Intuitive Modification of the Friedewald Formula for Calculation of LDL-Cholesterol.

Background: High LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) is an established risk factor for cardiovascular disease and is considered an important therapeutic target. It can be measured directly or calculated from the results of other lipid tests. The Friedewald formula is the most widely used formula for calculating LDL-C. We modified the Friedewald formula for a more accurate and practical estimation of LDL-C. Methods: Datasets, including measured triglyceride, total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, and LDL-C concentrations were collected and assigned to derivation and validation sets. The datasets were further divided into five groups based on triglyceride concentrations. In the modified formula, LDL-C was defined as total cholesterol - HDL-cholesterol - (triglyceride/adjustment factor). For each group, the adjustment factor that minimized the difference between measured LDL-C and calculated LDL-C using modified formula was obtained. For validation, measured LDL-C and LDL-C calculated using the modified formula (LDL-CM), Friedewald formula (LDL-CF), Martin-Hopkins formula (LDL-CMa), and Sampson formula (LDL-CS) were compared. Results: In the derivation set, the adjustment factors were 4.7, 5.9, 6.3, and 6.4 for the groups with triglyceride concentrations <100, 101-200, 201-300, and >300 mg/dL, respectively. In the validation set, the coefficient of determination (R2) between measured and calculated LDL-C was higher for LDL-CM than for LDL-CF (R2=0.9330 vs. 0.9206). The agreement according to the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III classification of LDL-C was 86.36%, 86.08%, 86.82%, and 86.15% for LDL-CM, LDL-CF, LDL-CMa, and LDL-CS, respectively. Conclusions: We proposed a practical, improved LDL-C calculation formula by applying different factors depending on the triglyceride concentration.

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Active-controlled, Factorial Design, Phase III Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy of Pitavastatin and Ezetimibe Versus Monotherapy of Pitavastatin in Patients With Primary Hypercholesterolemia.

PURPOSE: Pitavastatin is a unique lipophilic statin with moderate efficacy in lowering LDL-C levels by 30% to 50% with a tolerable safety profile. However, the efficacy of adding ezetimibe to pitavastatin in patients with dyslipidemia has not been well investigated. Therefore, the objective of this double-blind, multicenter, randomized, Phase III study was to compare the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy with those of pitavastatin monotherapy in Korean patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: Korean men and women aged >19 and <80 years with primary hypercholesterolemia requiring medical treatment were included in this study. During the 8-week screening period, all patients were instructed to make therapeutic lifestyle changes. The screening period consisted of a 4-week washout period and a placebo run-in period (4-8 weeks). During treatment period I, patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 4 treatments: pitavastatin 2 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg, pitavastatin 2 mg, pitavastatin 4 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg, or pitavastatin 4 mg. The 8-week double-blind treatment period then commenced. Adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory data, and vital signs were assessed in all patients. FINDINGS: The percentages in LDL-C from baseline after 8 weeks of double-blind treatment decreased significantly in the pooled pitavastatin/ezetimibe (-52.8% [11.2%]) and pooled pitavastatin (-37.1% [14.1%]) groups. Treatment with pitavastatin/ezetimibe resulted in a significantly greater LDL-C-lowering effect than that with pitavastatin (difference, -15.8 mg/dL; 95% CI, -18.7 to -12.9; P < 0.001). The precentages of achieving LDL-C goal in pooled pitavastatin/ezetimibe and pooled pitavastatin groups were 94.2% and 69.1%, respectively (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the incidence of overall AEs and adverse drug reactions. Serious AEs were comparable between the groups. IMPLICATIONS: Pitavastatin and ezetimibe combinations effectively and safely decreased LDL-C levels by >50% in patients with dyslipidemia. The safety and tolerability of pitavastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy were comparable with those of pitavastatin monotherapy. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04584736.

Efficacy and Safety of Fenofibrate-Statin Combination Therapy in Patients With Inadequately Controlled Triglyceride Levels Despite Previous Statin Monotherapy: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Phase IV Study.

PURPOSE: Residual cardiovascular risk reduction by fenofibrate in patients with high serum triglyceride (TG) levels despite previous statin monotherapy is not well characterized. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of choline fenofibrate and statin in patients with inadequately controlled TG levels despite previous statin monotherapy. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study was conducted in Korea. A total of 133 patients with controlled LDL-C but elevated TG levels, already receiving statin monotherapy, were enrolled in the study, which was conducted from July 2018 to December 2019. Patients were randomly assigned to receive combination therapy with choline fenofibrate and statin or statin monotherapy in a 1:1 ratio. After 8 weeks of treatment, the lipid profiles and safety parameters of the patients in the 2 groups were compared. FINDINGS: The study included 127 patients (64 in the combination group and 63 in the control group) older than 19 years. After 8 weeks of therapy, mean serum TG levels significantly decreased from 269.8 to 145.5 mg/dL (P < 0.0001) in the combination therapy group, whereas no significant changes occurred in the statin monotherapy group (from 271.1 to 280.5 mg/dL). Contrarily, the mean serum HDLC levels significantly increased from 45.0 to 50.4 mg/dL (P = 0.0004) in the combination therapy group, whereas there were no significant changes in the monotherapy group (from 44.3 to 44.7 mg/dL). There were no additional serious adverse events in the combination therapy group compared with the statin monotherapy group. IMPLICATIONS: The combination therapy using choline fenofibrate and statin was found to be effective in serum TG control and likely tolerable in patients with high TG levels despite statin monotherapy. A larger study, conducted for a longer duration, is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this combination in reducing cardiovascular risk. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03874260.

Association of Lipoprotein(a) With Recurrent Ischemic Events Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the association between elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and risk of recurrent ischemic events in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Elevated levels of Lp(a) have been identified as an independent, possibly causal, risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in a general population study. METHODS: A prospective single-center registry was used to identify 12,064 patients with baseline Lp(a) measurements who underwent PCI between 2003 and 2013. The primary outcomes were a composite of cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke. RESULTS: From the registry, 3,747 (31.1%) patients had high Lp(a) (>30 mg/dL) and 8,317 (68.9%) patients had low Lp(a) (≤30 mg/dL). During a median follow-up of 7.4 years, primary outcomes occurred in 1,490 patients, and the incidence rates of primary outcomes were 2.0 per 100 person-years in the high-Lp(a) group and 1.6 per 100 person-years in the low-Lp(a) group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.30; P = 0.004). Increased risk of recurrent ischemic cardiovascular events in the high-Lp(a) group was consistent in various subgroups including patients receiving statin treatment at discharge (aHR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.03-1.34; P = 0.011). In addition, the risk of repeated revascularization was significantly higher in the high-Lp(a) group (aHR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.02-1.25; P = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated levels of Lp(a) were significantly associated with the recurrent ischemic events in patients who underwent PCI. This study provides a rationale for outcome trials to test Lp(a)-lowering therapy for secondary prevention in patients undergoing PCI.

Efficacy and safety of co-administered telmisartan/amlodipine and rosuvastatin in subjects with hypertension and dyslipidemia.

Single risk factors, such as hypertension and dyslipidemia, can combine to exacerbate the development and severity of cardiovascular disease. Treatment goals may be more effectively achieved if multiple disease factors are targeted with combination treatment. We enrolled 202 patients who were randomly divided into the following three groups: telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg, telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg, and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg. The primary efficacy variables were changes from baseline in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) between telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg at 8 weeks, and the percent changes from baseline in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol between telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg at 8 weeks. The secondary efficacy variables were changes in MSSBP, mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (MSDBP), LDL cholesterol and other lipid levels at 4 weeks and 8 weeks, as well as observed adverse events during follow-up. There were no significant differences between the three groups in demographic characteristics and no significant difference among the three groups in terms of baseline characteristics for the validity evaluation variables. The mean overall treatment compliance in the three groups was, respectively, 98.42%, 96.68%, and 98.12%, indicating strong compliance for all patients. The Least-Square (LS) mean (SE) for changes in MSSBP in the two (telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg) groups were -19.3 (2.68) mm Hg and -6.69 (2.76) mm Hg. The difference between the two groups was significant (-12.60 (2.77) mm Hg, 95% CI -18.06 to -7.14, P < .0001). The LS Mean for the percent changes from baseline in LDL cholesterol in the two (telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg) groups were -52.45 (3.23) % and 2.68 (3.15) %. The difference between the two groups was significant (-55.13 (3.20) %, 95% CI -61.45 to -48.81, P < .0001). There were no adverse events leading to discontinuation or death. Combined administration of telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg and rosuvastatin 20 mg for the treatment of hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia significantly reduces blood pressure and improves lipid control. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03067688.

Safety and Efficacy of Pitavastatin in Patients With Impaired Fasting Glucose and Hyperlipidemia: A Randomized, Open-labeled, Multicentered, Phase IV Study.

PURPOSE: Although the role of high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy in cardiovascular protection has broadened, concerns still exist about new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM), especially in vulnerable patients. This study aimed to compare the effect of high-dose (4 mg/d) and usual dose (2 mg/d) pitavastatin on glucose metabolism in patients with hyperlipidemia and impaired fasting glucose (IFG). METHODS: In this 12-month study, glucose tolerance and lipid-lowering efficacy of high-dose pitavastatin (4 mg [study group]) was compared with that of usual dose pitavastatin (2 mg [control group]) in patients with hyperlipidemia and IFG. The primary end point was the change of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) after 24 weeks of treatment. The secondary end points were as follows: (1) NODM within 1 year after treatment, (2) change of lipid parameters, (3) changes of adiponectin, and (4) change of blood glucose and insulin levels. FINDINGS: Of the total 417 patients screened, 313 patients with hypercholesterolemia and IFG were randomly assigned into groups. The mean (SD) change in HbA1c was 0.06% (0.20%) in the study group and 0.03% (0.22%) in the control group (P = 0.27). Within 1 year, 27 patients (12.3%) developed NODM, including 12 (10.6%) of 113 patients in the study group and 15 (14.2%) of 106 in the control group (P = 0.43). The study group had a significantly higher reduction of total cholesterol and LDL-C levels and a higher increase in apolipoprotein A1/apolipoprotein B ratio (0.68 [0.40] vs 0.51 [0.35], P < 0.01). IMPLICATIONS: The high-dose pitavastatin therapy did not aggravate glucose metabolism compared with the usual dose therapy. Moreover, it had a better effect on cholesterol-lowering and apolipoprotein distribution in the patients with hyperlipidemia and IFG.

Effects of pelvis-shoulders torsional separation style on kinematic sequence in golf driving.

The golfer's body (trunk/arms/club) can be modeled as an inclined axle-chain system and the rotations of its parts observed on the functional swing plane (FSP) can represent the actual angular motions closely. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of pelvis-shoulders torsional separation style on the kinematic sequences employed by the axle-chain system in golf driving. Seventy-four male skilled golfers (handicap ≤ 3) were assigned to five groups based on their shoulder girdle motion and X-factor stretch characteristics: Late Shoulder Acceleration, Large Downswing Stretch, Large Backswing Stretch, Medium Total Stretch, and Small Total Stretch. Swing trials were captured by an optical system and the hip-line, thorax, shoulder-line, upper-lever, club, and wrist angular positions/velocities were calculated on the FSP. Kinematic sequences were established based on the timings of the peak angular velocities (backswing and downswing sequences) and the backswing-to-downswing transition time points (transition sequence). The backswing and transition sequences were somewhat consistent across the groups, showing full or partial proximal-to-distal sequences with minor variations. The downswing sequence was inconsistent across the groups and the angular velocity peaks of the body segments were not significantly separated. Various swing characteristics associated with the separation styles influenced the motion sequences.

Use of fenofibrate on cardiovascular outcomes in statin users with metabolic syndrome: propensity matched cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether fenofibrate as add-on to statin treatment reduce persistent cardiovascular risk in adults with metabolic syndrome in a real world setting. DESIGN: Propensity matched cohort study. SETTING: Population based cohort in Korea. PARTICIPANTS: 29 771 adults with metabolic syndrome (≥40 years) receiving statin treatment. 2156 participants receiving combined treatment (statin plus fenofibrate) were weighted based on propensity score in a 1:5 ratio with 8549 participants using statin only treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcome was composite cardiovascular events including incident coronary heart disease, ischaemic stroke, and death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS: The incidence rate per 1000 person years of composite cardiovascular events was 17.7 (95% confidence interval 14.4 to 21.8) in the combined treatment group and 22.0 (20.1 to 24.1) in the statin group. The risk of composite cardiovascular events was significantly reduced in the combined treatment group compared with statin group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.58 to 0.93; P=0.01). The significance was maintained in the on-treatment analysis (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 0.92; P=0.02). The risk of incident coronary heart disease, ischaemic stroke, and cardiovascular death was lower in the combined treatment group than statin group but was not significant. Participant characteristics did not appear to be associated with the low risk of composite cardiovascular events with combined treatment. CONCLUSION: In this propensity weighted cohort study of adults with metabolic syndrome, the risk of major cardiovascular events was significantly lower with fenofibrate as add-on to statin treatment than with statin treatment alone.

Effects of the golfer-ground interaction on clubhead speed in skilled male golfers.

The purposes of this study were to characterise the golfer-ground interactions during the swing and to identify meaningful associations between the golfer-ground interaction force/moment parameters and the maximum clubhead speed in 63 highly skilled male golfers (handicap ≤ 3). Golfers performed shots in 3 club conditions (driver, 5-iron and pitching wedge) which were captured by an optical motion capture system and 2 force plates. In addition to the ground reaction forces (GRFs), 3 different golfer-ground interaction moments (GRF moments, pivoting moments and foot contact moments) were computed. The GRF moment about the forward/backward (F/B) axis and the pivoting moment about the vertical axis were identified as the primary moments. Significant (p < 0.05) correlations of peak force parameters (all components in the lead foot and F/B component in the trail foot) and peak moment parameters (lead-foot GRF moment and trail-foot pivoting moment) to clubhead speed were found. The lead-foot was responsible for generating the GRF moment, while the trail foot contributed to the pivoting moment more. The instant the lead arm becomes parallel to the ground was identified as the point of maximum angular effort, and the loading onto the lead-foot near this point was critical in generating both peak moments.