Prevalence of Tendon Rupture and Tendinopathies Among Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Derived From United States Administrative Claims Data.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of tendon rupture and tendinopathies (TRT) has not been determined in a large population of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We investigated TRT prevalence among patients with ASCVD and in the general population, using data from the Symphony Health Integrated Dataverse, a large US medical and pharmacy claims database. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study included patients aged ≥ 19 years from the claims database during the identification period (January 2019 to December 2020) and 12 months of continuous enrollment. The primary outcome was evidence of TRT in the 12 months following the index date (first ASCVD diagnosis in the ASCVD cohort; first claim in the claims database in the overall population). Diagnostic codes (ICD-10 and/or CPT) were used to define ASCVD and TRT diagnosis. RESULTS: The ASCVD cohort and overall population included 5,589,273 and 61,715,843 patients, respectively. In the ASCVD cohort, use of medications with a potential or known association with TRT was identified in 67.9% (statins), 17.7% (corticosteroids), and 16.7% (fluoroquinolones) of patients. Bempedoic acid use was reported in 1556 (< 0.1%) patients. TRT prevalence during 12-month follow-up was 3.4% (ASCVD cohort) and 1.9% (overall population). Among patients with ASCVD, 83.5% experienced TRT in only one region of the body. Factors most associated with TRT in the ASCVD cohort were increasing age, most notably in those aged 45-|64 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.07-2.32), obesity (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.50-1.53), and rheumatoid arthritis (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.45-1.79). Use of statins or bempedoic acid was not associated with increased TRT risk. CONCLUSION: Patients with ASCVD may have greater risk of TRT than the general population, which may be driven by an increased prevalence of comorbidities and use of medications with a potential or known association with TRT.

Patients with atherosclerosis, the main cause of heart attacks, strokes, and peripheral vascular disease, typically require several drugs to control the disease. Some of the drugs used to treat atherosclerosis have been linked to a higher occurrence of tendon tears (or ruptures) or swelling/inflammation of the tendons (tendinopathies). However, there may be other factors present in these patients that increase the risk of tendon injuries that are not related to these drugs. This study used the medical records of over 5.5 million patients with atherosclerosis and over 63 million patients reflecting the general population in the United States to determine the prevalence of tendon injury. Additionally, the researchers looked at other factors that might be related to a higher risk of tendon injury in each group. Over a 12-month period, tendon injuries occurred in 3.4% of patients with atherosclerosis and 1.8% of patients in the general population. In patients with atherosclerosis, factors such as being obese, older (45­64 years), or having rheumatoid arthritis were also linked to an increased risk of tendon injuries. There was no association seen between statin or bempedoic acid use and tendon injuries. These results may help healthcare providers to determine the underlying risk of tendon injuries and guide treatment of this patient population.

Efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid among patients with and without diabetes: prespecified analysis of the CLEAR Outcomes randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Statins reduce LDL cholesterol and cardiovascular events among those with or without diabetes but have been reported to increase new-onset diabetes. The CLEAR Outcomes trial demonstrated that bempedoic acid reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events among statin-intolerant patients at high cardiovascular risk. In this prespecified analysis, our dual aims were to evaluate the cardiovascular benefits of bempedoic acid, an ATP-citrate lyase inhibitor, in individuals with diabetes, and to evaluate the risk of new-onset diabetes and HbA1c among those without diabetes in the CLEAR Outcomes trial. METHODS: CLEAR Outcomes was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted across 1250 primary care and outpatient sites in 32 countries. Patients with or without cardiovascular disease who were unwilling or unable to take guideline-recommended doses of statins and an LDL cholesterol of 2·59 mmol/L or more were randomly assigned (1:1) in a double-blinded manner to either bempedoic acid 180 mg once per day or placebo. In this prespecified analysis, the efficacy endpoint was a time-to-event analysis of four-component major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE-4), which is the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularisation, using the intention-to-treat population stratified by baseline glycaemia status. The prespecified analysis of risk of new-onset diabetes and HbA1c increase was evaluated in patients without diabetes at baseline. The CLEAR Outcomes trial was completed on Nov 7, 2022, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02993406). FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2016, and Nov 7, 2022, 13 970 patients were screened and randomly assigned; 6373 (45·6%) with diabetes, 5796 (41·5%) with prediabetes, and 1801 (12·9%) with normoglycaemia. Over a median of 3·4 years follow up, patients with diabetes had significant relative and absolute cardiovascular risk reductions in MACE-4 endpoints with bempedoic acid (HR 0·83; 95% CI 0·72-0·95; absolute risk reduction of 2·4%) compared to placebo, with no statistical evidence of effect modification across glycaemic strata (interaction p=0·42). The proportion of patients who developed new-onset diabetes were similar between the bempedoic acid and placebo groups, with 429 of 3848 (11·1%) with bempedoic acid versus 433 of 3749 (11·5%) with placebo (HR 0·95; 95% CI 0·83-1·09). HbA1c concentrations at month 12 and the end of the study were similar between randomised groups in patients who had prediabetes and normoglycaemia. Placebo-corrected LDL cholesterol concentrations and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein at 6 months were reduced in each glycaemic stratum (diabetes, prediabtes, and normoglycaemia) for patients randomly assigned to bempedoic acid (all p<0·001). INTERPRETATION: Among patients with diabetes, bempedoic acid reduces LDL cholesterol and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and risk of cardiovascular events. Patients without diabetes had no increase in new-onset diabetes or worsening HbA1c with bempedoic acid. The efficacy and cardiometabolic safety profile of bempedoic acid makes it a clinical option for those with and without diabetes. FUNDING: Esperion Therapeutics.

Inflammation and Cholesterol as Predictors of Cardiovascular Events Among 13 970 Contemporary High-Risk Patients With Statin Intolerance.

BACKGROUND: Among patients treated with statin therapy to guideline-recommended cholesterol levels, residual inflammatory risk assessed by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) is at least as strong a predictor of future cardiovascular events as is residual risk assessed by low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC). Whether these relationships are present among statin-intolerant patients with higher LDLC levels is uncertain but has implications for the choice of preventive therapies, including bempedoic acid, an agent that reduces both LDLC and hsCRP. METHODS: The multinational CLEAR-Outcomes trial (Cholesterol Lowering via Bempedoic Acid, an ACL-Inhibiting Regimen Outcomes Trial) randomly allocated 13 970 statin-intolerant patients to 180 mg of oral bempedoic acid daily or matching placebo and followed them for a 4-component composite of incident myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or cardiovascular death, and for all-cause mortality. Quartiles of increasing baseline hsCRP and LDLC were assessed as predictors of future adverse events after adjustment for traditional risk factors and randomized treatment assignment. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, bempedoic acid reduced median hsCRP by 21.6% and mean LDLC levels by 21.1% at 6 months. Baseline hsCRP was significantly associated with the primary composite end point of major cardiovascular events (highest versus lowest hsCRP quartile; hazard ratio [HR], 1.43 [95% CI, 1.24-1.65]), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 2.00 [95% CI, 1.53-2.61]), and all-cause mortality (HR, 2.21 [95% CI, 1.79-2.73]). By contrast, the relationship of baseline LDLC quartile (highest versus lowest) to future events was smaller in magnitude for the primary composite cardiovascular end point (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.04-1.37]) and neutral for cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.70-1.17]) and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.78-1.16]). Risks were high for those with elevated hsCRP irrespective of LDLC level. Bempedoic acid demonstrated similar efficacy in reducing cardiovascular events across all levels of hsCRP and LDLC. CONCLUSIONS: Among contemporary statin-intolerant patients, inflammation assessed by hsCRP predicted risk for future cardiovascular events and death more strongly than hyperlipidemia assessed by LDLC. Compared with placebo, bempedoic acid had similar efficacy for reducing cardiovascular risk across hsCRP and LDLC strata. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02993406.

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.

Efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid in patients with and without metabolic syndrome: Pooled analysis of data from four phase 3 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Bempedoic acid significantly lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with hypercholesterolemia but its effects in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) have not been well characterized. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid in patients with hypercholesterolemia by baseline MetS status. METHODS: This study used pooled data from four phase 3 studies. Using modified International Atherosclerosis Society guidelines, patients were grouped into two pools: those with and those without MetS. Patients with diabetes were excluded. Endpoints assessed change from baseline to week 12 in lipid and glycemic parameters and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and safety. RESULTS: The study included 936 patients with MetS (bempedoic acid, 648; placebo, 288) and 1573 without MetS (bempedoic acid, 1037; placebo, 536). Significant placebo-corrected reductions in LDL-C were observed with bempedoic acid (p < 0.0001), with a slightly larger decrease in patients with vs. without MetS (-22.3% vs. -18.4%; interaction p = 0.0472). Compared with placebo, bempedoic acid significantly (p < 0.0001) lowered total cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and hsCRP, with a similar magnitude of benefit observed between MetS categories. Triglycerides increased with bempedoic acid but only to a lesser extent than with placebo in patients without MetS (placebo-corrected difference, -4.4%; p = 0.02). Only patients with MetS experienced decreases in glycated hemoglobin (-0.07%; p < 0.0001) and fasting plasma glucose (-2.4 mg/dL; p = 0.002). Safety was comparable between MetS categories and treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that bempedoic acid is a suitable therapy for patients with and without MetS who require additional lipid lowering.

Bempedoic Acid for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Statin-Intolerant Patients.

Importance: The effects of bempedoic acid on cardiovascular outcomes in statin-intolerant patients without a prior cardiovascular event (primary prevention) have not been fully described. Objective: To determine the effects of bempedoic acid on cardiovascular outcomes in primary prevention patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This masked, randomized clinical trial enrolled 13 970 statin-intolerant patients (enrollment December 2016 to August 2019 at 1250 centers in 32 countries), including 4206 primary prevention patients. Interventions: Participants were randomized to oral bempedoic acid, 180 mg daily (n = 2100), or matching placebo (n = 2106). Main Outcome Measures: The primary efficacy measure was the time from randomization to the first occurrence of any component of a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization. Results: Mean participant age was 68 years, 59% were female, and 66% had diabetes. From a mean baseline of 142.2 mg/dL, compared with placebo, bempedoic acid reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels by 30.2 mg/dL (21.3%) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels by 0.56 mg/L (21.5%), from a median baseline of 2.4 mg/L. Follow-up for a median of 39.9 months was associated with a significant risk reduction for the primary end point (111 events [5.3%] vs 161 events [7.6%]; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.89]; P = .002) and key secondary end points, including the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke (83 events [4.0%] vs 134 events [6.4%]; HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.48-0.84]; P < .001); MI (29 events [1.4%] vs 47 events [2.2%]; HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.39-0.98]); cardiovascular death (37 events [1.8%] vs 65 events [3.1%]; HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.41-0.92]); and all-cause mortality (75 events [3.6%] vs 109 events [5.2%]; HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.54-0.98]). There was no significant effect on stroke or coronary revascularization. Adverse effects with bempedoic acid included a higher incidence of gout (2.6% vs 2.0%), cholelithiasis (2.5% vs 1.1%), and increases in serum creatinine, uric acid, and hepatic enzyme levels. Conclusions: In a subgroup of high-risk primary prevention patients, bempedoic acid treatment was associated with reduced major cardiovascular events. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02993406.

Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model Development and Verification for Bioequivalence Testing of Bempedoic Acid Oral Suspension and Reference Tablet Formulation.

The bioequivalence of bempedoic acid oral suspension and commercial immediate release (IR) tablet formulations were assessed using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model. The mechanistic model, developed from clinical mass balance results and in vitro intrinsic solubility, permeability, and dissolution data, was verified against observed clinical pharmacokinetics (PK) results. Model inputs included a fraction of a dose in solution (0.01%), viscosity (118.8 cps), and median particle diameter (50 µm) for the suspension and particle diameter (36.4 µm) for IR tablets. Dissolution was determined in the relevant media (pH 1.2-6.8) in vitro. Model simulations of bioequivalence predicted oral suspension (test) to IR tablet (reference) geometric mean ratio estimates of 96.9% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 92.6-101) for maximum concentration and 98.2% (90% CI: 87.3-111) for the area under the concentration-time curve. Sensitivity analyses showed gastric transit time had a minor impact on model predictions. Oral suspension biopharmaceutical safe space was defined by extremes of particle size and the percent of bempedoic acid in solution. PBPK model simulations predicted that the rate and extent of bempedoic acid absorption are unlikely to exhibit clinically meaningful differences when dosed as an oral suspension compared with an IR tablet without requiring a clinical bioequivalence study in adults.

Bempedoic Acid and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Statin-Intolerant Patients.

BACKGROUND: Bempedoic acid, an ATP citrate lyase inhibitor, reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels and is associated with a low incidence of muscle-related adverse events; its effects on cardiovascular outcomes remain uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving patients who were unable or unwilling to take statins owing to unacceptable adverse effects ("statin-intolerant" patients) and had, or were at high risk for, cardiovascular disease. The patients were assigned to receive oral bempedoic acid, 180 mg daily, or placebo. The primary end point was a four-component composite of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 13,970 patients underwent randomization; 6992 were assigned to the bempedoic acid group and 6978 to the placebo group. The median duration of follow-up was 40.6 months. The mean LDL cholesterol level at baseline was 139.0 mg per deciliter in both groups, and after 6 months, the reduction in the level was greater with bempedoic acid than with placebo by 29.2 mg per deciliter; the observed difference in the percent reductions was 21.1 percentage points in favor of bempedoic acid. The incidence of a primary end-point event was significantly lower with bempedoic acid than with placebo (819 patients [11.7%] vs. 927 [13.3%]; hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 0.96; P = 0.004), as were the incidences of a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal stroke, or nonfatal myocardial infarction (575 [8.2%] vs. 663 [9.5%]; hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.96; P = 0.006); fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (261 [3.7%] vs. 334 [4.8%]; hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.91; P = 0.002); and coronary revascularization (435 [6.2%] vs. 529 [7.6%]; hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.92; P = 0.001). Bempedoic acid had no significant effects on fatal or nonfatal stroke, death from cardiovascular causes, and death from any cause. The incidences of gout and cholelithiasis were higher with bempedoic acid than with placebo (3.1% vs. 2.1% and 2.2% vs. 1.2%, respectively), as were the incidences of small increases in serum creatinine, uric acid, and hepatic-enzyme levels. CONCLUSIONS: Among statin-intolerant patients, treatment with bempedoic acid was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization). (Funded by Esperion Therapeutics; CLEAR Outcomes ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02993406.).

Potential Cardiovascular Events Avoided with Bempedoic Acid Plus Ezetimibe Fixed-Dose Combination Compared with Ezetimibe Alone in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Taking Maximally Tolerated Statins.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease who require additional low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering despite maximally tolerated statins have a significant unmet medical need and are at increased risk of future cardiovascular events and a reduced quality of life. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to estimate the percentage of cardiovascular events avoided following treatment with a fixed-dose combination of bempedoic acid plus ezetimibe (BA+EZE FDC) versus ezetimibe (EZE) in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease receiving maximally tolerated statins across a range of baseline LDL-C levels. METHODS: A Markov cohort simulation model estimated major adverse cardiovascular events avoided over a lifetime horizon among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and baseline LDL-C levels from 80 to >200 mg/dL. BA+EZE FDC was compared with EZE based on mean percent LDL-C reductions versus placebo reported in a phase III trial. Health outcomes for the average patient were extrapolated to a US population of 100,000 persons using evidence on contemporary LDL-C levels from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. RESULTS: Among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease not at the LDL-C goal with maximally tolerated statins, the addition of BA+EZE FDC compared with the addition of EZE was predicted to provide incremental absolute reductions in major adverse cardiovascular events dependent on baseline LDL-C levels at the population level. For those with baseline LDL-C of 101-110 mg/dL (n = 15,237), there were 4.9% (744) fewer events predicted, while for patients with baseline LDL-C of > 200 mg/dL (n = 1689), 10.9% (184) fewer events were predicted through the addition of BA+EZE FDC versus EZE. CONCLUSIONS: Further LDL-C reductions through the addition of BA+EZE FDC to maximally tolerated statins are predicted to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared with the addition of EZE. Benefits are potentially greater among those with higher starting LDL-C.

Factors Associated With Enhanced Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Lowering With Bempedoic Acid.

Background Bempedoic acid (BA) inhibits ATP-citrate lyase in the cholesterol synthesis pathway and lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). As with other lipid-lowering therapies, interindividual variation in response to BA was observed in clinical trials. We characterized LDL-C response to BA using guideline-defined statin intensity categories and identified clinical factors associated with enhanced LDL-C lowering with BA. Methods and Results This post hoc analysis used pooled data from 4 phase 3 studies. Patients were randomized 2:1 to once-daily BA 180 mg (n=2321) or placebo (n=1167) for 12 to 52 weeks and grouped based on percent change in LDL-C from baseline to week 12 according to guideline-established statin intensity categories. Factors associated with ≥30% reduction in LDL-C were identified using logistic regression analyses. From baseline to week 12, BA lowered LDL-C levels comparable to a moderate- or high-intensity statin (≥30%) in 28.9% of patients; this degree of LDL-C lowering was observed in 50.9% of patients not receiving background statin therapy. In a multivariable analysis, the absence of statins, female sex, a history of diabetes, ezetimibe use, and higher high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level were associated with increased rates of achieving ≥30% LDL-C reduction with BA (P<0.01 for each). Conclusions A large percentage of patients receiving BA achieved LDL-C reductions comparable to a moderate- or high-intensity statin. Factors including statin absence, female sex, diabetes history, ezetimibe use, and a higher high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level may be useful to identify patients who may have a greater LDL-C reduction with BA. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT02666664, NCT02991118, NCT02988115, NCT03001076.

Estimated cardiovascular benefits of bempedoic acid in patients with established cardiovascular disease.

Background and aims: Cardiovascular outcomes trials have demonstrated that lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduces the risk for future cardiovascular events. We assessed the potential cardiovascular benefits of bempedoic acid through a simulation study in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and elevated LDL-C. Methods: The validated SMART prediction model was used to estimate the baseline 10-year risk of three-point major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke) in patients with ASCVD who were enrolled in four Phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled bempedoic acid studies. The predicted change in 10-year cardiovascular risk associated with bempedoic acid was estimated for each patient based on the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' model. Data were analyzed in two cohorts: Cohort 1 included mostly patients treated with moderate-high intensity statins, and Cohort 2 included patients who were intolerant of more than low-intensity statin. Results: A total of 2884 patients were included in Cohort 1 and 226 in Cohort 2. Weighted average baseline 10-year cardiovascular event risk was 26.1% and 31.6% for Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. The least squares mean percent difference (95% confidence interval (CI) of the predicted absolute change in 10-year cardiovascular event risk with bempedoic acid was -3.3% (-3.7% to -2.9%) for patients in Cohort 1 and -6.0% (-7.7% to -4.3%) for patients in Cohort 2 compared with placebo (p < 0.0001 for both). Conclusions: Among patients with ASCVD who could potentially benefit from additional LDL-C lowering, our simulation predicted a lower absolute cardiovascular event risk after initiating bempedoic acid as compared with placebo.

Beliefs, risk perceptions, and lipid management among patients with and without diabetes: Results from the PALM registry.

Intensive lipid management is critical to reduce cardiovascular (CV) risk for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: We performed an observational study of 7628 patients with (n = 2943) and without DM (n = 4685), enrolled in the Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry and treated at 140 outpatient clinics across the United States in 2015. Patient self-estimated CV risk, patient-perceived statin benefit and risk, observed statin therapy use and dosing were assessed. RESULTS: Patients with DM were more likely to believe that their CV risk was elevated compared with patients without DM (39.1% vs 29.3%, P < .001). Patients with DM were more likely to receive a statin (74.2% vs 63.5%, P < .001) but less likely to be treated with guideline-recommended statin intensity (36.5% vs 46.9%, P < .001), driven by the low proportion (16.5%) of high risk (ASCVD risk ≥7.5%) primary prevention DM patients treated with a high intensity statin. Patients with DM treated with guideline-recommended statin intensity were more likely to believe they were at high CV risk (44.9% vs 38.4%, P = .005) and that statins can reduce this risk (41.1% vs 35.6%, P = .02), compared with patients treated with lower than guideline-recommended statin intensity. Compared with patients with an elevated HgbA1c, patients with well-controlled DM were no more likely to be on a statin (77.9% vs 79.3%, P = .43). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide study, the majority of patients with DM were treated with lower than guideline-recommended statin intensity. Patient education and engagement may help providers improve lipid therapy for these high-risk patients.

The SYDNEY Device Study: A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-label Usability Study of a 2-mL Alirocumab Autoinjector Device.

PURPOSE: The proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor alirocumab has produced significant reductions in LDL-C at a dose of 300 mg q4w administered as 2 separate 150-mg injections via a 1-mL autoinjector (AI). A recently developed 2-mL device (SYDNEY) permits the administration of a single 300mg dose of alirocumab. METHODS: We assessed the usability and product technical complaints (PTCs) reported by patients using the 2-mL SYDNEY device in unsupervised settings, adverse events, and effects on LDL-C, in a multicenter, randomized, open-label, 16-week study conducted in the United States. For their first dose, 69 patients with hypercholesterolemia despite receiving statin with or without other lipid-lowering therapy randomly received supervised, self-administered alirocumab 300 mg via 1 × 300 mg injection with the SYDNEY device (n = 35) or 2 × 150-mg injections with the currently approved AI (n = 34). All continuing patients subsequently received unsupervised, self-administered alirocumab 300 mg q4w using the SYDNEY device at weeks 4, 8, and 12. The primary end point was the proportion of SYDNEY device-associated PTCs related to the use of the unsupervised injections. FINDINGS: Baseline characteristics between the study arms varied only in a higher percentage of males being randomized to the study arm using the SYDNEY device (74.3%) compared with the AI arm (44.1%). A single PTC was reported during the unsupervised injections (0.5%; 1 of 196 injections; 95% CI, 0.0%-3.2%). This event was classified as patient related as opposed to device related. No PTCs occurred during supervised injections. Mean LDL-C reductions from baseline at week 4 were 66.2% with SYDNEY and 51.2% with the AI; after adjustment for sex differences between groups, mean LDL-C reductions were 63.5% and 53.9%, respectively. LDL-C reductions persisted for 16 weeks. The most common adverse event was upper respiratory tract infection (3 with SYDNEY and 0 with the AI during weeks 0-4). IMPLICATIONS: The SYDNEY device allowed for a single 2-mL injection of alirocumab 300 mg, providing substantial LDL-C reductions with no new product technical issues or no new safety concerns compared with the currently marketed 1-mL AI device. In conclusion, the 2-mL SYDNEY device provides patients with the possibility of injecting the 300-mg alirocumab dose as a single injection. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03415178.

Risk Categorization Using New American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines for Cholesterol Management and Its Relation to Alirocumab Treatment Following Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: The 2018 US cholesterol management guidelines recommend additional lipid-lowering therapies for secondary prevention in patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥70 mg/dL or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥100 mg/dL despite maximum tolerated statin therapy. Such patients are considered at very high risk (VHR) based on a history of >1 major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event or a single ASCVD event and multiple high-risk conditions. We investigated the association of US guideline-defined risk categories with the occurrence of ischemic events after acute coronary syndrome and reduction of those events by alirocumab, a PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) inhibitor. METHODS: In the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab), patients with recent acute coronary syndrome and residual dyslipidemia despite optimal statin therapy were randomly assigned to alirocumab or placebo. The primary trial outcome (major adverse cardiovascular events, ie, coronary heart disease death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina) was examined according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association risk category. RESULTS: Of 18 924 participants followed for a median of 2.8 years, 11 935 (63.1%) were classified as VHR: 4450 (37.3%) had multiple prior ASCVD events and 7485 (62.7%) had 1 major ASCVD event and multiple high-risk conditions. Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 14.4% of placebo-treated patients at VHR versus 5.6% of those not at VHR. In the VHR category, major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 20.4% with multiple prior ASCVD events versus 10.7% with 1 ASCVD event and multiple high-risk conditions. Alirocumab was associated with consistent relative risk reductions in both risk categories (hazard ratio=0.84 for VHR; hazard ratio=0.86 for not VHR; Pinteraction=0.820) and by stratification within the VHR group (hazard ratio=0.86 for multiple prior ASCVD events; hazard ratio=0.82 for 1 major ASCVD event and multiple high-risk conditions; Pinteraction=0.672). The absolute risk reduction for major adverse cardiovascular events with alirocumab was numerically greater (but not statistically different) in the VHR group versus those not at VHR (2.1% versus 0.8%; Pinteraction=0.095) and among patients at VHR with multiple prior ASCVD events versus a single prior ASCVD event (2.4% versus 1.8%; Pinteraction=0.661). CONCLUSIONS: The US guideline criteria identify patients with recent acute coronary syndrome and dyslipidemia who are at VHR for recurrent ischemic events and who may derive a larger absolute benefit from treatment with alirocumab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01663402.

Intensity of Lipid Lowering With Statin Therapy in Patients With Cerebrovascular Disease Versus Coronary Artery Disease: Insights from the PALM Registry.

Background Current treatment guidelines strongly recommend statin therapy for secondary prevention. However, it remains unclear whether patients' perceptions of cardiovascular risk, beliefs on cholesterol, or the intensity of prescribed statin therapy differs for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) versus cerebrovascular disease (CeVD) versus both CAD and CeVD (CAD&CeVD). Methods and Results The PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry collected data on statin use, intensity, and core laboratory low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels for 3232 secondary prevention patients treated at 133 US clinics. Among individuals with CeVD only (n=403), CAD only (n=2202), and CeVD&CAD (n=627), no significant differences were observed in patient-perceived cardiovascular disease risk, beliefs on cholesterol lowering, or perceived effectiveness and safety of statin therapy. However, patients with CeVD only were less likely to receive any statin therapy (76.2% versus 86.2%; adjusted odds ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.45-0.91), or guideline-recommended statin intensity (34.6% versus 50.4%; adjusted odds ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.45-0.81) than those with CAD only. Individuals with CeVD only were also less likely to achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL (59.2% versus 69.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.99) than individuals with CAD alone. There were no significant differences in the use of any statin therapy or guideline-recommended statin intensity between individuals with CAD&CeVD and those with CAD only. Conclusions Despite lack of significant differences in patient-perceived cardiovascular risk or statin beliefs, patients with CeVD were significantly less likely to receive higher intensity statin or achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL than those with CAD only.

Effect of Alirocumab on Coronary Atheroma Volume in Japanese Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome　- The ODYSSEY J-IVUS Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), alirocumab reduced the risk of recurring ischemic events. ODYSSEY J-IVUS assessed the effect of alirocumab on coronary atheroma volume in Japanese patients recently hospitalized with ACS and hypercholesterolemia, using intravascular ultrasound imaging analysis.Methods and Results:Patients (n=206) who at index ACS diagnosis either had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥2.59 mmol/L (≥100 mg/dL) despite stable statin therapy, or were not on statins with LDL-C levels above target after statin initiation, were randomized (1:1) to alirocumab (75 mg every 2 weeks [Q2 W]/up to 150 mg Q2 W), or standard of care (SoC; atorvastatin ≥10 mg/day or rosuvastatin ≥5 mg/day) for 36 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint (week [W] 36 mean [standard error] percent change in normalized total atheroma volume [TAV] from baseline) was -3.1 (1.0)% with SoC vs. -4.8 (1.0)% with alirocumab (between-group difference: -1.6 [1.4]; P=0.23). W36 absolute change from baseline in percent atheroma volume was -1.3 (0.4)% (SoC) and -1.4 (0.4)% (alirocumab; nominal P=0.79). At W36, LDL-C was reduced from baseline by 13.4% (SoC) vs. 63.9% (alirocumab; nominal P<0.0001). In total, 61.8% (SoC) and 75.7% (alirocumab) of patients reported treatment-emergency adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In Japanese patients with ACS and hypercholesterolemia inadequately controlled despite statin therapy, from baseline to W36, a numerically greater percent reduction in normalized TAV was observed with alirocumab vs. SoC, which did not reach statistical significance.

Sex Differences in the Use of Statins in Community Practice.

BACKGROUND: Female patients have historically received less aggressive lipid management than male patients. Contemporary care patterns and the potential causes for these differences are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Examining the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management Registry-a nationwide registry of outpatients with or at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease-we compared the use of statin therapy, guideline-recommended statin dosing, and reasons for undertreatment. We specifically analyzed sex differences in statin treatment and guideline-recommended statin dosing using multivariable logistic regression. Among 5693 participants (43% women) eligible for 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Cholesterol Guideline-recommended statin treatment, women were less likely than men to be prescribed any statin therapy (67.0% versus 78.4%; P<0.001) or to receive a statin at the guideline-recommended intensity (36.7% versus 45.2%; P<0.001). Women were more likely to report having previously never been offered statin therapy (18.6% versus 13.5%; P<0.001), declined statin therapy (3.6% versus 2.0%; P<0.001), or discontinued their statin (10.9% versus 6.1%; P<0.001). Women were also less likely than men to believe statins were safe (47.9% versus 55.2%; P<0.001) or effective (68.0% versus 73.2%; P<0.001) and more likely to report discontinuing their statin because of a side effect (7.9% versus 3.6%; P<0.001). Sex differences in both overall and guideline-recommended intensity statin use persisted after adjustment for demographics, socioeconomic factors, clinical characteristics, patient beliefs, and provider characteristics (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81; P<0.001; and odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.92; P<0.01, respectively). Sex differences were consistent across primary and secondary prevention indications for statin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Women eligible for statin therapy were less likely than men to be treated with any statin or guideline-recommended statin intensity. A combination of women being offered statin therapy less frequently, while declining and discontinuing treatment more frequently, accounted for these sex differences in statin use.

Treatment effect of alirocumab according to age group, smoking status, and hypertension: Pooled analysis from 10 randomized ODYSSEY studies.

BACKGROUND: Age, smoking, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension are major risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. OBJECTIVE: We examined whether the effects of alirocumab on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) differed according to age, hypertension, or smoking status. METHODS: Data were pooled from 10 Phase 3 ODYSSEY randomized trials (24-104 weeks' duration) in 4983 people with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) or non-familial hypercholesterolemia (3188 on alirocumab, 1795 on control [620 on ezetimibe and 1175 on placebo]). Most participants received concomitant maximum tolerated statin therapy. In 8 trials, the alirocumab dose was increased from 75 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) to 150 mg Q2W at Week 12 if predefined risk-based LDL-C goals were not achieved at Week 8 (≥70 mg/dL in very high cardiovascular risk; ≥100 mg/dL in moderate or high cardiovascular risk). Two trials compared alirocumab 150 mg Q2W vs placebo. The efficacy and safety of alirocumab were assessed post hoc in subgroups stratified by age (<65, ≥65 to <75, ≥75 years) and baseline hypertension or smoking status. RESULTS: Alirocumab reduced LDL-C by 23.7% (75/150 mg vs ezetimibe + statin) to 65.4% (150 mg vs placebo + statin) from baseline to Week 24 vs control. Subgroup analyses confirmed no significant interactions in response to alirocumab between age group, hypertension, or smoking status. Overall rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between alirocumab and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis from 10 trials, alirocumab led to substantial LDL-C reductions vs control in every age group and regardless of hypertension or smoking status. Alirocumab was well tolerated in all subgroups.

Practice-level variation in statin use and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control in the United States: Results from the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to guideline-recommended statin recommendations in the United States is suboptimal. Patients' likelihood to be treated according to guidelines may vary by the practice in which they are treated. METHODS: Variation in the use of statin therapy in 5445 patients, with known or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and meeting a statin treatment indication, was examined across 74 US Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) Registry clinics. Multivariable generalized linear mixed modeling was used to determine the median odds ratio (MOR) for statin use and 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline-recommended statin intensity by practice. MOR quantifies between-practice variation by comparing the odds of receiving guideline-recommended statin treatment in a patient from a randomly selected practice with a similar patient from another random practice. Risk-adjusted low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) control (<100 and <70 mg/dL) was compared among practice tertiles based on percentage of eligible patients receiving recommended statin intensity. RESULTS: Among 74 practices (43.2% cardiology) comprised of 300 healthcare providers enrolling 5445 patients (56.2% with ASCVD), statin use at the guideline-recommended intensity at practices varied widely (12.7-71.4%; adjusted MOR 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-1.64). Results were consistent when evaluated for any statin use overall (adjusted MOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.48-1.99) and when stratified by primary versus secondary prevention patients. Relative to practices with lowest or mid-tertile statin use of statins, highest tertile clinics were more frequently cardiology practices (68.0% vs 48.0% vs 12.5%, P < .001). Compared with lowest tertile clinics, patients at highest tertile clinics were more likely to achieve LDL-C <70 mg/dL (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.49, 95% CI 1.08-2.04) and <100 mg/dL (adjusted OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.41-2.25). CONCLUSIONS: US clinics varied widely in their adherence to guideline recommendations for statin therapy, which contributed to significant differences in LDL-C levels.