Lipid-lowering nutraceuticals update on scientific evidence.

: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the main cause of mortality worldwide. Risk factors of CVD can be classified into modifiable (smoking, hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia) through lifestyle changes or taking drug therapy and not modifiable (age, ethnicity, sex and family history). Elevated total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels have a lead role in the development of coronary heart disease (CHD), while high levels of high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) seem to have a protective role.The current treatment for dyslipidemia consists of lifestyle modification or drug therapy even if not pharmacological treatment should be always considered in addition to lipid-lowering medications.The use of lipid-lowering nutraceuticals alone or in association with drug therapy may be considered when the atherogenic cholesterol goal was not achieved.These substances can be classified according to their mechanisms of action into natural inhibitors of intestinal cholesterol absorption, inhibitors of hepatic cholesterol synthesis and enhancers of the excretion of LDL-C. Nevertheless, many of them are characterized by mixed or unclear mechanisms of action.The use of these nutraceuticals is suggested in individuals with borderline lipid profile levels or with drug intolerance, but cannot replace standard lipid-lowering treatment in patients at high, or very high CVD risk.Nutraceuticals can also have vascular effects, including improvement in endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness, as well as antioxidative properties. Moreover, epidemiological and clinical studies reported that in patients intolerant of statins, many nutraceuticals with demonstrated hypolipidemic effect are well tolerated.

Recent Clinical Trials Shed New Light on the Cardiovascular Benefits of Omega-3 Fatty Acids.

Three recent clinical trials have demonstrated the benefits of marine omega-3 fatty acids on cardiovascular disease end points. In the Vitamin D and Omega-3 Trial (VITAL), 840 mg/d of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) resulted in a 28% reduced risk for heart attacks, 50% reduced risk for fatal heart attacks, and 17% reduced risk for total coronary heart disease events. In the ASCEND trial (A Study of Cardiovascular Events in Diabetes), cardiovascular disease death was significantly reduced by 19% with 840 mg/d of EPA and DHA. However, the primary composite end points were not significantly reduced in either study. In REDUCE-IT (the Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial), there was a 25% decrease in the primary end point of major cardiovascular events with 4 g/d EPA (icosapent ethyl) in patients with elevated triglycerides (135-499 mg/dL) who also were taking a statin drug. For clinical practice, we now have compelling evidence of the cardiovascular benefits of omega-3 fatty acids. The findings of REDUCE-IT provide a strong rationale for prescribing icosapent ethyl for patients with hypertriglyceridemia who are on a statin. For primary prevention, the goal is to increase the population intake of omega-3 fatty acids to levels currently recommended, which translates to consuming at least one to two servings of fish/seafood per week. For individuals who prefer taking omega-3 fatty acid supplements, recent findings from clinical trials support the benefits for primary prevention.

Combined effect of individual and neighborhood socioeconomic status on mortality in patients with newly diagnosed dyslipidemia: A nationwide Korean cohort study from 2002 to 2013.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The study aims to determine whether dyslipidemia patients living in less affluent neighborhood are at a higher risk of mortality compared to those living in more affluent neighborhoods. METHODS AND RESULTS: A population-based cohort study was conducted using a stratified representative sampling from the National Health Insurance claim data from 2002 to 2013. The target subjects comprise patients newly diagnosed with dyslipidemia receiving medication. We performed a survival analysis using the Cox proportional hazard model. Of 11,946 patients with dyslipidemia, 1053 (8.8%) subjects died during the follow-up period. Of the dyslipidemia patients earning a middle-class income, the adjusted HR in less affluent neighborhoods was higher than that in the more affluent neighborhoods compared to the reference category of high individual SES in more affluent neighborhoods (less affluent; hazard ratio (HR) = 1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.35-1.99 vs. more affluent; HR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.20-1.81, respectively). We obtained consistent results in patients with lower income, wherein the adjusted HR in less affluent neighborhoods was higher than that in more affluent neighborhoods (less affluent; HR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.16-1.97 vs. more affluent; HR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.04-1.92, respectively). CONCLUSION: Living in a less affluent neighborhood contributes to higher mortality among dyslipidemia patients. The individual- and neighborhood-level variables cumulatively affect individuals such that the most at-risk individuals include those having both individual- and neighborhood-level risk factors. These findings raise important clinical and public health concerns and indicate that neighborhood SES approaches should be essentially considered in health-care policies similar to individual SES.

Current characteristics and management of ST elevation and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the Tokyo metropolitan area: from the Tokyo CCU network registered cohort.

Limited data exists on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) managed by a well-organized cardiac care network in a metropolitan area. We analyzed the Tokyo CCU network database in 2009-2010. Of 4329 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients including STEMI (n = 3202) and NSTEMI (n = 1127), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed in 88.8 % of STEMI and 70.4 % of NSTEMI patients. Mean onset-to-door and door-to-balloon times in STEMI patients were shorter than those in NSTEMI patients (167 vs 233 and 60 vs 145 min, respectively, p < 0.001). Coronary artery bypass graft surgery was performed in 4.2 % of STEMI and 11.4 % of NSTEMI patients. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in STEMI patients than NSTEMI patients (7.7 vs 5.1 %, p < 0.007). Independent correlates of in-hospital mortality were advanced age, low blood pressure, and high Killip classification, statin-treated dyslipidemia and PCI within 24 h were favorable predictors for STEMI. High Killip classification, high heart rate, and hemodialysis were significant predictors of in-hospital mortality, whereas statin-treated dyslipidemia was the only favorable predictor for NSTEMI. In conclusion, patients with MI received PCI frequently (83.5 %) and promptly (door-to-balloon time; 66 min), and had favorable in-hospital prognosis (in-hospital mortality; 7.0 %). In addition to traditional predictors of in-hospital death, statin-treated dyslipidemia was a favorable predictor of in-hospital mortality for STEMI and NSTEMI patients, whereas hemodialysis was the strongest predictor for NSTEMI patients.

[Analysis of cost-effectiveness of simvastatin versus atorvastatin in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events within the Brazilian public healthcare system]. / Análise de custo-efetividade da sinvastatina versus atorvastatina na prevenção secundária de eventos cardiovasculares no Sistema Único de Saúde Brasileiro.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to perform an economic evaluation analyzing the treatment with atorvastatin and simvastatin in comparison to placebo treatment, within the Brazilian Public Healthcare System (SUS) scenario, for patients with high risk of cardiovascular disease; analyzing if the additional cost related to statin treatment is justified by the clinical benefits expected, in terms of cardiovascular event and mortality reduction. METHODS: Cardiovascular event risk and mortality risk were used as outcomes. Statin efficacy at LDL-c and cardiovascular events levels lowering data was obtained from a systematic review of literature. A decision analytic model was developed to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing atorvastatin 10mg/day and simvastatin 40 mg/day to placebo treatment in patients with dyslipidemia in Brazil. The target population of this study was a hypothetic cohort of men and women with a mean age of 50 years old and high risk of cardiovascular disease. The model includes only direct costs obtained from Ambulatory and Hospital Information System and Price Database of Brazilian Ministry of Health. The comparative cost-effectiveness analysis itself was done through Excel spreadsheets covering a 5 -years time horizon. RESULTS: The result shows that atorvastatin 10mg/day in comparison to placebo has higher cost with higher effectiveness in the time horizon of 5 years (Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio of R$ 433.065,05 per life year gained). In this scenario atorvastatin is not cost effective in comparison to placebo. The simvastatin 40 mg/day appears to be a strategy with lower cost and higher effectiveness in comparison to placebo, in the time horizon analyzed (5 years). In the multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analysis, simvastatin showed 53% of the results in the quadrant with greater effectiveness and lower cost. CONCLUSIONS: This study is an important tool for public decision makers. The study can be used in the decision process of increasing cardiovascular disease treatment access with budgetary sustainability for Ministry of Health. In comparison to placebo, the results show that sinvastatin is a cost saving strategy while atorvastatin is not cost effective.

Treating dyslipidemia in the elderly.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The treatment of dyslipidemia has been dynamic over the past several years. Of special importance is the impact of recent clinical trial data on management strategies of dyslipidemia in the elderly. People 65 years and older are living longer and are the fastest growing subset of the US population, necessitating more attention to chronic disease conditions that manifest in this age group. This review addresses guidelines of lipid management, discusses data that support their use, and examines the benefits of lipid-lowering therapy in the elderly with attention to the chronic conditions that are common in this population. RECENT FINDINGS: Clinical trials completed since the publication of the 2001 National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines support the use of lipid-lowering therapy in the elderly population. Lipid-lowering therapy has not only proven to be generally safe in the elderly, but has also proven effective in helping manage the chronic disease conditions that are common in this age group. SUMMARY: The elderly segment of our population continues to grow. Along with this growth in population is a growth in incidence of cardiovascular disease, the metabolic syndrome, chronic kidney disease, cerebrovascular disease, and diabetes mellitus. There is no known panacea for managing these chronic disease conditions; however, lipid-lowering therapy has been shown to prevent or delay the progression of these diseases and the mortality and morbidity that accompanies them.