Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Aug;12(8):e005460.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.005460. Epub 2019 Aug 15.

More- Versus Less-Intensive Lipid-Lowering Therapy

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

More- Versus Less-Intensive Lipid-Lowering Therapy

Toshiaki Toyota et al. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 Aug.

Abstract

Background: It has not been yet adequately addressed whether the addition of the nonstatin LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol)-lowering agents on top of statins has the same magnitude of risk reduction in the cardiovascular events as compared with more-intensive statin therapy.

Methods and results: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs (randomized controlled trials) comparing more- versus less-intensive lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) on clinical outcomes in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk. We included 23 studies involving 133 037 patients (more-intensive LLT: 67 691 patients and less-intensive LLT: 65 346 patients). We evaluated 3 types of more- versus less-intensive LLT including more versus less statins (57 672 patients), combination therapy of ezetimibe versus statins alone (20 688 patients), or a PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9) inhibitor with statins versus statins alone (54 677 patients). The odds for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; equivalent to the composite of coronary heart death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, or coronary revascularization) were significantly lower in the more-intensive LLT group compared with the less-intensive LLT group in the entire study population (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.88; P<0.001), and in all the 3 categories of more-intensive LLT strategies (more-intensive statin therapy: odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.90; P<0.001, ezetimibe: odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.96; P<0.001, and PCSK9 inhibitors: odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.90; P<0.001) with numerically greater relative odds reduction by more-intensive statin therapy and PCSK9 inhibitors than by ezetimibe. Odds reduction for MACE per 20 mg/dL LDL-C reduction was also different across the 3 types of more-intensive LLT (more-intensive statin therapy: 17.4%, ezetimibe: 11.0%, and PCSK9 inhibitors: 6.6%).

Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, more-intensive LLT as compared with less-intensive LLT was associated with significant odds reduction for MACE in the entire study population and in all the 3 categories of more-intensive LLT such as more-intensive statin therapy, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors. However, overall odds reduction for MACE and odds reduction for MACE per 20 mg/dL LDL-C reduction were different across the 3 types of more-intensive LLT. Registration: URLs: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ and http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr. Unique identifiers: PROSPERO: CRD42018081196, and UMIN-CTR: R000036229.

Keywords: PCSK9 inhibitors; ezetimibe; lipids; myocardial infarction; risk factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources