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?
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
Addressing the residual burden of CVD in renal impairment: do PPARa agonists provide an answer?
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

1 September 2013
The Residual Vascular Risk Conundrum: Why we should target atherogenic dyslipidaemia
Prof. Jean Charles Fruchart, Prof. Jean Davignon, Prof. Michel Hermans
An Editorial from the R3i Trustees
 
Prof. Jean Charles Fruchart, Prof. Jean Davignon, Prof. Michel Hermans Ongoing development of the proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors has re ignited debate about the preferred strategy for lowering residual vascular risk that persists beyond current standards of care. There is a conundrum: Should the focus be on lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) beyond currently recommended levels or on targeting triglyceride-rich apolipoprotein (apo) B100/48-containing lipoproteins (TRL) and their remnants? The Residual Risk Reduction Initiative (R3i) strongly believes that there is evidence to support the latter approach, particularly relevant against the rising tide of obesity-related cardiometabolic disease.
Undoubtedly, LDL-C is the primary focus of dyslipidaemia management, as recognised by current international guidelines. However, there are two key questions: What evidence do we have that achieving very low LDL-C levels (<50 mg/dL or 1.25 mmol/L) provides further clinical benefits, against a background of current standards of care? And, is this approach safe in the long-term?

Transition from a hunter-gatherer to urban society with adoption of a Westernised diet is recognised as a major factor contributing to higher plasma LDL-C levels and escalation in the rates of cardiovascular disease in modern societies. For example, increasing urbanisation and adoption of a Westernised diet in China has dramatically increased cholesterol levels, and correspondingly, the prevalence of coronary heart disease, metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes.(1,2) Meta-analyses of LDL-lowering strategies indicate a linear relationship between reduction in LDL-C plasma levels and reduction in the risk of cardiovascular events, with no evidence of a threshold over the LDL-C range studied.(3,4) Ongoing studies with novel treatments targeting LDL-C will provide further insights. However, as a caveat we need to bear in mind that these treatments also lower other atherogenic lipoproteins. Notably, the PCSK9 inhibitors also lower triglycerides by 20-30% and lipoprotein(a).(5-7) A similar argument can be made for the cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitors anacetrapib and evacetrapib, as well as mipomersen, the antisense oligonucleotide against apoB.(8.9) In respect of mipomersen, reducing the production of apoB-100 reduces hepatic production of very low-density lipoprotein, consequently decreasing circulating levels of atherogenic very low-density lipoprotein remnants, intermediate-density lipoproteins, LDL, and lipoprotein(a) particles.9 Therefore it is difficult to differentiate effects due to lowering LDL-C, triglycerides, LDL number, TRL and/or lipoprotein(a), on residual cardiovascular risk.

Safety is another consideration, especially in high-risk patients with or at risk of type 2 diabetes. High-dose statin therapy has been associated with a small increased risk of new-onset diabetes or worsening of glycaemic control of pre-existing diabetes,(10) although in the context of the high-risk patient, the reduction in the risk of cardiovascular events far outweighs this potential risk. Furthermore, high-dose statin therapy is also associated with an increased risk of myopathy, particularly in older persons with comorbid conditions and receiving polypharmacy.(11) However, we need to bear in mind the extensive safety database relating to statins, with huge long-term population exposure.

In respect of the new therapeutic agents, safety data are limited. While there has been no adverse signal in short-term trials with the PCSK9 monoclonal antibody inhibitors, long-term safety data are clearly needed. Indeed, safety is a particular issue for the CETP inhibitors in development, given the chequered history of this therapeutic class.

Targeting TRL in high-risk dyslipidaemic patients with cardiometabolic disease has been shown to confer clinical benefit. The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study showed ∼30% reduction in cardiovascular events associated with fenofibrate treatment in statin-treated type 2 diabetes patients with marked atherogenic dyslipidaemia defined by baseline (on statin) triglycerides in the upper third of the population (≥204 mg/dL or 2.3 mmol/L) and baseline HDL cholesterol levels in the lower third (≤34 mg/dL or 0.9 mmol/L).(12) This finding was subsequently confirmed in a meta-analysis of subgroups with similar lipid criteria for atherogenic dyslipidaemia in the major fibrate trials.(13) However, the R3i acknowledges that this was a post hoc analysis, and recognises the need for an outcomes trial specifically in high-risk statin-treated patients with atherogenic dyslipidaemia to conclude this definitively. The next generation of highly potent and selective PPARα-modulators (SPPARMα), such as K-877, may offer greater benefit, given evidence of improved lipid-modifying efficacy. Furthermore, treatment with a fibrate (specifically fenofibrate) confers benefits on residual microvascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes, irrespective of baseline atherogenic dyslipidaemia, with significant preventive effects on diabetic retinopathy, nephropathy and risk for lower-extremity distal amputations.(14-17) Evolving evidence also suggests that the pleiotropic effects of fibrates, including raising circulating plasma levels of adiponectin as discussed in this month’s Focus article (18) may potentially contribute to reductions in both macro- and microvascular residual risk.

Finally, the safety profile of fibrates appears to be well characterised. Although fenofbrate is associated with elevation in serum creatinine, this effect is generally considered functional, being transient and reversible usually within 6-8 weeks of stopping treatment, and is not associated with adverse effects on renal or CV outcomes.(19-21)

In conclusion, the R3i believes that the current evidence base supports a strategy targeting TRL associated with atherogenic dyslipidaemia to reduce the substantial residual cardiovascular risk that persists despite current standards of care, including targeting LDL-C. Consistent with this view, the recent International Atherosclerosis Society Position Paper(22) highlights the importance of targeting not only LDL-C but also very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in individuals with elevated triglycerides, as associated with atherogenic dyslipidaemia.

Finally, it is relevant that fenofibrate has been shown to reduce the residual risk of microvascular complications, including diabetic retinopathy and nephropathy, in patients with type 2 diabetes. In the light of evidence that people with diabetes are living longer,23 this is at least as important given the increasing clinical, socioeconomic and disability burden associated with diabetic microvascular complications.


References

1. Critchley J, Liu J, Zhao D, Wei W, Capewell S. Explaining the increase in coronary heart disease mortality in Beijing between 1984 and 1999. Circulation 2004;110:1236-44.
2. Muntner P, Gu D, Reynolds RF et al. Therapeutic lifestyle changes and drug treatment for high blood cholesterol in China and application of the Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Am J Cardiol 2005;96:1260-5.
3. Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM et al. Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet 2005;366:1267-78.
4. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration, Baigent C, Blackwell L, Emberson J et al. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet 2010;376:1670-81.
5. McKenney JM, Koren MJ, Kereiakes DJ, Hanotin C, Ferrand AC, Stein EA. Safety and efficacy of a monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 serine protease, SAR236553/REGN727, in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia receiving ongoing stable atorvastatin therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:2344-53.
6. Giugliano RP, Desai NR, Kohli P et al; LAPLACE-TIMI 57 Investigators. Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 in combination with a statin in patients with hypercholesterolaemia (LAPLACE-TIMI 57): a randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 2 study. Lancet 2012;380:2007-17.
7. Raal F, Scott R, Somaratne R, Bridges I, Li G, Wasserman SM, Stein EA. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-lowering effects of AMG 145, a monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 serine protease in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia: the Reduction of LDL-C With PCSK9 Inhibition in Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia Disorder (RUTHERFORD) randomized trial. Circulation 2012;126:2408-17.
8. Kathiresan S. Will cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition succeed primarily by lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol? Insights from human genetics and clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:2049-52.
9. Toth P. Emerging LDL therapies: Mipomersen-antisense oligonucleotide therapy in the management of hypercholesterolemia. J Clin Lipidol 2013;7 (3 Suppl):S6-10.
10. Preiss D, Seshasai SR, Welsh P et al. Risk of incident diabetes with intensive-dose compared with moderate-dose statin therapy: a metaanalysis. JAMA 2011; 305:2556–64.
11. Mansi I, Frei CR, Pugh MJ, Makris U, Mortensen EM. Statins and musculoskeletal conditions, arthropathies, and injuries. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:1318-26.
12. ACCORD Study Group, Ginsberg HN, Elam MB, Lovato LC et al. Effects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Eng J Med 2010;362:1563–74.
13. Sacks FM, Carey VJ, Fruchart JC. Combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2010; 363:692-4.
14. Keech AC, Mitchell P, Summanen PA et al; FIELD study investigators: Effect of fenofibrate on the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy (FIELD study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007; 370:1687-97.
15. ACCORD Study Group; ACCORD Eye Study Group, Chew EY, Ambrosius WT, Davis MD et al. Effects of medical therapies on retinopathy progression in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2010, 363:233-44.
16. Keech A, Simes RJ, Barter P et al; FIELD study investigators: Effects of long-term fenofibrate therapy on cardiovascular events in 9795 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the FIELD study): randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005; 366:1849-61.
17. Rajamani K, Colman PG, Li LP et al; FIELD study investigators: Effect of fenofibrate on amputation events in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (FIELD study): A prespecified analysis of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009; 373:1780-8.
18. Sahebkar A, Watts GF. Fibrate therapy and circulating adiponectin concentrations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Atherosclerosis 2013 doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2013.06.026 [Epub ahead of print].
19. 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.
20. Davis TM, Ting R, Best JD et al; Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes Study investigators. 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.
21. Ting RD, Keech AC, Drury PL et al; FIELD Study Investigators. 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.
22. An International Atherosclerosis Society Position Paper: Global Recommendations for the
Management of Dyslipidemia. Full report. Available from: http://www.athero.org/download/IASPPGuidelines_FullReport_2.pdf.
23. Lind M, Garcia-Rodriguez LA, Booth GL et al. Mortality trends in patients with and without diabetes in Ontario, Canada and the UK from 1996 to 2009: a population-based study. Diabetologia 2013 Jun 22. [Epub ahead of print].

Fruchart JC, Sacks FM, Hermans MP et al; Residual Risk Reduction Initiative (R3I). The Residual Risk Reduction Initiative: a call to action to reduce residual vascular risk in dyslipidaemic patient. Diab Vasc Dis Res 2008;5:319-35.
?>