Lower Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Targets Research Articles

Real-World Use of Alirocumab: Experience from a Large Healthcare Provider.

With the emerging use of anti-PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies for lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, real-world evidence (RWE) is needed to evaluate drug effectiveness. This study aimed to characterize new users of alirocumab and evaluate its effectiveness in achieving LDL-C target levels. Included were patients initiating treatment with alirocumab from 1 August 2016 to 1 May 2020, with blood lipids evaluations during baseline (180 days prior to therapy initiation) and after 120 (±60) days of follow-up. Patients with treatment intensification during the follow-up period were excluded. LDL-C change from baseline and reaching LDL-C target levels, according to 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines, were evaluated. Among 623 included patients, 50.2% were men, the mean age was 65 years (±9 y), 62% were classified as very-high risk, and 76% had statin intolerance. During the follow-up, 65% (n = 407) were treated only with alirocumab. In 90% the initiation dose was 75 mg, and 21% were up-titrated. Alirocumab was associated with a 31.7% reduction in LDL-C, with 20.5% of patients reaching target levels. In this RWE study, alirocumab was used primarily as a single agent for eligible patients. Suboptimal use and adherence to therapy may have led to a lower LDL-C reduction compared to previous RCTs and most reported real-world studies.

Optimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol target level in Korean acute myocardial infarction patients (

BackgroundCurrent treatment guidelines for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) recommend lowering low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). However, previous clinical studies among East Asian AMI patients failed to prove its clinical efficacy of lipid lowering therapy based on Western target LDL-C level. Thus, the purpose of this study is directly to compare the clinical outcomes of target LDL-C < 70 mg/dL and < 55 mg/dL and identify optimal target LDL-C level and in Korean AMI patients. Methods and resultsA total of 2198 AMI patients in Korea AMI Registry – National Institute of Health were enrolled. Patients were initially divided into LDL-C non-target group (n = 1115) and target group (n = 1083). Successful achievement of follow up target LDL-C was defined as <70 mg/dL and ≥ 50% reduction from baseline. Target group patients were additionally divided to <70 mg/dL group (n = 698) and <55 mg/dL group (n = 385). Propensity score matching analysis was done in non-target vs. target group and <70 mg/dL vs. <55 mg/dL group. In the matched population, the risk of 3 years major adverse cardiac event (MACE) (13.0% vs 9.8%, HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.56–0.96; p = 0.025) was higher in non-target group patients. However, the risk of MACE was similar in <70 mg/dL and < 55 mg/dL group patients (10.0% vs 8.1%, HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.46–1.22; p = 0.247). ConclusionIn the present study, target LDL-C level of <70 mg/dL and ≥ 50% reduction from baseline level was associated with better clinical outcomes in Korean AMI patients. However, further lowering target LDL-C level of <55 mg/dL showed no additional benefits.

Guideline-directed low-density lipoprotein management in high-risk ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack admissions in China from 2015 to 2019.

BackgroundLowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is crucial for secondary stroke prevention in stroke patients with preexisting cardiovascular diseases (CVD) or cerebrovascular diseases (CeVD). However, data on attainment of guideline-recommended LDL-C levels are lacking.MethodsWe analyzed data from the Chinese Stroke Center Alliance (CSCA) program for patients with ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) hospitalized between August 2015 and July 2019. Participants were classified into different disease groups according to preexisting CeVD (stroke/TIA) or CVD [coronary heart disease (CHD) or myocardial infarction (MI)].ResultsOf 858,509 patients presenting with an acute stroke/TIA, 251,176 (29.3%) had a preexisting CeVD, 44,158 (5.1%) had preexisting CVD, 33,070 (3.9%) had concomitant preexisting CeVD and CVD, and 530,105 (61.7%) had no documented history of CeVD/CVD. Overall, only 397,596 (46.3%) met the target for LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L, 128,177 (14.9%) for LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L and 55,275 (6.4%) for LDL-C <1.4 mmol/L, and patients with concomitant CeVD and CVD had higher attainment rates than other disease groups (P<0.001). Despite improvements over time in the proportion of patients who attain LDL-C targets (P for trend <0.05), it remains suboptimal. Younger age, women, having a history of hypertension or dyslipidemia, current smoking or drinking, and being admitted to hospitals located in eastern China were associated with lower odds of meeting the LDL-C goals.ConclusionsOverall attainment of guideline LDL-C targets in a population of stroke/TIA patients is low and indicates the need for better management of dyslipidemia, particularly for high-risk stroke patients with pre-existing CeVD or CVD.

Real-world data on metabolic effects of PCSK9 inhibitors in a tertiary care center in patients with and without diabetes mellitus

BackgroundThe lipid-lowering and positive cardiovascular effect of proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors was shown in several studies, hence, they are more widely used in the lipid-lowering management of individuals with high cardiovascular risk. As real-world data are still scarce, specifically in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the aim of this retrospective analysis was to investigate the efficacy of PCSK9 inhibitors in lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in an outpatient clinic of a tertiary care center in routine care.MethodsA retrospective analysis of data extracted from the electronic patient record was performed. Patients who were routinely prescribed with PCSK9 inhibitor therapy (alirocumab or evolocumab) during the years 2016 and 2019 were included in the analysis. Characteristics of the patient population, the effects on LDL-C and HbA1c levels as well as subsequent cardiovascular events were assessed over an observation period of 18 months.ResultsWe identified 237 patients treated with PCSK9 inhibitors between January 2016 and September 2019. Almost all patients (97.5%) received PCSK9 inhibitors for secondary prevention. 26.2% of the population had a concomitant diabetes diagnosis. Intolerance to statins (83.1%), ezetimibe (44.7%) or both agents (42.6%) was reported frequently. Three months after initiation of PCSK9 inhibitor therapy, 61.2% of the patients achieved LDL-C levels < 70 mg/dl, and 44.1% LDL-C levels < 55 mg/dl. The median LDL-C was lowered from 141 mg/dl at baseline, to 60 mg/dl after 3 months and 66 mg/dl after 12 months indicating a reduction of LDL-C as follows: 57.5% after 3 months and 53.6% after 12 months. After 3 months of observation, target achievement of LDL-C was higher in patients with T2D compared to non-diabetes patients; < 55 mg/dl: 51% vs. 41.5%; < 70 mg/dl 69.4 vs. 58.5%. After 12 months even more pronounced target LDL achievement in T2D was demonstrated < 55 mg/dl: 58.8% vs. 30.1%; < 70 mg/dl 70.6 vs. 49.6%. Patients with insufficiently controlled T2D (HbA1c > 54 mmol/mol) had a higher reduction in LDL-C but still were more likely to subsequent cardiovascular events.ConclusionsSignificant reductions in LDL-C and a high percentage of patients achieving recommended treatment targets were observed. The percentage of patients with T2D meeting recommended LDL-C targets was higher than in those without T2D. Still some patients did not achieve LDL-C levels as recommended in current guidelines. Special attention to the characteristics of these patients is required in the future to enable achievement of treatment goals and avoid adverse cardiovascular outcomes.

Attainment of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Targets Following Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduces cardiovascular risk. We sought to determine the proportion of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery patients that attain the guideline-recommended LDL-C targets.

Design of the randomized, placebo-controlled evolocumab for early reduction of LDL-cholesterol levels in patients with acute coronary syndromes (EVOPACS) trial.

Statins lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and improve clinical outcomes in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) often do not achieve LDL-C targets despite potent statin treatment, and have a particularly high risk of early recurrent events. Evolocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type (PCSK9)-inhibitor resulting in rapid, marked LDL-C reduction, has been studied in hypercholesterolemic subjects without CVD and stabilized patients with CVD; the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of this treatment initiated in the acute phase of ACS remain unknown. We report the design of evolocumab for early reduction of LDL-cholesterol levels in patients with ACS (EVOPACS), a phase-3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess the feasibility, safety, and LDL-C-lowering efficacy of evolocumab on top of atorvastatin 40 mg in patients with ACS. The primary endpoint is percent change in LDL-C from baseline to 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints are adverse events and serious adverse events. Against a background of beneficial cardiovascular effects of statins beyond LDL-C lowering and in view of preclinical evidence of similar effects of PCSK9 inhibition, the study will also address a variety of exploratory endpoints including the change in C-reactive protein and other inflammatory biomarkers; platelet reactivity; and occurrence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury and myocardial injury in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. An intracoronary imaging sub-study will investigate the change from baseline in the lipid core burden index in non-culprit lesions, as assessed by serial near-infrared spectroscopy. Recruitment began in January 2018 and enrollment of 308 patients is planned.

Predictors of LDL-cholesterol target value attainment differ in acute and chronic coronary heart disease patients: Results from DYSIS II Europe.

Patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and survivors of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are at very high risk for adverse cardiovascular events. Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) can reduce the risk, with effective lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) readily available; however, dyslipidemia remains prevalent throughout Europe. The observational Dyslipidemia International Study II (DYSIS II) aimed to identify unmet treatment needs in adult ACS and CHD patients. Data for the seven participating European countries are presented herein. The study was carried out from December 2012 to November 2014. Use of LLT and attainment of European-guideline-recommended LDL-C targets were assessed. For ACS patients, changes in lipid levels and LLT were evaluated 4 months post-hospitalization. Of the 4344 patients enrolled, 2946 were attending a physician visit for the assessment of stable CHD, while 1398 had been hospitalized for an ACS event. In both patient sets, mean LDL-C levels were high (89.5 and 112.5 mg/dl, respectively) and <70 mg/dl target attainment extremely poor. The mean daily statin dosage (normalized to atorvastatin potency) was 27 ± 20 mg for CHD and 22 ± 17 mg for ACS patients. Treatment was intensified slightly for ACS subjects after hospitalization, with the dosage reaching 35 ± 24 mg/day. LDL-C target attainment was higher by the end of the 4-month follow up (30.9% and 41.5% for patients on LLT and without LLT at baseline, respectively; p < 0.05). Elevated blood cholesterol levels are highly prevalent across Europe, with low numbers of coronary patients reaching their recommended LDL-C target. While use of LLT is widespread, there is significant scope for intensifying treatment.

Treatment Strategy for Dyslipidemia in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Focus on Old and New Drugs.

Prevention and treatment of dyslipidemia should be considered as an integral part of individual cardiovascular prevention interventions, which should be addressed primarily to those at higher risk who benefit most. To date, statins remain the first-choice therapy, as they have been shown to reduce the risk of major vascular events by lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). However, due to adherence to statin therapy or statin resistance, many patients do not reach LDL-C target levels. Ezetimibe, fibrates, and nicotinic acid represent the second-choice drugs to be used in combination with statins if lipid targets cannot be reached. In addition, anti-PCSK9 drugs (evolocumab and alirocumab) provide an effective solution for patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and statin intolerance at very high cardiovascular risk. Recently, studies demonstrated the effects of two novel lipid-lowering agents (lomitapide and mipomersen) for the management of homozygous FH by decreasing LDL-C values and reducing cardiovascular events. However, the costs for these new therapies made the cost–effectiveness debate more complicated.

Circulation : Clinical Summaries

<i>Circulation</i> : Clinical Summaries

Achievement of Dual Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein Targets More Frequent With the Addition of Ezetimibe to Simvastatin and Associated With Better Outcomes in IMPROVE-IT

Statins lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP); addition of ezetimibe to statins further reduces LDL-C and hs-CRP. An analysis of the relationship between achieved LDL-C and hs-CRP targets and outcomes for simvastatin and ezetimibe/simvastatin was prespecified in Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT). The IMPROVE-IT trial randomly assigned 18 144 patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome to simvastatin or ezetimibe/simvastatin. LDL-C and hs-CRP were measured at baseline and 1 month after randomization. Outcomes were assessed in those achieving one or both of the prespecified targets of LDL-C<70 mg/dL and hs-CRP<2 mg/L versus achieving neither target, adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics. An exploratory analysis examined targets of LDL-C<50 mg/dL and hs-CRP<1 mg/L. Patients meeting both targets at baseline, with no 1-month values, or with end points before 1 month were excluded. Of 15 179 patients, 39% achieved the dual LDL-C (<70 mg/dL) and hs-CRP (<2 mg/L) targets at 1 month, 14% met neither target, 14% met only the hs-CRP target, and 33% met only the LDL-C target. Those achieving dual targets had lower primary end point rates than those meeting neither target (cardiovascular death, major coronary event, or stroke; 38.9% versus 28.0%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.73; 0.66-0.81; P<0.001). More patients treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin met dual targets than those treated with simvastatin alone (50% versus 29%, P<0.001). The association of dual-target attainment with improved outcomes was similar irrespective of treatment assignment (P-interaction=0.65). Similar findings were observed using the exploratory targets. Significantly more patients treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin met prespecified and exploratory dual LDL-C and hs-CRP targets than patients treated with simvastatin alone. Reaching both LDL-C and hs-CRP targets was associated with improved outcomes after multivariable adjustment. URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00202878.

Dyslipidemia

Dyslipidemia

Can LDL-cholesterol targets be achieved in a population at high risk? Results of the non-interventional study ACT II

:Objective:Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels can reduce vascular clinical endpoints in outcome studies. Despite this evidence, previous cross-sectional analyses reported a mean LDL-C target attainment of <50%. This non-interventional, longitudinal study aimed to asses the rate of target attainment by intensified LDL-C lowering therapy in a high-risk population under routine medical care.Design:This was an open-label, non-interventional, observational, non-comparative longitudinal study.Methods:A total of 1682 outpatients at high cardiovascular risk, not at LDL-C target despite statin therapy, were documented. Treating physicians administered an intensified therapy at their discretion. In all, 794 patients completed all the examinations at baseline after 3 and 12 months. The achieved LDL-C reductions was evaluated based on expert consensus reflecting the 2007 guidelines issued by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) on cardiovascular disease prevention.Registration:www.clinicaltrials.gov, identification number NCT 01381679Results:In the study, 40.3% achieved the individual LDL-C target of <1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dl) or <2.5 mmol/L (100 mg/dl); 73% received a simvastatin/ezetimibe fixed-dose combination; 3% received add-on ezetimibe and 23% statin therapy at maintained or increased doses; 1% received no drug treatment at all. LDL-C declined after 12 months by −31.0% (ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.67–0.71, p < 0.001), triglycerides by −11.8% (ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.85–0.91, p < 0.01) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) increased by 11.9% (ratio 1.12, 95% CI 1.10–1.14, p < 0.01).Conclusion:Intensified therapy was effective, but target attainment was still low at 40.3% or 13.9% with regard to the new 2011 guidelines issued by the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) and the ESC on dyslipidemias. Enhanced screening of LDL-C levels and the use of statins at highest tolerated dose and concomitant combination therapy is recommended in order to achieve LDL-C targets outlined by current guidelines. Limitations include the design as a non-interventional study. However, this study reflects real life conditions.

Differential Impacts of Blood Pressure and Lipid Lowering on Regression of Ventricular and Arterial Mass

The relative impacts of lowering blood pressure versus lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol on regression of ventricular and arterial mass have not been systematically examined. Changes in left ventricular mass and arterial mass (common carotid artery cross-sectional area) after 36 months of simultaneous lowering of systolic blood pressure and LDL cholesterol were examined in the Stop Atherosclerosis in Native Diabetics Trial of standard versus aggressive LDL cholesterol and blood pressure targets in American Indians with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The 2 treatment groups were combined to examine changes in left ventricular and arterial mass over a spectrum of achieved blood pressure and lipid levels. Among the combined group of 413 Stop Atherosclerosis in Native Diabetics Trials participants, systolic blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, and left ventricular mass were all significantly reduced, whereas arterial mass significantly increased, after 36 months of therapy ( P &lt;0.001 for all). In linear regression models, a decrease in arterial mass was significantly related to achieved systolic blood pressure and, to a lesser extent, achieved LDL cholesterol, after adjustment for important covariates. Left ventricular mass progressively decreased with lower achieved levels of systolic blood pressure, independent of baseline levels of left ventricular mass. In conclusion, achieved levels of systolic blood pressure are important determinants of the extent of regression of arterial and ventricular mass during prolonged therapy in diabetic individuals. Achieved levels of LDL cholesterol influence regression of arterial but not ventricular mass. Our findings suggest that there is no threshold of systolic blood pressure below which regression of cardiovascular target organ damage cannot be achieved.

Relationship of glycemia control to lipid and blood pressure lowering and atherosclerosis: the SANDS experience

Objectives Cardiovascular disease prevention for patients with type 2 diabetes is accomplished through hypertension and dyslipidemia management. Although studies have established strategies for lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and blood pressure (BP), none have examined whether glycemia influences ability to achieve lipid and BP targets. This post hoc analysis from the Stop Atherosclerosis in Native Diabetics Study examines the role of baseline glycemia in achieving standard and aggressive targets and outcomes after 36 months. Methods Diabetic individuals aged >40 years with no cardiovascular events ( n=499) were randomized to aggressive versus standard targets for LDL-C, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and systolic BP (SBP). Management algorithms were used for both groups. Carotid ultrasound and echocardiography were performed at baseline and after 36 months. Results No differences were observed in baseline hemoglobin A1c between treatment groups nor any significant change in A1c after 36 months in either group. Baseline A1c, however, was significantly and negatively related to achieving LDL-C ( P=.007), non-HDL-C ( P=.03) and SBP targets ( P=.007) and to changes in LDL-C ( P=.007), non-HDL-C ( P=.03) and SBP ( P=.001) in both groups. Baseline A1c failed to predict progression of carotid intima medial thickness (CIMT) ( P=.42) or left ventricular mass index (LVMI) ( P=.10), nor was it related to the effects of lipid and BP lowering on CIMT and LVMI over 36 months. Conclusions In diabetic adults with no cardiovascular disease events, A1c was negatively associated with ability to achieve LDL-C, non-HDL-C and SBP goals but was not independently related to treatment-associated changes in CIMT or LVMI over 36 months.

Variation in the Net Benefit of Aggressive Cardiovascular Risk Factor Control Across the US Population of Patients With Diabetes Mellitus

Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and blood pressure (BP) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) can significantly reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, to our knowledge, previous studies have not assessed variability in both the benefit and harm from pursuing LDL-C and BP target levels. Our sample comprised individuals 30 to 75 years old with DM participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III. We used Monte Carlo methods to simulate a treat-to-target strategy, in which patients underwent treatment intensification with the goal of achieving LDL-C and BP target levels of 100 mg/dL and 130/80 mm Hg, respectively. Patients received up to 5 titrations of statin therapy and 8 titrations of antihypertensive therapy. Treatment adverse effects and polypharmacy risks and burdens were incorporated using disutilities. Health outcomes were simulated using a Markov model. Treating to targets resulted in gains of 1.50 (for LDL-C) and 1.35 (for BP) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of lifetime treatment-related benefit, which declined to 1.42 and 1.16 QALYs after accounting for treatment-related harms. Most of the total benefit was limited to the first few steps of medication intensification or to tight control for a limited group of very high-risk patients. However, because of treatment-related disutility, intensifying beyond the first step (LDL-C) or third step (BP) resulted in either limited benefit or net harm for patients with below-average risk. The benefits and harms from aggressive risk factor modification vary widely across the US population of individuals with DM, depending on a patient's underlying CVD risk, suggesting that a personalized approach could maximize a patient's net benefit from treatment.

Cardiovascular risk reduction: What do recent trials with rosuvastatin tell us?

Abundant evidence from large-scale clinical trials supports the importance of lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to decrease the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. The LDL-C targets in various guidelines remain important treatment goals but, even in trials where statin therapy achieves substantial reduction of LDL-C, a significant number of CVD events still occur and the residual risk remains high. These findings suggest that lipid parameters other than LDL-C, such as high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, and LDL particle size, can influence the risk of CVD. On this basis, other strategies that can alter the lipid profile, in particular raising HDL.C, may provide additional benefits. Other factors such as HDL-C functionality and susceptibility to oxidation and inflammatory factors can also influence cardiovascular risk. In addition to the modifications of the lipid profile, statins have cholesterol-independent beneficial pleiotropic effects. The contribution of these effects to event reduction is not yet fully understood. Recently, the body of evidence has expanded to support the use of intensive statin therapy in broader patient populations. The JUPITER trial has shown the benefit of intensive statin treatment in low-risk subjects with high levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and average levels of LDL-C. Unlike the setting of primary and secondary prevention, the results of statin trials in patients with heart failure have shown no clear benefit in terms of survival. The recently published AURORA trial was carried out to investigate the effect of rosuvastatin in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing chronic hemodialysis. In this trial no benefit on cardiovascular events was shown with statin therapy. In conclusion, large outcomes trials have clearly shown that statin treatments have a favorable benefit/risk profile in a large range of patients at different levels of risk, with the exception of patients with heart failure and those with renal disease undergoing dialysis. Further evidence is needed on the role of therapeutic strategies on the so-called residual risk.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients treated with atypical antipsychotics: Missed targets and lost opportunities

Background The treatment of psychotic disorders with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) has been linked to an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). Lowering low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) to individualized targets of 100, 130 or 160 mg/dl reduces the risk of CHD. We determined the prevalence of above-target LDL-C and its management during psychiatric hospitalization. Methods 364 hospitalized adults receiving SGAs underwent LDL-C target assessments. Records of patients with above-target LDL-C were searched for dietary or pharmacologic treatments and referrals for medical consultation. Results Above-target LDL-C levels were present in 100 (27.5%) patients and were associated with higher total cholesterol, lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, older age, higher systolic blood pressure, smoking and male gender ( r 2: 0.53; p < 0.0001). Only 32.0% of these patients received appropriate interventions during hospital stays of 27.6 ± 23.3 days. Conclusions A substantial number of SGA-treated patients have above-target LDL-C, but do not receive interventions to reduce the risk of CHD.

Lower is better: Implications of the Treating to New Targets (TNT) study for Canadian patients

Recent clinical trials have indicated that lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels below currently recommended targets results in favourable surrogate and clinical end points. The Treating to New Targets (TNT) study now confirms that aggressive cholesterol lowering to a mean LDL-C of 2.0 mmol/L with atorvastatin 80 mg daily, compared with the previous target of 2.5 mmol/L with atorvastatin 10 mg daily, results in improved clinical outcomes in high-risk patients with coronary artery disease. A lower LDL-C target of less than 2.0 mmol/L will present therapeutic challenges, because approximately only one-half of high-risk patients will achieve this target using monotherapy with the newer and more powerful statins. Furthermore, registry data show that one-half of these patients are not even achieving the current LDL-C target of 2.5 mmol/L. Causes of the care gap are discussed and possible remedies to achieve the new lower targets are suggested.

Lipid-lowering treatment in coronary artery disease: how low should cholesterol go?

The randomised clinical trial data, which supports preventing coronary heart disease (CHD) events by lowering low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, is substantial, consistent and highly significant. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), which are the preferred medications for lowering LDL-C levels, are well tolerated, with greater efficacy than other lipid-altering medications. In 1993, the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines recommended LDL-C target levels to be achieved with therapy in high-risk individuals. In particular, the LDL-C goal of therapy in patients with CHD was < or = 100 mg/dl (2.6 mmol/L), with no specific guidance as to the lower limit or whether additional clinical benefit could be expected. Because little clinical trial data existed at that time to offer support, and because some epidemiological data raised concern about the potential detriments associated with very low total cholesterol and LDL-C levels, the NCEP Adult Treatment Panel remained appropriately vague on the 'how low should you go' question. In the last few years, several additional clinical trials have provided sufficient efficacy and safety data to re-examine that question. Analyses of on-treatment LDL-C levels and subsequent CHD events from three landmark trials with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors suggest that progressively lower LDL-C levels are associated with lower CHD events in a curvilinear fashion. The Post Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (Post-CABG) trial and Atorvastatin Versus Revascularisation Trial (AVERT) examined a more intensive versus less intensive drug regimen for LDL-C reduction, and concluded that the more aggressively treated patients had better angiographic and end-point outcomes. Most importantly, there did not appear to be any change in noncardiovascular end-points associated with lower LDL-C levels. In several ongoing clinical trials, patients with CHD have been randomised to receive HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors with targets for LDL-C levels of 100 mg/dl versus 75 mg/dl (1.94 mmol/L). These trials have sufficient patient numbers and power to definitely determine if reducing LDL-C levels to approximately 75 mg/dl can provide an acceptable benefit-to-risk-ratio.