DEFINING TOMORROW'S VASCULAR STRATEGIES
×
Register now to R3i !
Your login
Your password
Confirm your password
Your email
I agree to receive the R3i newsletter
Mar 2024
The microvascular-macrovascular interplay: the next target?
Jan 2024
Targeting residual cardiovascular risk: what’s in the pipeline?
Sep 2023
Remnant cholesterol – evolving evidence
Jul 2023
Call to action on residual stroke risk
Apr 2023
Residual risk in 2023: where to?
Dec 2022
Lipid-related residual risk: lessons from PROMINENT?
Sep 2022
Residual cardiovascular risk: is apolipoprotein B the preferred marker?
Jul 2022
Residual vascular risk in chronic kidney disease: new options on the horizon
Feb 2022
Looking back at 2021 – what made the news?
Nov 2021
New ACC guidance addresses unmet clinical needs for high-risk patients with mild to moderate hypertriglyceridemia
Sep 2021
Residual vascular risk: What matters?
Aug 2021
Understanding vein graft failure: a role for PPARalpha in pathobiology
May 2021
Residual cardiovascular risk: how to identify?
Apr 2021
Metabolic syndrome and COVID-19
Mar 2021
Elevated triglyceride: linking ASCVD and dementia
Feb 2021
Does SPPARMα offer new opportunities in metabolic syndrome and NAFLD?
Jan 2021
Omega-3 fatty acids for residual cardiovascular risk: more questions than answers
Oct 2020
Targeting triglycerides: Novel agents expand the field
Jul 2020
Why multidrug approaches are needed in NASH: insights with pemafibrate
Jun 2020
Triglyceride-rich remnant lipoproteins: a new therapeutic target in aortic valve stenosis?
Mar 2020
Lowering triglycerides or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: which provides greater clinical benefit?
Feb 2020
The omega-3 fatty acid conundrum
Dec 2019
Focus on stroke: more input to address residual cardiovascular risk
Jul 2019
International Expert Consensus on Selective Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Alpha Modulator (SPPARMα): New opportunities for targeting modifiable residual cardiovascular risk
Nov 2018
Residual cardiovascular risk: triglyceride metabolism and genetics provide a key
Jul 2018
The clinical gap for managing residual cardiovascular risk: will new approaches make the difference?
Apr 2018
Residual cardiovascular risk: refocus on a multifactorial approach
Feb 2018
Optimizing treatment benefit: the tenet of personalized medicine
Jan 2018
Addressing residual cardiovascular risk – back to basics?
Dec 2017
Residual risk of heart failure: how to address this global epidemic?
Oct 2017
Remnants and residual cardiovascular risk: triglycerides or cholesterol?
Jul 2017
Targeting residual cardiovascular risk: lipids and beyond…
Jun 2017
Why we need to re-focus on Latin America.
Apr 2017
Residual cardiovascular risk in the Middle East: a perfect storm in the making
Feb 2017
A global call to action on residual cardiovascular risk
Dec 2016
SPPARM?: more than one way to tackle residual risk
Oct 2016
Remnants linked with diabetic myocardial dysfunction
Sep 2016
New study links elevated triglycerides with plaque progression
Aug 2016
Atherogenic dyslipidaemia: a risk factor for silent coronary artery disease
Jul 2016
SPPARM?: a concept becomes clinical reality
Jun 2016
Remnant cholesterol back in the news
May 2016
Back to the future: triglycerides revisited
Apr 2016
Unravelling the heritability of triglycerides and coronary risk
Mar 2016
Will residual cardiovascular risk meet its nemesis in 2016?
Feb 2016
Tackling residual cardiovascular risk: a case for targeting postprandial triglycerides?
Jan 2016
Looking back at 2015: lipid highlights
Dec 2015
Legacy effects in cardiovascular prevention
Nov 2015
Residual cardiovascular risk: it’s not just lipids!
Oct 2015
Addressing residual vascular risk: beyond pharmacotherapy
Sep 2015
Back to basics: triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, remnants and residual vascular risk
Jul 2015
Beyond the PCSK9 decade: what's next?
Jun 2015
Targeting triglycerides: what lies on the horizon for novel therapies?
May 2015
Do we need new lipid biomarkers for residual cardiovascular risk?
Apr 2015
The Residual Risk Debate Hots Up: Lowering LDL-C or lowering remnant cholesterol?
Mar 2015
Call for action on stroke
Feb 2015
Triglycerides: the tide has turned
Jan 2015
Post IMPROVE-IT: Where to now for residual risk?
Dec 2014
R3i publishes new Call to Action paper: Residual Microvascular Risk in Type 2 Diabetes in 2014: Is it Time for a Re-Think?
Sep 2014
Targeting residual vascular risk: round-up from ESC Congress 2014 and beyond
Jul 2014
Lipid-related residual cardiovascular risk: a new therapeutic target on the horizon
Mar 2014
Non-HDL-C and residual cardiovascular risk: the Lp(a) perspective
Feb 2014
REALIST Micro, atherogenic dyslipidaemia and residual microvascular risk
Jan 2014
Looking back at 2013: what have we learned about residual vascular risk?
Dec 2013
Long-overdue US guidelines for lipid management oversimplify the evidence
Nov 2013
Triglycerides and residual cardiovascular risk: where now?
Oct 2013
How to target residual cardiovascular risk?
Sep 2013
The Residual Vascular Risk Conundrum: Why we should target atherogenic dyslipidaemia
Jul 2013
Targeting atherogenic dyslipidemia: we need to do better
Apr 2013
Is PCSK9- targeted therapy the new hope for residual risk?
Mar 2013
Scope for multifocal approaches for reducing residual cardiovascular risk?
Feb 2013
Renewing the R3i call to action: Now more than ever we need to target and treat residual cardiovascular risk
Jan 2013
Time for a re-think on guidelines to reduce residual microvascular risk in diabetes?
Jan 2013
Re-evaluating options for residual risk post-HPS2-THRIVE : are SPPARMs the answer?
Dec 2012
Dysfunctional HDL: an additional target for reducing residual risk
Nov 2012
Egg consumption: a hidden residual risk factor
Oct 2012
Call to action: re-emphasising the importance of targeting residual vascular risk
Jun 2012
Time to prioritise atherogenic dyslipidaemia to reduce residual microvascular risk?
Jan 2012
Residual vascular risk in chronic kidney disease: an overlooked high-risk group
Dec 2011
Introducing the HDL Resource Center: HDL science now available for clinicians
Oct 2011
Targeting reverse cholesterol transport: the future of residual vascular risk reduction?
Sep 2011
After SPARCL: Targeting cardio-cerebrovascular metabolic risk and thrombosis to reduce residual risk of stroke
Jul 2011
Challenging the conventional wisdom: Lessons from the FIELD study on diabetic nephropathy
Jul 2010
ACCORD Eye Study: a milestone in residual microvascular risk reduction for patients with type 2 diabetes
May 2010
Lipids and residual risk of coronary heart disease in statin-treated patients
Mar 2010
ACCORD Lipid Study brings new hope to people with type 2 diabetes and atherogenic dyslipidemia
Mar 2010
Reducing residual risk of diabetic nephropathy: the role of lipoproteins
Dec 2009
ARBITER 6-HALTS: Implications for residual cardiovascular risk
Nov 2009
Microvascular event risk reduction in type 2 diabetes: New evidence from the FIELD study
Aug 2009
Fasting versus nonfasting triglycerides: Importance of triglyceride-regulating genetic polymorphisms to residual cardiovascular risk
Jul 2009
Residual risk of microvascular complications of diabetes: is intensive multitherapy the solution?
Apr 2009
Reducing residual vascular risk: modifiable and non modifiable residual vascular risk factors
Jan 2009
Micro- and macrovascular residual risk: one of the most challenging health problems of the moment
Nov 2008
Treated dyslipidemic patients remain at high residual risk of vascular events

R3i Editorial

5 January 2013
Addressing the residual burden of CVD in renal impairment: do PPARa agonists provide an answer?
Prof. JC Fruchart, Prof. J. Davignon, Prof. M Hermans
An Editorial from the R3i Trustees
 
Prof. JC Fruchart, Prof. J. Davignon, Prof. M Hermans Chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a growing challenge. In the US, one in 10 individuals has some degree of renal impairment, with even higher prevalence among those aged 65 years or more.(1) Data from Europe, although less comprehensive, indicate a similar scenario.(2) CKD is an important determinant of the burden of the major non-communicable diseases, being a risk multiplier in cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes and hypertension.(3) Indeed, CKD is acknowledged as a coronary artery disease risk equivalent in recent guidelines, with reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) the primary focus of therapy.(4) As shown by recent meta-analyses, treatment with a statin confers clinical benefit across the spectrum of CKD.(5,6) However, it is acknowledged that there remains a high residual risk of CV events in CKD patients despite best treatment. Moreover, as shown in the latest meta-analysis of statin therapy in CKD, statin treatment had no benefit on renal events.(5)

Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins as a mediator of CVD in CKD

This month’s Focus article highlights new evidence from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA),(7) implying that part of the association between CVD and CKD is mediated via elevations in triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, a key component of atherogenic dyslipidemia. While statins are undoubtedly effective in lowering LDL-C, their effects on atherogenic dyslipidemia, characterised by an increase in triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and low high-density lipoprotein (HDL), are more modest. It is therefore plausible that additional therapy targeting this non-LDL dyslipidemia may help to reduce the residual burden of CVD in CKD patients.

In this context, a case can be made for the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα) agonists, fibrates. These agents are efficacious in reducing elevated triglycerides, a marker of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins. In post hoc analyses, fibrates have been shown to be effective in reducing CV risk in individuals with marked atherogenic dyslipidemia, the combination of elevated triglycerides (≥204 mg/dL or 2.3 mmol/L) and low HDL cholesterol (≤34 mg/dL or 0.88 mmol/L).(8) A recent meta-analysis showed that fibrate therapy (predominantly fenofibrate) improves lipid profiles and reduces CV risk in individuals with CKD, to a similar extent as in those with normal renal function.(9)

However, clinicians may regard the use of fibrates in this population with caution due to safety concerns related to elevation in serum creatinine. Recent findings contribute to allay such concerns. Reports from the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study and the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study have confirmed that the fenofibrate-related increases in creatinine are reversible.(10,11) Furthermore, the increase in serum creatinine associated with fenofibrate treatment did not appear to carry the same risk of decline in renal function and was reversible following drug wash-out. An analysis from the FIELD study showed no increase in risk of end-stage renal disease or additional safety issues compared with patients with no or mild renal impairment.(12) Indeed, there was evidence of potential renoprotection with fenofibrate, including reduction in secular loss of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria.(10) Taken together, despite the acute changes in creatinine associated with fenofibrate therapy, the available data indicate long-term clinical benefits. These data merit consideration in guideline review.

The Residual Risk Reduction Initiative (R3i) believes that the addition of a PPARα agonist, which is efficacious in lowering elevated triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, may offer the potential to reduce the residual burden of CVD in patients with CKD. The R3i strongly believes that such evidence should be considered in guidelines for the management of dyslipidemia in CKD. Whether improving the selectivity and potency of agents targeting PPARα may provide further benefit is very much a focus of ongoing research.

References

1. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), National Institutes of Health (NIH). Kidney Disease Statistics for the United States. http://kidney.niddk.nih.gov/kudiseases/pubs/kustats/#1. Accessed 22 April 2013.
2. Zoccali C, Kramer A, Jager KJ. Epidemiology of CKD in Europe: an uncertain scenario. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2010;25: 1731-3.
3. Couser WG, Remuzzi G, Mendis S, Tonelli M. The contribution of chronic kidney disease to the global burden of major noncommunicable diseases. Kidney Int 2011;80:1258-70.
4. Reiner Z, Catapano AL, De Backer G et al. ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: the Task Force for the management of dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS). Eur Heart J 2011;32:1769-818.
5. Hou W, Lv J, Perkovic V et al. Effect of statin therapy on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart 2013;Epub ahead of print March 6, 2013.
6. Upadhyay A, Earley A, Lamont JL, Haynes S, Wanner C, Balk EM. Lipid-lowering therapy in persons with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2012;157:251-62.
7. Lamprea-Montealegre JA, McClelland RL, Astor BC, Matsushita K, Shlipak M, de Boer IH, Szklo M. Chronic kidney disease, plasma lipoproteins, and coronary artery calcium incidence: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2013;33:652-8.
8. Sacks FM, Carey VJ, Fruchart JC. Combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2010;363:692-4.
9. Jun M, Zhu B, Tonelli M, Jardine MJ, Patel A, Neal B, Liyanage T, Keech A, Cass A, Perkovic V. Effects of fibrates in kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol;60:2061-71.
10. Davis TME, Ting R, Best JD et al. Effects of fenofibrate on renal function in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) Study. Diabetologia 2011;54:280–90.
11. Mychaleckyj JC, Craven T, Nayak U et al. Reversibility of fenofibrate therapy-induced renal function impairment in ACCORD type 2 diabetic participants. Diabetes Care 2012;35:1008 –14
12. Ting RD, Keech AC, Drury PL et al. Benefits and safety of long-term fenofibrate therapy in people with type 2 diabetes and renal impairment: the FIELD Study. Diabetes Care 2012;35:218-25.
?>