LO MEJOR DE EL ACC.16 CARDIOMETABOLICO

Similar documents
The ACCELERATE Trial

Update on Dyslipidemia and Recent Data on Treating the Statin Intolerant Patient

Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) - 3 Combined Lipid Lowering and Blood Pressure Lowering in Moderate Risk People

Results of the GLAGOV Trial

Safety of Anacetrapib in Patients with or

Industry Relationships and Institutional Affiliations

John J.P. Kastelein MD PhD Professor of Medicine Dept. of Vascular Medicine Academic Medial Center / University of Amsterdam

Lipids: new drugs, new trials, new guidelines

Cottrell Memorial Lecture. Has Reversing Atherosclerosis Become the New Gold Standard in the Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease?

CETP inhibition: pros and cons. Philip Barter The Heart Research Institute Sydney, Australia

STABILITY Stabilization of Atherosclerotic plaque By Initiation of darapladib TherapY. Harvey D White on behalf of The STABILITY Investigators

MS Sabatine, RP Giugliano, AC Keech, PS Sever, SA Murphy and TR Pedersen, for the FOURIER Steering Committee & Investigators

Decline in CV-Mortality

Effect of the PCSK9 Inhibitor Evolocumab on Cardiovascular Outcomes

CORONARY: The Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery Off or On Pump Revascularization Study. Results at 1 Year

CVD risk assessment using risk scores in primary and secondary prevention

What have We Learned in Dyslipidemia Management Since the Publication of the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline?

Marshall Tulloch-Reid, MD, MPhil, DSc, FACE Epidemiology Research Unit Tropical Medicine Research Institute The University of the West Indies, Mona,

Making War on Cholesterol with New Weapons: How Low Can We/Should We Go? Shaun Goodman

FOURIER STUDY GREYLOCK PRESS: CTS PRODUCT SAMPLE - FOURIER YES. Did the study achieve its main objective?

No relevant financial relationships

Alirocumab Treatment Effect Did Not Differ Between Patients With and Without Low HDL-C or High Triglyceride Levels in Phase 3 trials

ATP IV: Predicting Guideline Updates

Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors - what have we learnt? Philip Barter The Heart Research Institute Sydney, Australia

Συμπεράσματα από τις νέες μελέτες για την αρτηριακή υπέρταση (SPRINT,PATHAY 2,HOPE 3)

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Achieving Very Low LDL-C Levels With the PCSK9 Inhibitor Evolocumab in the FOURIER Outcomes Trial

Flaws, Bias, Misinterpretation and Fraud in Randomized Clinical Trials

Kenneth W. Mahaffey, MD and Keith AA Fox, MB ChB

The inhibition of CETP: From simply raising HDL-c to promoting cholesterol efflux and lowering of atherogenic lipoproteins Prof Dr J Wouter Jukema

Anne Carol Goldberg, MD, FACP, FAHA, FNLA Washington University, St. Louis, MO USA

The Indian Polycap Study 1 & 2 (TIPS 1 & 2) and The International Polycap Study 3 & 4 (TIPS 3 & 4)

Expert Meeting on Large Simple Trials (LST s)

Contemporary management of Dyslipidemia

Lipid/Lipoprotein Structure and Metabolism (Overview)

Canakinumab Anti-Inflammatory Thrombosis Outcomes Study (CANTOS)

Review of guidelines for management of dyslipidemia in diabetic patients

Long-term safety, tolerability and efficacy of alirocumab in high cardiovascular risk patients: ODYSSEY LONG TERM

AIM HIGH for SATURN and stay SHARP; COURAGE (v1.5)

Disclosure. No relevant financial relationships. Placebo-Controlled Statin Trials

Managing Dyslipidemia in Disclosures. Learning Objectives 03/05/2018. Speaker Disclosures

ACCP Cardiology PRN Journal Club

The JUPITER trial: What does it tell us? Alice Y.Y. Cheng, MD, FRCPC January 24, 2009

Characterization of Types and Sizes of Myocardial Infarction Reduced with Evolocumab in FOURIER

Should we prescribe aspirin and statins to all subjects over 65? (Or even all over 55?) Terje R.Pedersen Oslo University Hospital Oslo, Norway

Goal Achievement after Utilizing an Anti-PCSK9 Antibody in Statin-Intolerant Subjects (GAUSS): Results from a

New Approaches to Lower LDL-C

Inhibition of PCSK9: The Birth of a New Therapy

Cholesterol; what are the future lipid targets?

No relevant financial relationships

Randomized Comparison of the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Long-term Administration of AMG 145: 52-Week Results From the OSLER Study

The TNT Trial Is It Time to Shift Our Goals in Clinical

GSK Medicine: Study Number: Title: Rationale: Phase: Study Period: Study Design: Centres: Indication: Treatment: Objectives:

FOURIER: Enough Evidence to Justify Widespread Use? Did It fulfill Its Expectations?

Preventing Cardiovascular Disease With Lipid Management: Matching Therapy to Risk

ESC Geoffrey Rose Lecture on Population Sciences Cholesterol and risk: past, present and future

JUPITER NEJM Poll. Panel Discussion: Literature that Should Have an Impact on our Practice: The JUPITER Study

Management of LDL as a Risk Factor. Raul D. Santos MD, PhD Heart Institute-InCor University of Sao Paulo Brazil

4 th and Goal To Go How Low Should We Go? :

Disclosures No relationships (not even to an employer) No off-label uses. Cholesterol Lowering Guidelines: What now?

Lipid Lowering in Patients at High Risk for Cardiovascular Disease

Impact of a 1- or 2-dose starting regimen of inclisiran, a novel sirna inhibitor to PCSK9 on time averaged LDL-C reductions over 1 year

Lessons from Recent Atherosclerosis Trials

How would you manage Ms. Gold

Dyslipidemia Treatment in 2016 Novel Agents Combination Therapies Statin Intolerance

Modelling diabetes Professor Alastair Gray Health Economics Research Centre University of Oxford

Common Repatha Documentation Requirements for Patients With Primary Hyperlipidemia and Established CVD 1,2

Study 2 ( ) Pivotal Phase 3 Study Top-Line Results. October 29, 2018

Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of 150 mg Q2W Dose of the PCSK9 mab REGN727/SAR236553: Data from Three Phase 2 Studies

ROLE OF INFLAMMATION IN HYPERTENSION. Dr Barasa FA Physician Cardiologist Eldoret

PCSK9 antibodies: A new therapeutic option for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia

Industry Relationships and Institutional Affiliations

What Role do the New PCSK9 Inhibitors Have in Lipid Lowering Treatment?

Novel PCSK9 Outcomes. in Perspective: Lessons from FOURIER & ODYSSEY LDL-C. ASCVD Risk. Suboptimal Statin Therapy

Inflammation, the Inflammasome and CAD Do Cardiologists need to know this? Jacques Genest MD

Considerations and Controversies in the Management of Dyslipidemia for ASCVD Risk Reduction

Treatment of Cardiovascular Risk Factors. Kevin M Hayes D.O. F.A.C.C. First Coast Heart and Vascular Center

Cholesterol Reduction Therapy in 2018 A Perspective Role Of Statins, Ezetimibe and PCSK9-Inhibitors

PCSK9 Inhibitors and Modulators

Cardiovascular Complications of Diabetes

Pitavastatin 4 mg vs. Pravastatin 40 mg in HIV Dyslipidemia: Post- Hoc Analysis of the INTREPID Trial Based on the Independent CHD Risk Factor for Age

NEWS BRIEFING Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease. Moderated by: Robert Eckel, MD University of Colorado

Experiences with interim trial monitoring, particularly with early stopped trials

Problem patients in primary care Patient 4: Peripheral artery disease

Beyond Framingham: Risk Assessment & Treatment for Primary Prevention

REVEAL: Randomized placebo-controlled trial of anacetrapib in 30,449 patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease

Update on CVD and Microvascular Complications in T2D

Fasting or non fasting?

Lipid Management 2013 Statin Benefit Groups

New evidences in heart failure: the GISSI-HF trial. Aldo P Maggioni, MD ANMCO Research Center Firenze, Italy

Modern Lipid Management:

The Clinical Unmet need in the patient with Diabetes and ACS

Does High-Intensity Pitavastatin Therapy Further Improve Clinical Outcomes?

Cardiovascular risk reduction in diabetes Lipids (NICE CG181)

Prospective Natural-History Study of Coronary Atherosclerosis

Dyslipidemia in the light of Current Guidelines - Do we change our Practice?

Evan A. Stein 1, David Sullivan 2, Anders G. Olsson 3, Rob Scott 4, Jae B. Kim 4, Allen Xue 4, Thomas Liu 4, Scott M. Wasserman 4

Drug Class Monograph

EVIDENCE TO DATE EVOLOCUMAB (REPATHA)

Presented by Terje R. Pedersen Oslo Disclosure: Research grants and/or speaker- / consulting fees from Merck, MSP, Astra-Zeneca, Pfizer

Cost-effectiveness of evolocumab (Repatha ) for hypercholesterolemia

Transcription:

LO MEJOR DE EL ACC.16 CARDIOMETABOLICO RICARDO GÓMEZ PALÁU INTERNISTA CARDIOLOGO U. Javeriana U. El Bosque Clinica SHAIO

AGENDA HOPE 3 TRIAL. GAUSS 3 TRIAL. ACCELERATE TRIAL.

NO CONFLICTOS DE INTERES

Intermediate-Risk Population Inclusion Criteria (Target Risk 1.0%/yr) W ome 60yrs,me 55 yrs with at least one additional Risk Factor Increased WHR Smoking Low HDL-C Dysglycemia Mild renal dysfunction Family history of CHD Exclusion Criteria: CVD or indication(s) or contraindication(s) to study drugs No strict BP or LDL-C criteria for entry Uncertainty principle 5

The HOPE-3 Trial 228 centers in 21 countries Coordinated by PHRI, Hamilton, Canada Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Hungary, India, Israel, Korea, Malaysia, Netherlands, Philippines, Russia, Slovakia, South Africa, Sweden, United Kingdom, Ukraine 6

Baseline Characteristics 12,705 randomized Age (yrs) 66 Female 46% Blood Pressure (mmhg) 138/82 LDL-Cholesterol (mg/dl) 128 LDL-Cholesterol (mmol/l) 3.3 Elevated waist-to-hip ratio 87% hscrp (g/l) median 2.0 Ethnicity White Caucasian Latin American Chinese Other Asian Black African 20% 28% 29% 20% 2% 11

BP Lowering vs. Placebo Outcome Cand+HCTZ N=6356 Placebo N=6349 HR (95% CI) Co-Primary 1 260 (4.1%) 279 (4.4%) 0.93 (0.79-1.10) 0.40 Co-Primary 2 312 (4.9%) 328 (5.2%) 0.95 (0.81-1.11) 0.51 Secondary 335 (5.3%) 364 (5.7%) 0.92 (0.79-1.06) 0.26 CV Death 155 (2.4%) 170 (2.7%) 0.91 (0.73-1.13) 0.40 MI 52 (0.8%) 62 (1.0%) 0.84 (0.58-1.21) 0.34 Stroke 75 (1.2%) 94 (1.5%) 0.80 (0.59-1.08) 0.14 CV Hosp. 319 (5.0%) 331 (5.2%) 0.96 (0.83-1.12) 0.63 p 13

Cholesterol Lowering: Outcomes Outcome Rosuvastatin N (%) Placebo N (%) HR (95% CI) p Co-Primary 1 235 (3.7) 304 (4.8) 0.76 (0.64-0.91) 0.002 Co-Primary 2 277 (4.4) 363 (5.7) 0.75 (0.64-0.88) 0.0004 Secondary 1 306(4.8) 393 (6.2) 0.77 (0.66-0.89) 0.0006 CV Death 154 (2.4) 171 (2.7) 0.89 (0.72-1.11) 0.31 MI 45 (0.7) 69 (1.1) 0.65 (0.44-0.94) 0.02 Stroke 70 (1.1) 99 (1.6) 0.70 (0.52-0.95) 0.02 CV Hosp. 281 (4.4) 369 (5.8) 0.75 (0.64-0.88) 0.0003 20

Cholesterol Lowering: Safety Rosuvastatin N (%) Placebo N (%) Permanent Discontinuation 1510 (23.7) 1664 (26.2) 0.001 Rhabdomyolysis/Myopathy 2 (0) 1 (0) 1.0 Muscle pain/ weakness 367 (5.8) 296 (4.7) 0.005 Cataract Surgery 241 (3.8) 194 (3.1) 0.02 New Diabetes 232 (3.9) 226 (3.8) 0.82 p 24

Combination vs Double Placebo Outcome Double Active N=3,180 N (%) Double Placebo N=3,168 N (%) HR (95% CI) p Co-Primary 1 113 (3.6) 157 (5.0) 0.71 (0.56, 0.90) 0.0054 Co-Primary 2 136 (4.3) 187 (5.9) 0.72 (0.57, 0.89) 0.0030 Secondary 1 147 (4.6) 205 (6.5) 0.71 (0.57, 0.87) 0.0012 CV Death 75 (2.4) 91 (2.9) 0.82 (0.60-1.11) 0.19 MI 21 (0.7) 38 (1.2) 0.55 (0.32-0.93) 0.026 Stroke 31 (1.0) 55 (1.7) 0.56 (0.36-0.87) 0.009 CV Hosp 141(4.4) 191 (6.0) 0.73 (0.59-0.91) 0.0046 29

The GAUSS-3 Trial Goal Achievement after Utilizing an anti-pcsk9 antibody in Statin Intolerant Subjects-3 Steven E. Nissen MD MACC* Erik Stroes MD PhD *Disclosure Study Sponsor: Amgen Consulting: Many pharmaceutical companies Clinical Trials: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Cerenis, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, The Medicines Company, Orexigen, Takeda, and Pfizer. Companies are directed to pay any honoraria, speaking or consulting fees directly to charity so that neither income nor tax deduction is received.

FUNDAMENTO 5-10 % pacientes alto riesgo CV suspenden estatinas después de experimentar síntomas musculares. Diagnostico se basa en la queja subjetiva, sin presencia de elevación enzimática. Estudio diseñado para evaluar intolerancia a estatinas.

CRITERIOS DE INCLUSION Incapacidad de tolerar Atorvastatina 10 mg u otra estatina. 3 o más estatinas, una de ellas en la menor dosis.

Study Design: Two Double-Blind Phases Phase A 511 patients enrolled at 53 centers with a history of intolerance to multiple statins due to muscle-related adverse effects. 10 weeks Atorvastatin 20 mg Placebo 10 weeks Atorvastatin 20 mg Placebo Phase B Patients proceeded to Phase B only if they had intolerable muscle symptoms o atorvastati,but otp acebo,orck 10xULN duri gpriorstati treatme t 2 1 24 weeks Monthly SC evolocumab 420 mg Daily oral ezetimibe 10 mg

Selected Baseline Characteristics Characteristic Phase A (n=491) Phase B (n=218) Ezetimibe (n=73) Evolocumab (n=145) Age (years) 61 59 59 Male Gender 50% 47% 54% Coronary Heart Disease 35% 29% 33% NCEP-ATP III High Risk 63% 52% 58% I to era ceto 3 stati s 82% 82% 82% Total Cholesterol (mg/dl) 301 308 307 LDL-C (mg/dl) 212 222 219 HDL-C (mg/dl) 51 50 50

Phase A: Study Drug Discontinuation Events Intolerable Muscle Symptoms N = 491 On atorvastatin, but not placebo 209 (42.6%)* On placebo, but not atorvastatin 130 (26.5%) On both placebo and atorvastatin 48 (9.8%) No symptoms on either treatment 85 (17.3%) Did not complete Phase A 20/511 Bypassed Phase A duetock e evatio 10xULN 19 (3.9%)* *218 of these 228 eligible patients proceeded to Phase B

Phase B: Key Primary and Secondary Outcomes Ezetimibe (n=73) Evolocumab (n=145) P value Co-Primary Primary Endpoints LDL-C (week 24) -16.7% -52.8% <.001 LDL-C (mean weeks 22 and 24) -16.7% -54.5% <.001 Selected Secondary Endpoints (Week 24) Lipoprotein (a) +0.2% -21.1% <.001 HDL-C +2.9% +7.4%.008 Triglycerides -1.1% -2.9% NS Other secondary endpoints: Changes in total cholesterol, non-hdl-c, Apo B, total cholesterol/hdl-c ratio, Apo B/Apo A1 ratio, significant (P<.001)

LDL-C Values Over Time During Phase B 0 Percent Change in LDL-C (%) -10-20 -30-40 -50-60 -70 Mean reduction 16.7% (LDL-C = 181 mg/dl) Mean reduction 53.0% (LDL-C = 104 mg/dl) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 Weeks Following Randomization in Phase B Ezetimibe Evolocumab

CONCLUSIONES 42.6 % Historia de intolerancia a las estatinas. Presentan síntomas con Atorvastatina 20 mg y NO en placebo. 26.5% presentaron síntomas musculares con placebo. No Atorvastatina. Evolucumab comparado con ezetimibe reduce significativamente el LDL y otras partículas aterogenicas. Ezetimibe / Evolucumab escasamente producen síntomas musculares ( Ezetimibe 6 % Evolucumab 0.7 % )

The ACCELERATE Trial Impact of the Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibitor Evacetrapib on Cardiovascular Outcome Stephen J Nicholls for the ACCELERATE investigators Disclosure Research support: AstraZeneca, Amgen, Anthera, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Cerenis The Medicines Company, Resverlogix, InfraReDx, Roche and LipoScience Consulting and honoraria: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Anthera, Merck, Takeda, Resverlogix, Sanofi-Aventis, CSL Behring, Esperion, Boehringer Ingelheim ACCELERATE was sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company

Role of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein (CETP) Liver VLDL FC CE CE TG TG CE LPL FFA Adipose and other tissues LDL SR-BI CETP CETP TG CE LDL receptor Liver LDL receptor HDL TG CE LCAT CE FC Cell in peripheral tissue

ACCELERATE Trial Design 12,092 patients at high vascular risk, defined as: ACS within 30-365 days Diabetes with coronary disease Peripheral arterial disease Cerebrovascular disease 1:1 randomization Evacetrapib 130 mg Placebo Event driven - Primary endpoint in 1670 patients (CV death, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization or hosp. for unstable angina) Minimum of 700 patients with hard events (CV death, MI or stroke), minimum of 1.5 years of follow-up per patient 84% power to detect a 13.5% reduction in the primary endpoint

Early Termination of Trial On October 12, 2015 study terminated prematurely on the recommendation of the Data Monitoring Committee for clinical futility for the primary composite endpoint. These findings represent the preliminary analyses after 98.8% of patients completed their end of study visit, prior to final database lock.

Baseline Clinical Characteristics Parameter Placebo (n=6054) Evacetrapib (n=6038) Age (years) 65 65 Males 77% 77% Caucasian 83% 82% Mean body mass index 30.2 30.3 History of hypertension 88% 87% History of diabetes 68% 68% Current smoker 16% 17% Prior myocardial infarction 67% 67% Prior PCI 72% 71% Prior CABG 29% 30%

Preliminary analysis prior to formal database lock Percent Change in HDL-C Levels During the Trial 175 Percent Change in HDL-C (%) 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 Mean HDL-C = 104 mg/dl Mean difference = 130% Mean HDL-C = 46 mg/dl Evacetrapib Placebo -25 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 Months Following Randomization

Percent Change in LDL-C Levels During the Trial 20 Percent Change in LDL-C (%) 10 0-10 -20-30 -40 Mean LDL-C = 84 mg/dl Mean difference 37% Mean LDL-C = 55 mg/dl Evacetrapib Placebo -50 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 Months Following Randomization Preliminary analysis prior to formal database lock

Cumulative Incidence of Primary Efficacy Endpoint Cumulative Event Rate (%) Evacetrapib, 774 events (12.8%) Placebo, 768 events (12.7%) HR = 1.01 95% CI, 0.91-1.12 P=0.85 Months Following Randomization Preliminary analysis prior to formal database lock

Secondary Efficacy Endpoints Placebo (n=6054) Evacetrapib (n=6038) CV death, MI, stroke 444 (7.3) 434 (7.2) CV death 163 (2.7) 140 (2.3) MI 255 (4.2) 256 (4.2) Stroke 95 (1.6) 92 (1.5) Hospitalization for unstable angina 143 (2.4) 155 (2.6) Coronary revascularization 482 (8.0%) 485 (8.0%) All cause mortality 269 (4.1) 227 (3.8) HR (95% CI) 0.98 (0.86,1.12) 0.86 (0.68,1.08) 1.00 (0.84,1.19) 0.97 (0.73,1.29) 1.08 (0.86,1.36) 1.01 (0.89, 1.14) 0.84 (0.71-1.01) P Value 0.73 0.18 0.97 0.82 0.48 0.92 0.06 Preliminary analysis prior to formal database lock

Systolic Blood Pressure During the Trial 134 Mean difference = 0.9 mm Hg (P <0.001) 133 Mean Systolic BP = 132 mm Hg Systolic BP (mm Hg) 132 131 130 Mean Systolic BP = 131 mm Hg Evacetrapib Placebo 129 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 Months Following Randomization Preliminary analysis prior to formal database lock

CONCLUSIONES 37 % Disminución LDL, 130 % Aumento en HDL. Evacetatrip no reduce el desenlace compuesto de eventos cardiovasculares. Los hallazgos dan información importante. En espera de los resultados del estudio REVEAL. Anacetatrip.

MENSAJE Reducción 28 % del riesgo Cardiovascular en prevención primaria. Alternativas en pacientes con intolerancia a estatinas = LIPID PATHWAY. Estudios con posible impacto C.V. ( inhibidores CTEP )

GRACIAS