Drug Class Review Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin Kexin type 9 (PCSK9) Inhibitors

Similar documents
HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, or statins, have been the

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

Drug Class Review Newer Oral Anticoagulant Drugs

PCSK9 Inhibitors: Promise or Pitfall?

Drug Class Review. Pharmacologic Treatments for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Effect of the PCSK9 Inhibitor Evolocumab on Cardiovascular Outcomes

Cost-effectiveness of evolocumab (Repatha ) for primary hypercholesterolemia and mixed dyslipidemia.

Pamela B. Morris, MD, FACC, FAHA, FASPC, FNLA

Drug Class Monograph

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

New ACC/AHA Guidelines on Lipids: Are PCSK9 Inhibitors Poised for a Breakthrough?

Class Update PCSK9 Inhibitors

Evolving Concepts on Lipid Management from Ezetimibe (IMPROVE IT) to PCSK9 Inhibitors

CADTH RAPID RESPONSE REPORT: SUMMARY WITH CRITICAL APPRAISAL PCSK-9 Inhibitors for Hyperlipidemia: A Review of the Comparative Clinical Effectiveness

B. Patient has not reached the percentage reduction goal with statin therapy

PCSK9 Agents Drug Class Prior Authorization Protocol

New Horizons in Dyslipidemia Management in Primary Care

Drug Class Review HMG-CoA Reductase Inhibitors (Statins) and Fixed-dose Combination Products Containing a Statin

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

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

PCSK9 Inhibitors Current Status

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

Patient Lists. Epic ABOUT THIS GUIDE INDICATIONS AND USAGE IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION. Please see accompanying full Prescribing Information

PCSK9 for LDL Cholesterol Reduction: What have we learned from clinical trials?

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

Class Update PCSK9 Inhibitors

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

Get a Statin or Not? Learning objectives. Presentation overview 4/3/2018. Treatment Strategies in Dyslipidemia Management

PCSK9 Inhibitors for Lowering Cholesterol: Ready for Prime Time?

PCSK9 Inhibitors Current Status

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

W J C. World Journal of Cardiology. PCSK9 inhibitors: A new era of lipid lowering therapy. Abstract REVIEW

Patient List Inquiries

Cardiovascular Controversies: Emerging Therapies for Lowering Cardiovascular Risk

PCSK9 Inhibitors Are They Worth The Money? Michael J. Blaha MD MPH

New Approaches to Lower LDL-C

PCSK9 Inhibitors: Narnia vs. Medicare Bankruptcy

Patient Action Sets. Allscripts Touchworks ABOUT THIS GUIDE INDICATIONS AND USAGE IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION

Contemporary management of Dyslipidemia

Patient Lists. Allscripts Professional ABOUT THIS GUIDE INDICATIONS AND USAGE IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION

EVIDENCE TO DATE EVOLOCUMAB (REPATHA)

Cost-effectiveness of evolocumab (Repatha ) for hypercholesterolemia

Systematic review of published Phase 3 data on anti-pcsk9 monoclonal antibodies in patients with hypercholesterolaemia

Pharmacy Policy Bulletin

JAMA. 2011;305(24): Nora A. Kalagi, MSc

Chapter 6. Long-Term Cardiovascular Outcomes with PCSK9 Inhibitors INTRODUCTION LIMITATIONS OF CURRENT MANAGEMENT OF DYSLIPIDAEMIA

Challenges in lipid management

New Drugs and Technologies

PCSK9 Inhibitors: A View of Clinical Studies

Disclosure. This study was sponsored by Pfizer, Inc. All authors are employees of Pfizer, Inc. with ownership of stock in Pfizer, Inc.

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

Clinical Policy: Mipomersen (Kynamro) Reference Number: ERX.SPMN.186 Effective Date: 01/2017

Does IMPROVE-IT & FOURIER Confirm or Refute the LDL Hypothesis?

Clinical Policy: Lomitapide (Juxtapid) Reference Number: ERX.SPA.170 Effective Date:

Subject: Repatha (evolocumab) Original Effective Date: 09/28/2015. Policy Number: MCP-258 Revision Date(s): 5/4/16; 4/17/17

Management of Dyslipidaemias: PCSK9 Inhibition. Alberico L. Catapano Professor President EAS University of Milano Italy

Alirocumab for the treatment of primary hypercholesterolaemia and mixed dyslipidaemia

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

Technology appraisal guidance Published: 22 June 2016 nice.org.uk/guidance/ta394

Reports. NextGen ABOUT THIS GUIDE INDICATIONS AND USAGE IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION. Please see accompanying full Prescribing Information

Accumulating Clinical data on PCSK9 Inhibition: Key Lessons and Challenges

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Statins and PCSK9 inhibitors for stroke prevention

Drug Regulatory Affairs. Praluent. Summary of the Risk Management Plan (RMP) for Praluent (alirocumab)

PCSK9 Inhibitors and Modulators

No relevant financial relationships

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

Repatha. Repatha (evolocumab) Description

Evolocumab for the treatment of primary hypercholesterolaemia and mixed dyslipidaemia

Fasting or non fasting?

Drug Class Review Newer Diabetes Medications and Combinations

Summary of the risk management plan (RMP) for Praluent (Alirocumab)

Clinical Policy: Evolocumab (Repatha) Reference Number: CP.CPA.269 Effective Date: Last Review Date: Line of Business: Commercial

HYPERCHOLESTEROLEMIA

Supplementary Online Content

Beyond HDL: new therapeutic targets

Lipid Management C. Samuel Ledford, MD Interventional Cardiology Chattanooga Heart Institute

Clinical Policy: Mipomersen (Kynamro) Reference Number: ERX.SPA.171 Effective Date:

Clinical Policy: Evolocumab (Repatha) Reference Number: ERX.SPMN.184 Effective Date: 01/2017

Approach to Dyslipidemia among diabetic patients

DYSLIPIDEMIA. Michael Brändle, Stefan Bilz

Disclosures. Objectives 2/11/2017

Registry Processor Reports

Deep Dive into Contemporary Cholesterol Management. Kim Allan Williams, Sr., MD, FACC Pamela B. Morris, MD, FACC 7 October 2016 Mexico City

EVOLOCUMAB Generic Brand HICL GCN Exception/Other EVOLOCUMAB REPATHA 42378

Cardiology 2015: Status On Pharmacology News, Debates & Novelties

Best Lipid Treatments

Drug Class Review on Macrolides

New Strategies for Lowering LDL - Are They Really Worth It?

Repatha. Repatha (evolocumab) Description

Non-Statin Lipid-Lowering Agents M Holler - Last updated: 10/2016

ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND PROCEDURE

Modern Lipid Management:

Dyslipidemia and Combination Therapy: A Framework for Clinical Decision Making

ACC/AHA GUIDELINES ON LIPIDS AND PCSK9 INHIBITORS

PCSK9 inhibition across a wide spectrum of patients: One size fits all?

Landmesser U et al. Eur Heart J 2017; /eurheartj/ehx549

INTERNAL MEDICINE - PEDIATRICS

David Y. Gaitonde, MD, FACP Endocrinology DDEAMC, Fort Gordon

Transcription:

Drug Class Review Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin Kexin type 9 (PCSK9) Inhibitors Final Original Report July 2015 The purpose of reports is to make available information regarding the comparative clinical effectiveness and harms of different drugs. Reports are not usage guidelines, nor should they be read as an endorsement of or recommendation for any particular drug, use, or approach. Oregon Health & Science University does not recommend or endorse any guideline or recommendation developed by users of these reports. Kim Peterson, MS Brittany Holzhammer, MPH Marian McDonagh, PharmD Marian McDonagh, PharmD, Principal Investigator Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center Roger Chou, MD, Director Marian McDonagh, PharmD, Associate Director Copyright 2015 by Oregon Health & Science University Portland, Oregon 97239. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, or statins, have been the primary therapeutic intervention for hypercholesterolemia for decades. They have been successful in reducing the risk of major cardiovascular (CV) events and mortality in a wide range of at-risk individuals. However, statins (alone or in combination with other lipid-lowering therapies, such as ) are not always adequate in reducing cholesterol levels in some patients, even at higher doses (e.g., patients with heterozygous hypercholesterolemia). Additionally, some patients cannot tolerate statins. Within the last decade, the relationship between proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) and cholesterol metabolism has been increasingly studied. PCSK9 signals the degradation of the low-density lipoprotein receptor, which causes levels plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol to increase. Monoclonal antibodies directed at inhibiting PCSK9 are undergoing development as novel therapies in response to the therapeutic gaps posed by current standard therapies to treat hypercholesterolemia. Scope and Key Questions Currently, there are three PCSK9 inhibitors in phase III testing (Table A), which are the focus of this review. These interventions have not yet been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The purpose of this review is to compare the benefits and harms of these drugs, with or without other lipid lowering drugs, with emphasis on health outcomes and longer-term harms. Table A. PCSK9 Inhibitors Included in this Report Generic Name Company Code Phase of Development BLA Submitted Estimated FDA Approval Evolocumab AMG 145 Phase II/III 8/28/14 Summer 2015 Alirocumab SAR236553 Phase III 11/27/2014 7/24/2015 (REGN727) Bococizumab RN316 (PF-04950615) Phase III Unclear 2016 Abbreviations: BLA, biologics license application; FDA, U.S. Food & Drug Administration In consultation with participating organizations, the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center drafted Key Questions and inclusion criteria reflecting populations, drugs, and outcome measures of interest to clinicians and patients. The following Key Questions were approved to guide this review: 1. What are the comparative benefits and harms of PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with heterozygous and homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia? 2. What are the comparative benefits and harms of PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with hypercholesterolemia who are unable to use statins due to intolerance or any other reasons? 3. What are the comparative benefits and harms of PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with nonfamilial hypercholesterolemia who have not achieved LDL-C <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl with their current lipid lowering regimen (e.g., statin, with or without, etc.)? PCSK9 Inhibitors 2 of 9

4. Do the comparative benefits and harms of PCSK9 inhibitors differ when used in different patient subgroups based on demographics, socioeconomic status, other medications, or comorbidities? METHODS To identify relevant studies, we searched Ovid MEDLINE (through February Week 1 2015), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2009 through 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2009 through January 2015), and Scopus (2010 through 2015) using names of included drugs as search terms. We attempted to identify additional studies through hand searches of reference lists of included studies and reviews. In addition, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov for unpublished results and additional publications. Finally, we requested dossiers of published and unpublished information from the relevant pharmaceutical companies for this review. All received dossiers were screened for studies or data not found through other searches. We assessed risk of bias (quality rating) of trials based on predefined criteria developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (ratings: good-fair-poor) and the National Health Service Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. We graded strength of evidence based on the guidance established for the Evidence-based Practice Center Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS Of 205 citations identified from electronic databases, 1 pharmaceutical manufacturer dossier submission, ClinicalTrials.gov, suggestions in public comments on the draft report and hand searches, we included 17 trials. We identified no completed studies with health outcomes as primary outcomes for alirocumab, bococizumab or evolocumab, but we identified ongoing studies with such primary outcomes for evolocumab (FOURIER) and for bococizumab (SPIRE-1 and SPIRE-2) with estimated completion dates in 2018. There were no published trials of bococizumab, despite 5 completed trials identified in ClinicalTrials.gov, 4 with completion dates between October 2011 and October 2013. There were no completed or ongoing studies that directly compared different PCSK9 inhibitors. The evidence is summarized below first by drug and then by population/key Question, and in the Summary Table (Table B). Part I. Evidence for Evolocumab Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia Compared to placebo, there was high-strength evidence from 2, 12-week randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (fair- and good-quality, N=499) that evolocumab, dosed at 140 mg every 2 weeks to weeks, achieved a greater low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction in patients who were largely taking a high-intensity statin plus with a greater improvement in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and no differences in harms (moderate-strength evidence). PCSK9 Inhibitors 3 of 9

Homozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia Low-strength evidence based on 1 small, good-quality trial (N=50) suggested that evolocumab weeks reduced LDL-C significantly more than placebo at 12 weeks in patients taking a maximum statin dose and. There was no difference in HDL-C change and there was no difference in the percentage of patients with serious adverse events, neurocognitive events, or those withdrawing due to treatment emergent adverse events. However, compared with placebo, patients treated with evolocumab experienced fewer overall treatment emergent adverse events and potential injection-site reactions but more reports of gastroenteritis. Statin Intolerant Patients In statin-intolerant patients, 2 fair-quality 12-week RCTs (GAUSS and GAUSS-2; N=434) provided low-strength evidence that evolocumab led to a greater reduction in LDL-C when dosed at 280 mg every 4 weeks to or 140 mg every 2 weeks, while having generally similar effects on HDL-C and harms. There was also low-strength evidence from the GAUSS study (N=62) that the combination of evolocumab weeks plus 10 mg led to a greater percent LDL-C reduction than 10 mg alone, but insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on other outcomes. Patients Not Achieving LDL-C <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl While on Treatment for Hypercholesterolemia Evolocumab Compared with Ezetimibe (Both with Statin Therapy) In a comparison of evolocumab and (both with statin therapy), the LAPLACE-2 study (N=329), provided low-strength evidence that when added to either atorvastatin 10 mg or 80 mg, compared to 10 mg, evolocumab 420 mg monthly resulted in higher rates of meeting an LDL-C target of <70 mg/dl at 12 weeks, with similar rates of patients with overall adverse events. This study provided insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about HDL-C or serious adverse events or withdrawal due to adverse events, due to the small magnitude of change or event rates. Evolocumab Compared with Placebo in Patients with Varying CV Risk In short-term comparisons of evolocumab and placebo, LAPLACE-TIMI 57 AND LAPLACE-2 (N=996 for placebo comparison) provided high-strength evidence that at 12 weeks in patients with varying risk levels and not meeting LDL-C targets, significantly more patients taking evolocumab 420 mg monthly than taking placebo (both with statin therapy) achieved an LDL-C of <70 mg/dl, and had greater percent reduction in LDL-C. There was also moderate-strength evidence of modest HDL-C increases with evolocumab 420 mg monthly, and moderate- to highstrength evidence of no differences in harms outcomes. Based on 1 good quality trial longer-term (N=901; 52 weeks) there was moderatestrength evidence that evolocumab 420 mg given every 4 weeks also resulted in significantly more patients achieving a goal of LDL-C <70 mg/dl compared with placebo, low-strength evidence of a modest increase in HDL-C, and evidence of no difference in harms (moderate- and high-strength depending on outcome). Clinically important and statistically significant differences were seen in all CV risk subgroups. PCSK9 Inhibitors 4 of 9

Evolocumab Compared with Placebo in Patients with High CV Risk In patients with high CV risk, a small 12 week (N=104 for placebo comparison) study provided low-strength evidence that evolocumab 420 mg monthly resulted in higher rates of meeting LDL-C target of both <100 mg/dl and <70 mg/dl when added to statins in Japanese patients, compared to placebo. There was greater mean change in LDL-C, but insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about other outcomes. Mixed Populations: Heterozygous Familial, Statin-Intolerant, and Not At Target There was moderate-strength evidence, based on a pooled analysis of 2 open-label extension studies (OSLER 1 and 2) of patients completing 1 of 12 previous trials (patients not at target, with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, or statin intolerance; N=4,465), that evolocumab 420 mg monthly or 140 mg every 2 weeks (plus standard care primarily statins) reduced LDL-C by 61% more than standard care alone at 12 weeks. This reduction was largely sustained at 48 weeks (58.4% more than usual care at week 48). These studies also provided lowstrength evidence of a greater proportion of patients meeting an LDL-C goal of <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl and a greater increase in HDL-C at 12 weeks than with standard therapy alone. CV events were reported as secondary or post-hoc outcomes but evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions. There was low-strength evidence that slightly more patients on evolocumab experienced any adverse event at 12 weeks compared with statins alone, without differences in serious adverse events, but insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about other adverse event outcomes. Part II. Evidence for Alirocumab Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia Compared to placebo, there was low-strength evidence that alirocumab achieved a higher LDL-C reduction in patients taking a maximum statin dose plus based on 1 fair-quality trial (N=77), with similar effects on HDL-C, but insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about harms. Evidence on alirocumab compared with placebo in patients taking a low- to moderateintensity statin was insufficient (1 fair-quality RCT, N=22). Homozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia No evidence for alirocumab. Statin Intolerant Patients No evidence for alirocumab. Patients Not Achieving LDL-C <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl While on Treatment for Hypercholesterolemia Alirocumab versus Placebo in Average-Risk Patients Low-strength evidence from 2 small (N=154) fair-quality RCTs indicated that in patients stabilized on statins who had not achieved an LDL-C of <100 mg/dl, alirocumab 150 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks for 8 to 10 weeks resulted in significantly more patients achieving study goal (LDL-C <100 mg/dl) and greater percent reductions (49% to 67% more) than statins alone. Evidence on adverse events and in subgroups, compared with statins alone, was insufficient due to small sample sizes. PCSK9 Inhibitors 5 of 9

Alirocumab versus Ezetimibe in High-Risk Patients Moderate-strength evidence based on a good-quality trial (ODYSSEY COMBO, N=720), that alirocumab, 75 to 150 mg given every 2 weeks, resulted in a higher proportion of patients with high CV risk reaching study goal of LDL-C <70 mg/dl at 24 weeks (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.46 to 1.95) than 10 mg. Similarly, the difference in the percent change in LDL-C at 24 weeks was -29.8% (P<0.0001) and the difference in change in HDL-C was 8.1% (mean baseline LDL-C 106 mg/dl; P<0.0001). Alirocumab versus Placebo in High-Risk Patients Based on 2 trials (ODYSSEY COMBO I and ODYSSEY Long-Term; N =2656), there was highstrength evidence that alirocumab, 75 to 150 mg given every 2 weeks, resulted in a higher proportion of patients with high CV risk reaching study goal of LDL-C <70 mg/dl at 24 weeks than placebo (pooled RR, 9.65; 95% CI, 7.7 to 12.0). The difference in percent reduction in LDL-C (-45.9% to -61.9%, P<0.001; mean baseline LDL-C range 100 to 123 mg/dl) and HDL- C (7.3% to 7.6%, P<0.001) were also greater. There was moderate- and low-strength evidence of no difference in CV events between alirocumab and at 52 weeks or between alirocumab and placebo at 52 to 78 weeks (all with concomitant stain therapy). Moderate- and low-strength evidence found no differences in harms between alirocumab and or placebo (based on 3 trials), except for slightly more frequent injection site reactions with alirocumab in 1 study. Part III. Evidence for Bococizumab No completed studies. PCSK9 Inhibitors 6 of 9

OVERALL SUMMARY Evolocumab and alirocumab both had evidence of large LDL-C reductions, with few differences in adverse event outcomes compared with placebo or. The strongest evidence (high-strength) for evolocumab was in heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and those at average CV risk who had not achieved LDL-C of <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl with primarily statin-based treatment. For alirocumab, the strongest evidence (high-strength) was in patients at high CV risk who had not achieved LDL-C of <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl with primarily statin-based treatment. Important questions remain about the effects of PCSK9 inhibitors on health outcomes and effects with longer-term use. Table B. Summary of the evidence by drug and population Population Study N Patient N Evolocumab Concomitant lipid therapy PCSK9 inhibitor Dose Baseline LDL-C (mg/dl) Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia: 12 wks N=499 High-intensity statin + 140 mg every 2 wks to 420 mg every 4 wks Homozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia: 12 wks 1 RCT N=50 wks High-intensity statin + Unable to use statins: 12 wks N=496 N/A 140 mg every 2 wks or 280 mg, 350, or 420 mg given every 4 wks (vs. 10 mg) Difference in LDL-C change Difference in % meeting goal 150 to 155-44% to -61% vs. placebo 348-32.1% (95% CI, -45.1 to -19.2) vs. placebo 192 to 195-26% (95% CI, -34.1% to -17.9%) for 280 mg every 4 wks to -38% (95% CI, -43.7 to -32.4) for 140 mg every 2 wks (vs. ) HDL-C 6.8% (P<0.01) to 9.2% (95% CI, +4.7% to +13.7%) Evolocumab reduced HDL-C by 0.1% vs. placebo (NS) Differences favored evolocumab for all doses (3.6% to 8.5%) Cardiovascular events Harms No differences No differences or lower rates of most harms, except more gastroenteritis No difference in overall AEs and SAEs. Significantly lower WAEs with evolocumab (3% vs. 12%). No neurocognitive events and too few injection site reactions to draw conclusions. to PCSK9 Inhibitors 7 of 9

Population Study N Patient N Concomitant lipid therapy Ezetimibe 10 mg PCSK9 inhibitor Dose wks Baseline LDL-C (mg/dl) Not achieved LDL-C <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl : 12-52 wks Patients with varying risk of CV events: 12-52 wks Statin, range of doses according to risk level wks (vs. placebo) N=1,375 Patients with high risk of CV events: 12 wks N=1,375 Statin, range of doses wks (vs. placebo or ) Mixed population with extended duration: 12-48 wks 2 extension RCTs N=4,465 Usual care (primarily statins) wks Difference in LDL-C change Difference in % meeting goal -47% (95% CI, -53.7% to -40.8%) 104 Vs. placebo 52 wks: -57% (+/- 2.1 sd) LDL goal <70: 82.3% vs. 6.4% (P<0.0001) 12 wks: -53% to -70.5% vs. placebo LDL goal <70: 71.8% to 94.5% vs. 0-9.3% 139 vs. placebo; 126 to 129 or 92 to 94 vs. -63.9% (P<0.001) LDL goal <100: 96% vs. 1% (P<0.001) LDL goal <70: 82% vs. 0% (P<0.001) Vs. : LDL goal <70: 86% to 95% vs. 6% to 62% 12 wks: reduction of 61% (95% CI, 59 to 63, P<0.001) LDL goal <100: 90.2% vs. 26.0% LDL goal <70: 73.6% vs. 3.8% 48 wks: 58.4% (P<0.001) and HDL-C 52 wks: 5.4% (P<0.001) 12 wks: 4.5% (95% CI, 0.4 to 8.7) to 9.1% (95% CI, 4.4 to 13.7) to 12 wks: 8.7% vs. 1.7% (P<0.001) Cardiovascular events 48 wks: any CV event (adjudicated, but not a primary outcome): HR, 0.47 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.78) with evolocumab Harms 52 wks: no differences (vs. placebo) to 12 wks: more overall AEs (60% vs. 42%), no difference in withdrawals, serious harms, injection site reactions to no conclusions Vs. : similar rates of overall AEs, but no conclusions on other harms outcomes to 48 wks: Overall AEs: 69.2% vs. 64.8%. No difference in serious adverse events. for other harms PCSK9 Inhibitors 8 of 9

Population Study N Patient N Alirocumab Concomitant lipid therapy PCSK9 inhibitor Dose Baseline LDL-C (mg/dl) Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia: 12 wks N=98 High-dose statin + 150 mg, 200 mg, or 300 mg every 4 wks or 150 mg every 2 wks (vs. placebo) 151.0 to 170.1 Not achieved LDL-C <100 mg/dl or <70 mg/dl : 10-78 weeks Patients with average risk of CV events: 10 wks Statin, range of doses 75 to 150 mg every 2 wks (vs. or placebo) 122.6 to 123.9 N=124 at 150 mg dose Patients with high risk of CV events: 24-78 wks Vs. 1 RCT N=720 Vs. placebo N=2,656 Statin, range of doses 75 to 150 mg every 2 wks (vs. or placebo) 106 (vs. ) 100 to 123 (vs. placebo): Difference in LDL-C change Difference in % meeting goal -8% to -57% -49% to -67% LDL <100: 100% vs. 16% to 52% (150 mg every 2 wks) vs. placebo 24 wks: Vs. : -29.8% (P<0.0001) LDL goal <70: RR 1.70 (95% CI, 1.46 to 1.95) -45.9% to -61.9% (P<0.001) LDL goal <70: RR 9.65 (95% CI, 7.7 to 12.0) HDL-C NSD except for 150 mg every 2 wks: +12.34% vs. +2.20% (P=0.0496) 6% to 9% over placebo 24 wks: Vs. : 8.1% over (P<0.0001) 7.3% to 7.6% over placebo (P<0.0001) Cardiovascular events 52 wks: No difference in CV events between alirocumab and 52 and 78 wks: No differences between alirocumab and placebo Harms No differences in harms outcomes between alirocumab and or placebo, except for slightly more frequent injection site reactions with alirocumab in one study. and Strength of evidence: =High; =Moderate; =Low; =Insufficient Abbreviations: AEs, adverse events; CI, confidence interval CV, cardiovascular;, not reported; NSD, no significant difference; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SAEs, serious adverse events; sd, standard deviation; WAEs, withdrawal due to adverse events; wks, weeks PCSK9 Inhibitors 9 of 9