) versus 78 weeks (78%) of bempedoic acid treatment. In conclusion, bempedoic acid was generally well tolerated and demonstrated sustained efficacy with up to 2.5 years of continuous treatment. Bempedoic acid safety profiles were similar between the parent and OLE studies.

Effectiveness of a Novel ω-3 Krill Oil Agent in Patients With Severe Hypertriglyceridemia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Intense interest exists in novel ω-3 formulations with high bioavailability to reduce blood triglyceride (TG) levels. Objective: To determine the phase 3 efficacy and safety of a naturally derived krill oil with eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid as both phospholipid esters (PLs) and free fatty acids (FFAs) (ω-3-PL/FFA [CaPre]), measured by fasting TG levels and other lipid parameters in severe hypertriglyceridemia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study pooled the results of 2 identical randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. TRILOGY 1 (Study of CaPre in Lowering Very High Triglycerides) enrolled participants at 71 US centers from January 23, 2018, to November 20, 2019; TRILOGY 2 enrolled participants at 93 US, Canadian, and Mexican centers from April 6, 2018, to January 9, 2020. Patients with fasting TG levels from 500 to 1500 mg/dL, with or without stable treatment with statins, fibrates, or other agents to lower cholesterol levels, were eligible to participate. Interventions: Randomization (2.5:1.0) to ω-3-PL/FFA, 4 g/d, vs placebo (cornstarch) for 26 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the mean percentage of change in TG levels at 12 weeks; persistence at 26 weeks was the key secondary outcome. Other prespecified secondary outcomes were effects on levels of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C), HDL-C, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C); safety and tolerability; and TG level changes in prespecified subgroups. Results: A total of 520 patients were randomized, with a mean (SD) age of 54.9 (11.2) years (339 men [65.2%]), mean (SD) body mass index of 31.5 (5.1), and baseline mean (SD) TG level of 701 (222) mg/dL. Two hundred fifty-six patients (49.2%) were of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity; 275 (52.9%) had diabetes; and 248 (47.7%) were receiving statins. In the intention-to-treat analysis, TG levels were reduced by 26.0% (95% CI, 20.5%-31.5%) in the ω-3-PL/FFA group and 15.1% (95% CI, 6.6%-23.5%) in the placebo group at 12 weeks (mean treatment difference, -10.9% [95% CI, -20.4% to -1.5%]; P = .02), with reductions persisting at 26 weeks (mean treatment difference, -12.7% [95% CI, -23.1% to -2.4%]; P = .02). Compared with placebo, ω-3-PL/FFA had no significant effect at 12 weeks on mean treatment differences for non-HDL-C (-3.2% [95% CI, -8.0% to 1.6%]; P = .18), VLDL-C (-3.8% [95% CI, -12.2% to 4.7%]; P = .38), HDL-C (0.7% [95% CI, -3.7% to 5.1%]; P = .77), or LDL-C (4.5% [95% CI, -5.9% to 14.8%]; P = .40) levels; corresponding differences at 26 weeks were -5.8% (95% CI, -11.3% to -0.3%; P = .04) for non-HDL-C levels, -9.1% (95% CI, -21.5% to 3.2%; P = .15) for VLDL-C levels, 1.9% (95% CI, -4.8% to 8.6%; P = .57) for HDL-C levels, and 6.3% (95% CI, -12.4% to 25.0%; P = .51) for LDL-C levels. Effects on the primary end point did not vary significantly by age, sex, race and ethnicity, country, qualifying TG level, diabetes, or fibrate use but tended to be larger among patients taking statins or cholesterol absorption inhibitors at baseline (mean treatment difference, -19.5% [95% CI, -34.5% to -4.6%]; P = .08 for interaction) and with lower (less than median) baseline blood eicosapentaenoic acid plus docosahexaenoic acid levels (-19.5% [95% CI, -33.8% to -5.3%]; P = .08 for interaction). ω-3-PL/FFA was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that of placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that ω-3 -PL/FFA, a novel krill oil-derived ω-3 formulation, reduced TG levels and was safe and well tolerated in patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03398005 and NCT03361501.

Obesity definition, diagnosis, bias, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and telehealth: An Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) 2022.

Background: The Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) regarding definition, diagnosis, bias, standard operating procedures (SOPs) and telehealth is intended to provide clinicians an overview of obesity medicine and provide basic organizational tools towards establishing, directing, managing, and maintaining an obesity medical practice. Methods: This CPS is based upon published scientific citations, clinical perspectives of OMA authors, and peer review by Obesity Medicine Association leadership. Results: OMA has defined obesity as: "A chronic, progressive, relapsing, and treatable multi-factorial, neurobehavioral disease, wherein an increase in body fat promotes adipose tissue dysfunction and abnormal fat mass physical forces, resulting in adverse metabolic, biomechanical, and psychosocial health consequences." While body mass index may be sufficiently diagnostic for populations and many patients, accurate diagnosis of adiposity in an individual may require anthropometric assessments beyond body weight alone (e.g., waist circumference, percent body fat, and android/visceral fat). Obesity complications can be categorized as "sick fat disease" (adiposopathy) and/or "fat mass disease." Obesity complications predominantly of fat mass origins include sleep apnea and orthopedic conditions. Obesity complications due to adiposopathic endocrinopathies and/or immunopathies include cardiovascular disease, cancer, elevated blood sugar, elevated blood pressure, dyslipidemia, fatty liver, and alterations in sex hormones in both males (i.e., hypogonadism) and females (i.e., polycystic ovary syndrome). Obesity treatment begins with proactive steps to avoid weight bias, including patient-appropriate language, office equipment, and supplies. To help manage obesity and its complications, this CPS provides a practical template for an obesity medicine practice, creation of standard operating procedures, and incorporation of the OMA "ADAPT" method in telehealth (Assessment, Diagnosis, Advice, Prognosis, and Treatment). Conclusions: The OMA CPS regarding "Obesity Definition, Diagnosis, Bias, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), and Telehealth" is one in a series of OMA CPSs designed to assist clinicians care for patients with the disease of obesity.

Anti-Obesity Medications and Investigational Agents: An Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) 2022.

Background: This "Anti-Obesity Medications and Investigational Agents: An Obesity Medicine Association Clinical Practice Statement 2022" is intended to provide clinicians an overview of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved anti-obesity medications and investigational anti-obesity agents in development. Methods: The scientific information for this Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is based upon published scientific citations, clinical perspectives of OMA authors, and peer review by the Obesity Medicine Association leadership. Results: This CPS describes pharmacokinetic principles applicable to those with obesity, and discusses the efficacy and safety of anti-obesity medications [e.g., phentermine, semaglutide, liraglutide, phentermine/topiramate, naltrexone/bupropion, and orlistat, as well as non-systemic superabsorbent oral hydrogel particles (which is technically classified as a medical device)]. Other medications discussed include setmelanotide, metreleptin, and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate. Data regarding the use of combination anti-obesity pharmacotherapy, as well as use of anti-obesity pharmacotherapy after bariatric surgery are limited; however, published data support such approaches. Finally, this CPS discusses investigational anti-obesity medications, with an emphasis on the mechanisms of action and summary of available clinical trial data regarding tirzepatide. Conclusion: This "Anti-Obesity Medications and Investigational Agents: An Obesity Medicine Association Clinical Practice Statement 2022" is one of a series of OMA CPSs designed to assist clinicians in the care of patients with pre-obesity/obesity.

Bariatric surgery, gastrointestinal hormones, and the microbiome: An Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) 2022.

Background: This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is intended to provide clinicians an overview of bariatric surgery (i.e., bariatric procedures that improve metabolic disease are often termed "metabolic and bariatric surgery"), gastrointestinal hormones, and the microbiome as they relate to patients with obesity. Methods: The scientific information for this CPS is based upon published scientific citations, clinical perspectives of OMA authors, and peer review by the Obesity Medicine Association leadership. Results: This CPS includes the pros and cons of the most common types of bariatric procedures; the roles of gastrointestinal (GI) hormones in regulating hunger, digestion, and postabsorptive nutrient metabolism; and the microbiome's function and relationship with body weight. This CPS also describes patient screening for bariatric surgery, patient care after bariatric surgery, and treatment of potential nutrient deficiencies before and after bariatric surgery. Finally, this CPS explores the interactions between bariatric surgery, GI hormones, and the microbiome. Conclusions: This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) regarding bariatric surgery, gastrointestinal hormones, and the microbiome is one of a series of OMA CPSs designed to assist clinicians in the care of patients with the disease of obesity. Implementation of appropriate care before and after bariatric surgery, as well as an awareness of GI hormones and the microbiome, may improve the health of patients with obesity, especially patients with adverse fat mass and adiposopathic metabolic consequences.

Cancer and Obesity: An Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) 2022.

Background: This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) provides an overview of cancer and increased body fat. Methods: The scientific information for this CPS is based upon published scientific citations, clinical perspectives of OMA authors, and peer review by the Obesity Medicine Association leadership. Results: Topics include the increased risk of cancers among patients with obesity, cancer risk factor population-attributable fractions, genetic and epigenetic links between obesity and cancer, adiposopathic and mechanistic processes accounting for increased cancer risk among patients with obesity, the role of oxidative stress, and obesity-related cancers based upon Mendelian randomization and observational studies. Other topics include nutritional and physical activity principles for patients with obesity who either have cancer or are at risk for cancer, and preventive care as it relates to cancer and obesity. Conclusions: Obesity is the second most common preventable cause of cancer and may be the most common preventable cause of cancer among nonsmokers. This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) on cancer is one of a series of OMA CPSs designed to assist clinicians in the care of patients with the disease of obesity. Patients with obesity are at greater risk of developing certain types of cancers, and treatment of obesity may influence the risk, onset, progression, and recurrence of cancer in patients with obesity.

Nutrition and physical activity: An Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement 2022.

Background: This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) on Nutrition and Physical Activity provides clinicians an overview of nutrition and physical activity principles applicable to the care of patients with increased body fat, especially those with adverse fat mass and adiposopathic metabolic consequences. Methods: The scientific information and clinical guidance is based upon referenced evidence and derived from the clinical perspectives of the authors. Results: This OMA CPS on Nutrition and Physical Activity provides basic clinical information regarding carbohydrates, proteins, fats (including trans fats, saturated fats, polyunsaturated fats, and monounsaturated fats), general principles of healthful nutrition, nutritional factors associated with improved health outcomes, and food labels. Included are the clinical implications of isocaloric substitution of refined carbohydrates with saturated fats and vice-versa, as well as definitions of low-calorie, very low-calorie, carbohydrate-restricted, and fat-restricted dietary intakes. Specific dietary plans discussed include carbohydrate-restricted diets, fat-restricted diets, very low-calorie diets, the Mediterranean diet, Therapeutic Lifestyle diet, Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH), ketogenic (modified Atkins) diet, Ornish diet, Paleo diet, vegetarian or vegan diet (whole food/plant-based), intermittent fasting/time restricted feeding, and commercial diet programs. This clinical practice statement also examines the health benefits of physical activity and provides practical pre-exercise medical evaluation guidance as well as suggestions regarding types and recommended amounts of dynamic (aerobic) training, resistance (anaerobic) training, leisure time physical activity, and non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). Additional guidance is provided regarding muscle physiology, exercise prescription, metabolic equivalent tasks (METS), and methods to track physical activity progress. Conclusion: This Obesity Medicine Association Clinical Practice Statement on Nutrition and Physical Activity provides clinicians an overview of nutrition and physical activity. Implementation of appropriate nutrition and physical activity in patients with pre-obesity and/or obesity may improve the health of patients, especially those with adverse fat mass and adiposopathic metabolic consequences.

Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors.

Given rapid advancements in medical science, it is often challenging for the busy clinician to remain up-to-date on the fundamental and multifaceted aspects of preventive cardiology and maintain awareness of the latest guidelines applicable to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. The "American Society for Preventive Cardiology (ASPC) Top Ten CVD Risk Factors 2021 Update" is a summary document (updated yearly) regarding CVD risk factors. This "ASPC Top Ten CVD Risk Factors 2021 Update" summary document reflects the perspective of the section authors regarding ten things to know about ten sentinel CVD risk factors. It also includes quick access to sentinel references (applicable guidelines and select reviews) for each CVD risk factor section. The ten CVD risk factors include unhealthful nutrition, physical inactivity, dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia, high blood pressure, obesity, considerations of select populations (older age, race/ethnicity, and sex differences), thrombosis/smoking, kidney dysfunction and genetics/familial hypercholesterolemia. For the individual patient, other CVD risk factors may be relevant, beyond the CVD risk factors discussed here. However, it is the intent of the "ASPC Top Ten CVD Risk Factors 2021 Update" to provide a succinct overview of things to know about ten common CVD risk factors applicable to preventive cardiology.

Role of Bempedoic Acid in Clinical Practice.

Many patients do not achieve optimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels with statins alone; others are unable to tolerate statin therapy. Additional non-statin treatment options including ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors, and bile acid sequestrants are often necessary to further reduce the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This review provides practical guidance as to the use of bempedoic acid to lower LDL-C and includes direction as to which patients may benefit and advice for safety monitoring during treatment. Bempedoic acid, a new class of agent, is a prodrug converted to bempedoyl-CoA by very long-chain acyl-CoA synthetase 1, an enzyme with high expression in the liver but that is undetectable in the skeletal muscle. Bempedoic acid inhibits the enzyme adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-citrate lyase, which lies two steps upstream from ß-hydroxy ß-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase in the cholesterol biosynthesis pathway. In clinical trials conducted in patients with or at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or familial heterozygous hypercholesterolemia, bempedoic acid in combination with statins and/or ezetimibe significantly reduced LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein compared with placebo. Bempedoic acid is generally well tolerated with no clinically meaningful increase in muscle-related symptoms relative to placebo, even in patients taking maximally tolerated statins. A small increase in serum uric acid (mean increase 0.8 mg/dL) is the most noteworthy adverse effect. Bempedoic acid provides an effective and generally well-tolerated medication to further reduce LDL-C in patients taking maximally tolerated statins or manage LDL-C levels in those who are unable to take statins. The potential for a reduced incidence of major cardiovascular events with bempedoic acid is being investigated in the CLEAR Outcomes trial, with results expected in 2023.

A regional analysis of payer and provider views on cholesterol management: PCSK9 inhibitors as an illustrative alignment model.

BACKGROUND: Multiple barriers exist for appropriate use of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 enzyme inhibitors (PCSK9i) in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolemia despite standard therapies. Among these barriers, high payer rejection rates and inadequate prior authorization (PA) documentation by providers hinder optimal use of PCSK9i. OBJECTIVES: To (a) identify and discuss provider and payer discordances on barriers to authorization and use of PCSK9i based on clinical and real-world evidence and (b) align understanding and application of clinical, cost, safety, and efficacy data of PCSK9i. METHODS: Local groups of 3 payers and 3 providers met in 6 separate locations across the United States through a collaborative project of AMCP and PRIME Education. Responses to selected pre- and postmeeting survey questions measured changes in attitudes and beliefs regarding treatment barriers, lipid thresholds for considering PCSK9i therapy, and tactics for improving PA processes. Statistical analysis of inter- and intragroup changes in attitudes were performed by Cox proportional hazards test and Fisher's exact test for < 5 variables. RESULTS: The majority of providers and payers (67%-78%) agreed that high patient copayments and inadequate PA documentation were significant barriers to PCSK9i usage. However, payers and providers differed on beliefs that current evidence does not support PCSK9i cost-effectiveness (6% providers, 56% payers; P = 0.003) and that PA presents excessive administrative burden (72% providers, 44% payers; P = 0.09) Average increases pre- to postmeeting were noted in provider beliefs that properly documented PA forms expedite access to PCSK9i (22%-50% increase) and current authorization criteria accurately distinguish patients who benefit most from PCSK9i (6%-22%). Payers decreased in their belief that current authorization criteria accurately distinguish benefiting patients (72%-50%). Providers and payers increased in their belief that PCSK9i are cost-effective (44%-61% and 28%-50%, respectively) and were more willing to consider PCSK9i at the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol threshold of > 70 mg/dL for patients with ASCVD (78%-83% and 44%-67%, respectively) or FH (22%-39% and 22%-33%). Payers were more agreeable to less stringent PA requirements for patients with FH (33%-72%, P = 0.019) and need for standardized PA requirements (50%-83%, P = 0.034); these considerations remained high (89%) among providers after the meeting. Most participants supported educational programs for patient treatment adherence (83%) and physician/staff PA processes (83%-94%). CONCLUSIONS: Provider and payer representatives in 6 distinct geographic locations provided recommendations to improve quality of care in patients eligible for PCSK9i. Participants also provided tactical recommendations for streamlining PA documentation processes and improving awareness of PCSK9i cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy. The majority of participants supported development of universal, standardized patient eligibility criteria and PA forms. DISCLOSURES: The study reported in this article was part of a continuing education program funded by an independent educational grant awarded by Sanofi US and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals to PRIME Education. The grantor had no role in the study design, execution, analysis, or reporting. AMCP received grant funding from PRIME to assist in the study, as well as in writing the manuscript. McCormick, Bhatt, Bays, Taub, Caldwell, Guerin, Steinhoff, and Ahmad received an honorarium from PRIME for serving as faculty for the continuing education program. McCormick, Bhatt, Bays, Taub, Caldwell, Guerin, Steinhoff, and Ahmad were involved as participants in the study. Bhatt discloses the following relationships: Advisory board: Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, Level Ex, Medscape Cardiology, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences; Board of directors: Boston VA Research Institute, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, TobeSoft; Chair: American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; Data monitoring committees: Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo), Population Health Research Institute; Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Vice chair, ACC Accreditation Committee), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today's Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (Secretary/Treasurer), WebMD (CME steering committees); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor), NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee (Chair), VA CART Research and Publications Committee (Chair); Research funding: Abbott, Afimmune, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Synaptic, The Medicines Company; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Cardiovascular Intervention: A Companion to Braunwald's Heart Disease); Site co-investigator: Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Svelte; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded research: FlowCo, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Takeda. Bays' research site has received research grants from 89Bio, Acasti, Akcea, Allergan, Alon Medtech/Epitomee, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Axsome, Boehringer Ingelheim, Civi, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Evidera, Gan and Lee, Home Access, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Lexicon, Matinas, Merck, Metavant, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Selecta, TIMI, and Urovant. Bays has served as a consultant/advisor for 89Bio, Amarin, Esperion, Matinas, and Gelesis, and speaker for Esperion. McCormick, Caldwell, Guerin, Ahmad, Singh, Moreo, Carter, Heggen, and Sapir have nothing to disclose.

Bempedoic acid safety analysis: Pooled data from four phase 3 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: An ongoing need exists for safe and effective lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) for patients unable to achieve desired lipid levels with current treatment options. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe the safety profile of bempedoic acid, an oral, first-in-class, adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-citrate lyase inhibitor that significantly reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels by 17.4%-28.5% vs placebo. METHODS: This was a pooled analysis of four phase 3, randomized (2:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients with hypercholesterolemia who required additional LDL-C lowering, despite stable maximally-tolerated LLT. Patients received 180 mg of bempedoic acid (n = 2424) or placebo (n = 1197) once daily for 12 to 52 weeks. Assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and clinical laboratory tests. RESULTS: Of 3621 patients (the median drug exposure: 363 days), exposure-adjusted TEAE rates were 87.1/100 and 82.9/100 person-years (PY) for bempedoic acid and placebo, respectively. No single TEAE influenced the difference in rates. TEAEs leading to discontinuation occurred at rates of 13.4/100 and 8.9/100 PY for bempedoic acid vs placebo, with the most common cause being myalgia, which occurred less frequently with bempedoic acid vs placebo (1.5/100 vs 2.0/100 PY). Rates of myalgia and muscle weakness were comparable vs placebo. Bempedoic acid was associated with mild increases in blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, and uric acid and decreases in hemoglobin. These laboratory abnormalities were apparent by week 4, stable over time, and reversible after treatment cessation. Gout incidence was 1.6/100 vs 0.5/100 PY in the bempedoic acid vs placebo groups. New-onset diabetes/hyperglycemia occurred less frequently with bempedoic acid vs placebo (4.7/100 vs 6.4/100 PY). The safety profile was consistent across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Bempedoic acid is generally safe and well tolerated among patients with hypercholesterolemia who require additional LLT.

Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors ("ASPC Top Ten - 2020").

Preventive cardiology involves understanding and managing multiple cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. Given the rapid advancements in medical science, it may be challenging for the busy clinician to remain up-to-date on the multifaceted and fundamental aspects of CVD prevention, and maintain awareness of the newest applicable guidelines. The "American Society for Preventive Cardiology (ASPC) Top Ten 2020" summarizes ten essential things to know about ten important CVD risk factors, listed in tabular formats. The ten CVD risk factors include unhealthful nutrition, physical inactivity, dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia, high blood pressure, obesity, considerations of select populations (older age, race/ethnicity, and gender), thrombosis/smoking, kidney dysfunction and genetics/familial hypercholesterolemia. For the individual patient, other CVD risk factors may be relevant, beyond the CVD risk factors discussed here. However, it is the intent of the "ASPC Top Ten 2020" to provide a succinct overview of things to know about ten common CVD risk factors applicable to preventive cardiology.

Safety of Alirocumab (A PCSK9 Monoclonal Antibody) from 14 Randomized Trials.

Previous individual trials of alirocumab (a PCSK9 monoclonal antibody) showed significant low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reductions with overall treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) rates comparable with controls. This analysis evaluated safety data from 14 trials (4 phase 2 and 10 phase 3, 8 to 104 weeks; n = 5,234), in 2 pools according to control (placebo/ezetimibe). Overall, 3,340 patients received alirocumab (4,029 patient-years' exposure), 1,276 received placebo, and 618 received ezetimibe. Incidence of deaths, serious TEAEs, discontinuations because of TEAEs, and overall TEAEs were similar between alirocumab and control groups. Alirocumab was associated with a higher incidence of local injection site reactions (7.4% vs 5.3% with placebo; 3.1% vs 2.3% with ezetimibe), pruritus (1.3% vs 0.4% placebo; 0.9% vs 0.5% ezetimibe), and upper respiratory tract infection signs and symptoms (2.1% vs 1.1% placebo; 1.3% vs 0.8% ezetimibe). Incidence of musculoskeletal, neurologic, neurocognitive, ophthalmologic, hepatic events, and TEAEs related to diabetes/diabetes complications was similar between alirocumab and control groups. In a prespecified analysis of phase 3 studies, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events (coronary heart disease death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and unstable angina requiring hospitalization) occurred in 1.8% alirocumab versus 2.6% placebo patients (hazard ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 1.11) and 2.8% alirocumab versus 1.5% ezetimibe patients (hazard ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 3.02). In conclusion, pooled safety data from 14 trials demonstrate that alirocumab is generally well tolerated with a favorable safety profile.