2598906
Treatment of dyslipidemia in patients with type 2 diabetes
Type 2 diabetes is associated with significant cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Although low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels may be normal in patients with type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance drives a number of changes in lipid metabolism and lipoprotein composition that render low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and other lipoproteins more pathogenic than species found in patients without type 2 diabetes. Dyslipidemia, which affects almost 50% of patients with type 2 diabetes, is a cardiovascular risk factor characterized by elevated triglyceride levels, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and a preponderance of small, dense, low-density lipoprotein particles. Early, aggressive pharmacological management is advocated to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, regardless of baseline levels. A number of lipid-lowering agents, including statins, fibrates, niacin, and bile acid sequestrants, are available to target normalization of the entire lipid profile. Despite use of combination and high-dose lipid-lowering agents, many patients with type 2 diabetes do not achieve lipid targets. This review outlines the characteristics and prevalence of dyslipidemia in patients with type 2 diabetes and discusses strategies that may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in this population.
24967000
Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study
Abstract Objective: To determine the relation between exposure to glycaemia over time and the risk of macrovascular or microvascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: 23 hospital based clinics in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Participants: 4585 white, Asian Indian, and Afro-Caribbean UKPDS patients, whether randomised or not to treatment, were included in analyses of incidence; of these, 3642 were included in analyses of relative risk. Outcome measures: Primary predefined aggregate clinical outcomes: any end point or deaths related to diabetes and all cause mortality. Secondary aggregate outcomes: myocardial infarction, stroke, amputation (including death from peripheral vascular disease), and microvascular disease (predominantly retinal photo-coagulation). Single end points: non-fatal heart failure and cataract extraction. Risk reduction associated with a 1% reduction in updated mean HbA1c adjusted for possible confounders at diagnosis of diabetes. Results: The incidence of clinical complications was significantly associated with glycaemia. Each 1% reduction in updated mean HbA1c was associated with reductions in risk of 21% for any end point related to diabetes (95% confidence interval 17% to 24%, P<0.0001), 21% for deaths related to diabetes (15% to 27%, P<0.0001), 14% for myocardial infarction (8% to 21%, P<0.0001), and 37% for microvascular complications (33% to 41%, P<0.0001). No threshold of risk was observed for any end point. Conclusions: In patients with type 2 diabetes the risk of diabetic complications was strongly associated with previous hyperglycaemia. Any reduction in HbA1c is likely to reduce the risk of complications, with the lowest risk being in those with HbA1c values in the normal range (<6.0%).
28055310
Risk factors for coronary artery disease in non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus: United Kingdom prospective diabetes study (UKPDS: 23)
Abstract Objective: To evaluate baseline risk factors for coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Design: A stepwise selection procedure, adjusting for age and sex, was used in 2693 subjects with complete data to determine which risk factors for coronary artery disease should be included in a Cox proportional hazards model. Subjects: 3055 white patients (mean age 52) with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus and without evidence of disease related to atheroma. Median duration of follow up was 7.9 years. 335 patients developed coronary artery disease within 10 years. Outcome measures: Angina with confirmatory abnormal electrocardiogram; non-fatal and fatal myocardial infarction. Results: Coronary artery disease was significantly associated with increased concentrations of low density lipoprotein cholesterol, decreased concentrations of high density lipoprotein cholesterol, and increased triglyceride concentration, haemoglobin A1c, systolic blood pressure, fasting plasma glucose concentration, and a history of smoking. The estimated hazard ratios for the upper third relative to the lower third were 2.26 (95% confidence interval 1.70 to 3.00) for low density lipoprotein cholesterol, 0.55 (0.41 to 0.73) for high density lipoprotein cholesterol, 1.52 (1.15 to 2.01) for haemoglobin A1c, and 1.82 (1.34 to 2.47) for systolic blood pressure. The estimated hazard ratio for smokers was 1.41(1.06 to 1.88). Conclusion: A quintet of potentially modifiable risk factors for coronary artery disease exists in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. These risk factors are increased concentrations of low density lipoprotein cholesterol, decreased concentrations of high density lipoprotein cholesterol, raised blood pressure, hyperglycaemia, and smoking. Key messages Coronary artery disease is the major cause of mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus Patients without evidence of disease related to atheroma at diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus had an increased standardised mortality ratio compared with the population of the United Kingdom 11% of patients in this study had a myocardial infarction or developed angina over a median of 8 years' follow up The potentially modifiable risk factors for coronary artery disease were increased concentrations of low density lipoprotein cholesterol, decreased concentrations of high density lipoprotein cholesterol, hypertension, hyperglycaemia, and smoking; these are also risk factors for coronary artery disease in the general population Evidence is needed on whether modifying these risk factors will reduce coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
30512857
Diabetic dyslipidemia and atherosclerosis: Evidence from clinical trials
Diabetes is a highly prevalent disease in the United States and is increasing in both incidence and prevalence. Atherosclerotic vascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in diabetic patients. Type 2 diabetes is characterized by insulin resistance and frequently co-exists with a variety of cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension, obesity, dyslipidemia, and physical inactivity. Hygienic measures such as weight loss and exercise should form the basis of therapeutic interventions in the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes. The role of dyslipidemia as a causal factor in vascular disease associated with diabetes was previously downplayed because total cholesterol was frequently normal or minimally elevated. However, diabetic dyslipidemia is characterized by elevated triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein, and small, dense low-density lipoprotein, the combination of which has been termed the “lipid triad.” The role of lipid modification as a means to decrease cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes has recently been clarified by a number of clinical trials. Subgroup analysis in early studies implied the potential for benefit of lipid modification in diabetes. The results of these early studies prompted the design of large-scale intervention trials that employed statin and fibric acid derivatives in diabetes patients. The preponderance of data from the statin trials implicates significant clinical benefit in cardiovascular risk reduction. The fibric acid derivatives have theoretic advantages in diabetic dyslipidemia. However, the robust bulk of clinical data obtained from prospective statin studies is lacking for the fibric acid derivatives, and the results of the major trials are equivocal.
24190544
Prevention of cardiovascular disease in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus: current knowledge and rationale for the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial.
Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus die of cardiovascular disease (CVD) at rates 2-4 times higher than patients without diabetes but with similar demographic characteristics. The prevalence of diabetes is increasing in the United States and, thus, the prevention of CVD in patients with diabetes poses an urgent public health challenge. The objective of this report is to review the current knowledge base for the prevention of CVD in patients with diabetes, with particular emphasis on the control of glycemia, lipids, and blood pressure. Epidemiologic analyses suggest that each 1% increase in glycosylated hemoglobin increases the risk for CVD by approximately 18%; however, evidence from the randomized trials that have examined whether glucose lowering reduces this risk is conflicting. Randomized trials have shown that lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduces CVD event rates by 17%-43% in patients with diabetes. Limited data support a role for lowering triglycerides and increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the prevention of CVD. Evidence from clinical trials shows that reducing systolic blood pressure to <140 mm Hg results in 30%-60% reductions in CVD events; however, epidemiologic evidence suggests that lowering to optimal systolic blood pressure levels (<120 mm Hg) may be additionally beneficial. Important questions regarding prevention of CVD in patients with diabetes remain unresolved, including the benefits of near-normal glycemic control, comprehensive therapy for diabetes-related dyslipidemia, and optimal blood pressure control. The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial will test hypotheses to address these unanswered questions.
14491606
Lipoprotein Management in Patients With Cardiometabolic Risk
Risk factors for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD) often cluster, including obesity (particularly central), insulin resistance, hyperglycemia, dyslipoproteinemia, and hypertension. These conditions can also occur in isolation, and they are exaggerated by physical inactivity and smoking. Since each of these factors increases risk of CVD, the concept of global cardiometabolic risk (CMR) (Fig. 1) is of value (1). Lipoprotein abnormalities, including elevated triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol, and increased numbers of small dense LDL particles, are common findings in patients with CMR. Clinical entities with increased CMR include type 2 diabetes, familial combined hyperlipidemia, familial hypoalphalipoproteinemia, and polycystic ovary syndrome (2). These disorders often share the CMR characteristics of central obesity, insulin resistance, dyslipoproteinemia, and hypertension.

There are stringent lipid treatment goals for patients with type 2 diabetes or CVD; however, guidelines for treatment of dyslipoproteinemia in high-risk subjects without diabetes or CVD are less intense and are based primarily on LDL cholesterol concentrations, with non-HDL concentrations a secondary consideration in some subjects. Numerous trials have demonstrated that therapies (primarily statins) directed at LDL cholesterol lowering clearly reduce risk of CVD events in patients with diabetes and in those without diabetes but with other CVD risk factors; yet, a number of questions remain. Even with adequate LDL cholesterol lowering, many patients on statin therapy have significant residual CVD risk. It is unclear whether lipoprotein parameters other than LDL or non-HDL cholesterol provide clinically significant additional prognostic information regarding CVD risk, yield more information about the effectiveness of therapy, or indicate more appropriate treatment targets. Many patients with CMR or diabetes have relatively normal levels of LDL cholesterol but increased numbers of small dense LDL particles and other atherogenic lipoproteins. Some have advocated that assessment of other lipoprotein parameters might be more helpful than assessment limited to LDL or non-HDL …
33467713
American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes 2017
The American Diabetes Association’s (ADA) 2017 Standards of Care were published in Diabetes Care on 15 December 2016. Notable changes in the new guidelines include the recommendation of sodiumglucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor empagliflozin and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonist liraglutide for type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients at high risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Data from the Empagliflozin, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) trial and the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER) trial are now included in the section on cardiovascular disease and risk management. In addition, fixed-ratio combinations of a basal insulin and a GLP-1 agonist are included in the algorithm for combination therapy, just weeks after the first of these products, Novo Nordisk’s (Copenhagen, Denmark) Xultophy (insulin degludec/liraglutide) and Sanofi’s (Paris, France) Soliqua (insulin glargine/lixisenatide), were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for prescription in the US. Based on recommendations from the International Hypoglycemia Study Group, the ADA’s 2017 Standards of Care features a new classification for hypoglycemia: clinically significant hypoglycemia is now defined at blood glucose levels <54 mg/dL, whereas blood glucose levels <70 mg/dL should be used as an “alert value” to help individuals avoid more severe hypoglycemia. The ADA’s new guidelines also include a greater emphasis on cost of diabetes drugs, T2D prevention (with a push for more frequent prediabetes screenings), and psychosocial support in diabetes care, especially for adolescents and pediatric patients.
2776283
Diabetes, Other Risk Factors, and 12-Yr Cardiovascular Mortality for Men Screened in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial
OBJECTIVE To assess predictors of CVD mortality among men with and without diabetes and to assess the independent effect of diabetes on the risk of CVD death. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Participants in this cohort study were screened from 1973 to 1975; vital status has been ascertained over an average of 12 yr of follow-up (range 11–13 yr). Participants were 347,978 men aged 35–57 yr, screened in 20 centers for MRFIT. The outcome measure was CVD mortality. RESULTS Among 5163 men who reported taking medication for diabetes, 1092 deaths (603 CVD deaths) occurred in an average of 12 yr of follow-up. Among 342,815 men not taking medication for diabetes, 20,867 deaths were identified, 8965 ascribed to CVD. Absolute risk of CVD death was much higher for diabetic than nondiabetic men of every age stratum, ethnic background, and risk factor level—overall three times higher, with adjustment for age, race, income, serum cholesterol level, sBP, and reported number of cigarettes/day (P < 0.0001). For men both with and without diabetes, serum cholesterol level, sBP, and cigarette smoking were significant predictors of CVD mortality. For diabetic men with higher values for each risk factor and their combinations, absolute risk of CVD death increased more steeply than for nondiabetic men, so that absolute excess risk for diabetic men was progressively greater than for nondiabetic men with higher risk factor levels. CONCLUSIONS These findings emphasize the importance of rigorous sustained intervention in people with diabetes to control blood pressure, lower serum cholesterol, and abolish cigarette smoking, and the importance of considering nutritional-hygienic approaches on a mass scale to prevent diabetes.
43052802
Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III Guidelines.
The Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) of the National Cholesterol Education Program issued an evidence-based set of guidelines on cholesterol management in 2001. Since the publication of ATP III, 5 major clinical trials of statin therapy with clinical end points have been published. These trials addressed issues that were not examined in previous clinical trials of cholesterol-lowering therapy. The present document reviews the results of these recent trials and assesses their implications for cholesterol management. Therapeutic lifestyle changes (TLC) remain an essential modality in clinical management. The trials confirm the benefit of cholesterol-lowering therapy in high-risk patients and support the ATP III treatment goal of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) <100 mg/dL. They support the inclusion of patients with diabetes in the high-risk category and confirm the benefits of LDL-lowering therapy in these patients. They further confirm that older persons benefit from therapeutic lowering of LDL-C. The major recommendations for modifications to footnote the ATP III treatment algorithm are the following. In high-risk persons, the recommended LDL-C goal is <100 mg/dL, but when risk is very high, an LDL-C goal of <70 mg/dL is a therapeutic option, ie, a reasonable clinical strategy, on the basis of available clinical trial evidence. This therapeutic option extends also to patients at very high risk who have a baseline LDL-C < 100 mg/dL. Moreover, when a high-risk patient has high triglycerides or low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), consideration can be given to combining a fibrate or nicotinic acid with an LDL-lowering drug. For moderately high-risk persons (2+ risk factors and 10-year risk 10% to 20%), the recommended LDL-C goal is <130 mg/dL, but an LDL-C goal <100 mg/dL is a therapeutic option on the basis of recent trial evidence. The latter option extends also to moderately high-risk persons with a baseline LDL-C of 100 to 129 mg/dL. When LDL-lowering drug therapy is employed in high-risk or moderately high-risk persons, it is advised that intensity of therapy be sufficient to achieve at least a 30% to 40% reduction in LDL-C levels. Moreover, any person at high risk or moderately high risk who has lifestyle-related risk factors (eg, obesity, physical inactivity, elevated triglycerides, low HDL-C, or metabolic syndrome) is a candidate for TLC to modify these risk factors regardless of LDL-C level. Finally, for people in lower-risk categories, recent clinical trials do not modify the goals and cutpoints of therapy.
22878798
Diabetic dyslipidaemia
Purpose of review Diabetic dyslipidaemia is a cluster of plasma lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities that are metabolically interrelated. The increase of large type 1 very low density lipoprotein particles in type 2 diabetes initiates a sequence of events that generates atherogenic remnants, small dense low-density lipoprotein and small dense high-density lipoprotein particles. Thus, it is of great importance to elucidate the mechanisms behind the overproduction of large very low density lipoprotein particles in diabetic dyslipidaemia. This review discusses the pathophysiology of very low density lipoprotein metabolism in type 2 diabetes and recent concepts of lipid management of diabetic dyslipidaemia. Recent findings Results indicate that triglyceride and apolipoprotein B production in types 1 and 2 very low density lipoprotein are significantly correlated, suggesting a coupling of the two processes governing the metabolism of these lipoprotein subpopulations. Insulin resistance, hyperglycaemia, and liver fat were associated with excess hepatic production of type 1 but not type 2 very low density lipoprotein particles. These data provide support for the independent regulation of types 1 and 2 very low density lipoprotein apolipoprotein B production. Summary Recent data suggest that the assembly of very low density lipoprotein is fundamentally altered in type 2 diabetes, explaining the overproduction of large type 1 very low density lipoprotein as well as the inability of insulin to suppress production of type 1 very low density lipoprotein in type 2 diabetes. Future discoveries hopefully will delineate the regulatory steps to allow more targeted treatment of diabetic dyslipidaemia.
877724
Overproduction of Very Low–Density Lipoproteins Is the Hallmark of the Dyslipidemia in the Metabolic Syndrome
Insulin resistance is a key feature of the metabolic syndrome and often progresses to type 2 diabetes. Both insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes are characterized by dyslipidemia, which is an important and common risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Diabetic dyslipidemia is a cluster of potentially atherogenic lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities that are metabolically interrelated. Recent evidence suggests that a fundamental defect is an overproduction of large very low–density lipoprotein (VLDL) particles, which initiates a sequence of lipoprotein changes, resulting in higher levels of remnant particles, smaller LDL, and lower levels of high-density liporotein (HDL) cholesterol. These atherogenic lipid abnormalities precede the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes by several years, and it is thus important to elucidate the mechanisms involved in the overproduction of large VLDL particles. Here, we review the pathophysiology of VLDL biosynthesis and metabolism in the metabolic syndrome. We also review recent research investigating the relation between hepatic accumulation of lipids and insulin resistance, and sources of fatty acids for liver fat and VLDL biosynthesis. Finally, we briefly discuss current treatments for lipid management of dyslipidemia and potential future therapeutic targets.
31981041
Type 2 diabetes as a lipid disorder.
Diabetic dyslipidemia is a cluster of plasma lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities that are metabolically interrelated. The recognition that the elevation of large VLDL 1 particles initiates a sequence of events that leads to the formation of small dense LDL and HDL species has focused the assembly of VLDL particles on the spotlight as a potential culprit of dyslipidemia. Notably dyslipidemia is associated with insulin resistance, visceral obesity and liver fat content. Insulin resistance is associated with excessive flux of substrates for VLDL assembly to the liver as well as the upregulation of the machinery generating large VLDL particles in excess. The regulation of different molecular steps in this cascade of events are complex and so far poorly understood. The disordered crosstalk between adipose tissue and the liver results in an imbalance of the machinery that orchestrates the regulation of VLDL production. A number of studies indicates that adipocytokines in particular adiponectin may be a seminal player in the regulation of fat metabolism in the liver. Future discoveries hopefully will delineate the regulatory steps to allow more targeted treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia.
8577706
Effects of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes on lipoprotein subclass particle size and concentration determined by nuclear magnetic resonance.
The insulin resistance syndrome (IRS) is associated with dyslipidemia and increased cardiovascular disease risk. A novel method for detailed analyses of lipoprotein subclass sizes and particle concentrations that uses nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) of whole sera has become available. To define the effects of insulin resistance, we measured dyslipidemia using both NMR lipoprotein subclass analysis and conventional lipid panel, and insulin sensitivity as the maximal glucose disposal rate (GDR) during hyperinsulinemic clamps in 56 insulin sensitive (IS; mean +/- SD: GDR 15.8 +/- 2.0 mg. kg(-1). min(-1), fasting blood glucose [FBG] 4.7 +/- 0.3 mmol/l, BMI 26 +/- 5), 46 insulin resistant (IR; GDR 10.2 +/- 1.9, FBG 4.9 +/- 0.5, BMI 29 +/- 5), and 46 untreated subjects with type 2 diabetes (GDR 7.4 +/- 2.8, FBG 10.8 +/- 3.7, BMI 30 +/- 5). In the group as a whole, regression analyses with GDR showed that progressive insulin resistance was associated with an increase in VLDL size (r = -0.40) and an increase in large VLDL particle concentrations (r = -0.42), a decrease in LDL size (r = 0.42) as a result of a marked increase in small LDL particles (r = -0.34) and reduced large LDL (r = 0.34), an overall increase in the number of LDL particles (r = -0.44), and a decrease in HDL size (r = 0.41) as a result of depletion of large HDL particles (r = 0.38) and a modest increase in small HDL (r = -0.21; all P < 0.01). These correlations were also evident when only normoglycemic individuals were included in the analyses (i.e., IS + IR but no diabetes), and persisted in multiple regression analyses adjusting for age, BMI, sex, and race. Discontinuous analyses were also performed. When compared with IS, the IR and diabetes subgroups exhibited a two- to threefold increase in large VLDL particle concentrations (no change in medium or small VLDL), which produced an increase in serum triglycerides; a decrease in LDL size as a result of an increase in small and a reduction in large LDL subclasses, plus an increase in overall LDL particle concentration, which together led to no difference (IS versus IR) or a minimal difference (IS versus diabetes) in LDL cholesterol; and a decrease in large cardioprotective HDL combined with an increase in the small HDL subclass such that there was no net significant difference in HDL cholesterol. We conclude that 1) insulin resistance had profound effects on lipoprotein size and subclass particle concentrations for VLDL, LDL, and HDL when measured by NMR; 2) in type 2 diabetes, the lipoprotein subclass alterations are moderately exacerbated but can be attributed primarily to the underlying insulin resistance; and 3) these insulin resistance-induced changes in the NMR lipoprotein subclass profile predictably increase risk of cardiovascular disease but were not fully apparent in the conventional lipid panel. It will be important to study whether NMR lipoprotein subclass parameters can be used to manage risk more effectively and prevent cardiovascular disease in patients with the IRS.
42663610
Lipoprotein abnormalities and their consequences for patients with Type 2 diabetes
Dyslipidaemia is common in patients with Type 2 diabetes and is held to be responsible for considerable CVD-related morbidity and mortality. Patients with Type 2 diabetes are at high risk from complications associated with atherosclerosis and should therefore receive preventive interventions. At the level of the adipocyte, impaired insulin action leads to increased rates of intracellular hydrolysis of triglycerides with the release of NEFA. The rise in NEFA provides substrate for the liver that, in the presence of impaired insulin action and relative insulin deficiency, is associated with complex alterations in plasma lipids: * Plasma VLDL levels are raised. (i). Increased VLDL levels are associated with post-prandial hyperlipidaemia that is compounded by impaired LPL activity. The latter may be independently associated with CAD. (ii). Remnant particles can deliver more cholesterol to macrophages than LDL-C particles. Thrombogenic alterations in the coagulation system also ensue from hypertriglyceridaemia. * Plasma HDL-C levels are reduced. (i). The reduction in cardioprotective HDL-C means a reduction of cholesterol efflux from the tissues--the first step in reverse cholesterol transport to the liver from peripheral tissues. (ii). The antioxidant and antiatherogenic activities of HDL-C are reduced when circulating levels are low. * LDL-C particles become small and dense. Small, dense LDL-C particles are held to be more atherogenic than their larger, buoyant counterparts because they (a) are more liable to oxidation and (b) may more readily adhere to and subsequently invade the arterial wall. The atherogenicity of LDL-C may also be enhanced by nonenzymatic glycation. Metabolic and lipid abnormalities can often be improved with lifestyle changes, including dietary modification, weight loss, smoking cessation and increased exercise. Although attainment of better glycaemic control may improve diabetic dyslipidaemia, pharmacological intervention is usually required. Several large-scale clinical trials, including 4S and more recently HPS, have clearly demonstrated the benefits of statins in reducing cardiovascular events. By virtue of their high absolute risk of CVD, many patients with Type 2 diabetes may achieve a greater risk reduction than their non-diabetic counterparts. For example, in 4S there was a 43% reduction in total mortality risk among patients with diabetes compared with 29% for non-diabetics and a reduced risk of MI by 55% vs. 32% for diabetic and non-diabetics, respectively. In the diabetic subgroup in HPS, there were reductions of approximately 25-30% in the risk of first major vascular events. More recently, the lipid-lowering arm of the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT) was halted early because of a significant reduction in cardiovascular events compared with placebo. Surprisingly an analysis of subgroups failed to show significance among the diabetic population, although the sample size, shortened follow-up period and higher drop-in statin use among diabetics on placebo may have affected results. The Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS), involving 2800 patients with Type 2 diabetes, was halted 2 years early in June 2003 because patients allocated atorvastatin had significant reductions in MI, stroke and surgical procedures compared with those receiving placebo. The UKPDS demonstrated that the appearance and progression of certain microvascular complications of Type 2 diabetes could be reduced by treatment directed at hyperglycaemia and hypertension. In addition, correction of dyslipidaemia in patients with diabetes is important in reducing the high toll from macrovascular disease. The subjects in the HPS had similar lipid profiles to the participants in UKPDS, suggesting that additional benefit would accrue from a therapeutic assault on the main cardiovascular risk factors simultaneously. We now have firm evidence that appropriate use of statins in patients with Type 2 diabetes can significantly reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
23211569
Management of Dyslipidemia in Diabetes
Diabetes is associated with a high risk of cardiovascular disease. The management of dyslipidemia, a well-recognized and modifiable risk factor among patients with type 2 diabetes, is an important element in the multifactorial approach to prevent coronary heart disease. Diabetic dyslipidemia typically consists of elevated triglyceride, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and the predominance of small dense low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles. LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in patients with diabetes are similar to those found in the rest of the population. During the past few years, clinical trials have provided evidence that lipid-lowering therapy has a similar beneficial effect on cardiovascular outcomes in diabetic and nondiabetic individuals. According to current guidelines, the primary lipid target is an LDL-C <100 mg/dL (<70 mg/dL in very high-risk patients) and, to this end, statins are the agents of choice. The appropriate management of dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes, particularly in individuals with low LDL-C, remains controversial. To achieve lipid targets, attention should be directed first toward nonpharmacologic therapeutic interventions to control dyslipidemia, such as diet, exercise, smoking cessation, weight loss, and glycemic control. Statin therapy is recommended for most subjects but, frequently, a combination of lipid-lowering agents is required. A number of combinations are possible, and several factors should be considered to improve the safety of this strategy.
11701404
Beyond Low-Density Lipoprotein
The metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes mellitus are both becoming more prevalent, and both increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. Many patients are not receiving appropriate treatment for the type of dyslipidemia that commonly occurs in these disorders — the so-called ‘atherogenic lipid triad’ of high serum triglyceride levels, low serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels, and a preponderance of small, dense, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) particles.All of the processes involved in atherogenesis can be exacerbated by insulin resistance and/or the metabolic syndrome. Hypertriglyceridemia is a strong predictor of coronary heart disease. There is also an inverse relationship between serum levels of HDL-C and triglycerides in diabetic patients, with low serum HDL-C levels possibly representing an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Small, dense, LDL-C particles are also highly atherogenic as they are more likely to form oxidized LDL and are less readily cleared. Insulin resistance, which is central to the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes mellitus, leads to high levels of very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL), which contain a high concentration of triglycerides, resulting in high serum triglyceride levels and low serum HDL-C levels.Even though modification of the atherogenic lipid triad is probably one of the most effective methods of reducing cardiovascular risk, therapy for diabetic dyslipidemia is often directed to first lowering serum LDL-C levels with a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor. This may leave substantial excess risk for cardiovascular disease in patients with these types of dyslipidemia. The results of recent trials evaluating HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors have been mixed, with two showing no significant effect on cardiovascular outcomes in subgroups of diabetic patients. The recent CARDS (Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study) showed that atorvastatin can reduce cardiovascular events in a trial specifically designed for a diabetic population, though the population had to have at least one other risk factor in addition to diabetes mellitus.Fibric acid derivatives, such as fenofibrate, bezafibrate and gemfibrozil, are potentially well suited to the treatment of dyslipidemia that is generally associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus and the metabolic syndrome, as they are usually more effective than HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors for normalizing serum levels of HDL-C and triglycerides. Promising results have been obtained from several trials of fibric acid derivatives including the BIP (Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention) study and the VA-HIT (Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program HDL-C Intervention Trial; gemfibrozil). The FIELD (Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes) trial, a clinical outcomes trial specifically designed to evaluate fenofibrate in a large population of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, many of whom have the metabolic syndrome, is underway. The FIELD trial results should shed light on the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate in reducing cardiovascular morbidity in diabetic and metabolic syndrome patients and on the safety profile of combination therapy with fenofibrate and a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor.
22443026
Role of lipases, lecithin:cholesterol acyltransferase and cholesteryl ester transfer protein in abnormal high density lipoprotein metabolism in insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Dyslipidaemia, hallmarked by low HDL cholesterol and high plasma triglycerides, is a feature of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus. These lipoprotein abnormalities represent major cardiovascular risk factors in these conditions. Among other factors, lipoprotein lipase (LPL), hepatic lipase (HL), lecithin:cholesterol acyltransferase (LCAT) and cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) play an important role in an abnormal HDL metabolism in insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus. LPL hydrolyses lipoprotein triglycerides, thus providing lipids for HDL formation. In insulin resistant states, a decreased post-heparin plasma LPL activity contributes to a low HDL cholesterol, whereas an increased activity of HL reduces HDL particle size by hydrolysing its triglycerides and phospholipids. High HL activity coincides with low HDL cholesterol. The esterification of free cholesterol by LCAT increases HDL particle size. Subsequent CETP action results in transfer of cholesteryl esters from HDL towards triglyceride-rich lipoproteins. This cholesteryl ester transfer process results in lower HDL cholesterol and indirectly decreases HDL size. Plasma cholesterol esterification is unaltered or increased, whereas cholesteryl ester transfer is enhanced in type 2 diabetes mellitus, abnormalities which are probably related to the degree of hypertriglyceridaemia. It is plausible that a low LPL activity contributes to premature atherosclerosis as observed in insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus, but the effects of high HL activity and altered plasma cholesterol esterification on atherosclerosis development are uncertain. Since the cholesteryl ester transfer process between lipoproteins provides a metabolic intermediate between low HDL cholesterol and high plasma triglycerides, hypertriglyceridaemia-associated accelerated transfer of cholesteryl ester out of HDL may be pathogenetically involved in the development of cardiovascular disease in insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
4550953
Torcetrapib-induced blood pressure elevation is independent of CETP inhibition and is accompanied by increased circulating levels of aldosterone
Inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) with torcetrapib in humans increases plasma high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels but is associated with increased blood pressure. In a phase 3 clinical study, evaluating the effects of torcetrapib in atherosclerosis, there was an excess of deaths and adverse cardiovascular events in patients taking torcetrapib. The studies reported herein sought to evaluate off‐target effects of torcetrapib.
13530696
Efficacy and safety of the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor anacetrapib as monotherapy and coadministered with atorvastatin in dyslipidemic patients.
BACKGROUND
High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels are inversely associated with cardiovascular risk. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition is one strategy for increasing HDL-C. This study evaluated the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor anacetrapib as monotherapy or coadministered with atorvastatin in patients with dyslipidemia.


METHODS
A total of 589 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or mixed hyperlipidemia (53.8% of the study population had low HDL-C) were randomized equally to one of 10 groups: 5 groups received background statin therapy of atorvastatin 20 mg and 5 did not, and each of these was randomized to placebo, anacetrapib 10, 40, 150, and 300 mg once daily for 8 weeks. An equal proportion of patients had triglycerides >150 mg/dL in each group.


RESULTS
For placebo and anacetrapib monotherapy (10, 40, 150, and 300 mg), least squares mean percent changes from baseline to week 8 for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) were 2%, -16%, -27%, -40%, and -39%, respectively, and for HDL-C were 4%, 44%, 86%, 139%, and 133%, respectively (P < .001 vs placebo for all doses). Coadministration of anacetrapib with atorvastatin produced significant incremental LDL-C reductions and similar HDL-C increases versus atorvastatin monotherapy. For both anacetrapib monotherapy and coadministration with atorvastatin, the LDL-C reductions were similar in patients with baseline triglyceride levels greater than and less than or equal to the median. Anacetrapib was well tolerated, and the incidence of adverse events was similar for placebo and all active treatment groups. There were no increases in systolic or diastolic blood pressure in any treatment arm.


CONCLUSIONS
Anacetrapib, as monotherapy or coadministered with atorvastatin, produced significant reductions in LDL-C and increases in HDL-C; the net result of treatment with anacetrapib + atorvastatin was approximately 70% lowering of LDL-C and more than doubling of HDL-C. Anacetrapib was generally well tolerated with no discernable effect on blood pressure.
25756681
Anacetrapib, a cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitor for the treatment of atherosclerosis.
Anacetrapib, under development by Merck & Co Inc, is an inhibitor of the cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP) for the treatment of atherosclerosis. By reversibly increasing the affinity of CETP for lipoprotein particles, anacetrapib inhibits CETP-mediated cholesterol exchange, resulting in elevated HDL-cholesterol levels and reductions in LDL-cholesterol levels. In phase I and II clinical trials, anacetrapib was well tolerated and, unlike the now discontinued CETP inhibitor torcetrapib, did not affect blood pressure and aldosterone levels. The impact of anacetrapib on lipoprotein parameters was superior to that of the CETP inhibitors torcetrapib and dalcetrapib. However, while anacetrapib displays promising anti-arteriosclerotic properties, the long-term safety and tolerability of the agent remains to be evaluated. Moreover, the concept that inhibiting CETP is atheroprotective is yet to be proven. The future of CETP inhibitors has also been affected by the failure of torcetrapib, which increased mortality in a phase III trial. Results from an ongoing phase III trial of anacetrapib will determine the likely future development of not only anacetrapib, but of the pharmacological class of CETP inhibitors.
14043265
Molecular mechanisms of insulin resistance that impact cardiovascular biology.
Insulin resistance is concomitant with type 2 diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and other features of the metabolic syndrome. Because insulin resistance is associated with cardiovascular disease, both scientists and physicians have taken great interest in this disorder. Insulin resistance is associated with compensatory hyperinsulinemia, but individual contributions of either of these two conditions remain incompletely understood and a subject of intense investigation. One possibility is that in an attempt to overcome the inhibition within the metabolic insulin-signaling pathway, hyperinsulinemia may continue to stimulate the mitogenic insulin-signaling pathway, thus exerting its detrimental influence. Here we discuss some of the effects of insulin resistance and mechanisms of potentially detrimental influence of hyperinsulinemia in the presence of metabolic insulin resistance.
30574938
Approaches to Prevention of Cardiovascular Complications and Events in Diabetes Mellitus
Diabetes mellitus affects about 8% of the adult population. The estimated number of patients with diabetes, presently about 170 million people, is expected to increase by 50–70% within the next 25 years.Diabetes is an important component of the complex of ‘common’ cardiovascular risk factors, and is responsible for acceleration and worsening of atherothrombosis. Major cardiovascular events cause about 80% of the total mortality in diabetic patients. Diabetes also induces peculiar microangiopathic changes leading to diabetic nephropathy conducive to end-stage renal failure, and to diabetic retinopathy that may progress to vision loss and blindness.In terms of major cardiovascular events, coronary heart disease and ischaemic stroke are the main causes of morbidity and mortality in diabetic patients. Peripheral arterial disease frequently occurs, and is more likely to be conducive to critical limb ischaemia and amputation than in the absence of diabetes.Although there are a number of differences in the pathogenesis and clinical features of diabetic macroangiopathy and microangiopathy, these two entities often coexist and induce mutually worsening effects. Endothelial injury, dysfunction and damage are common starting points for both conditions. Causes of endothelial injury can be distinguished into those ‘common’ to nondiabetic atherothrombosis, such as hypertension, dyslipidaemia, smoking, hypercoagulability and platelet activation; and those more specific and in some cases ‘unique’ to diabetes and directly related to the metabolic derangement of the disease, such as (i) desulfation of glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) of the vascular matrix; (ii) formation of advanced glycation end-products (AGE) and their endothelial receptors (RAGE); (iii) oxidative and reductive stress; (iv) decline in nitric oxide production; (v) activation of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS); and (vi) endothelial inflammation caused by glucose, insulin, insulin precursors and AGE/RAGE.Prevention of major cardiovascular events with the antithrombotic agent aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) is widely recommended, but reportedly underutilised in patients with diabetes. However, some data suggest that aspirin may be less effective than expected in preventing cardiovascular events and especially mortality in patients with diabetes, as well as in slowing progression of retinopathy.In contrast, a recent study found picotamide, a direct thromboxane inhibitor, to be superior to aspirin in diabetic patients. Clopidogrel was either equivalent or less active in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients, depending upon different clinical settings.Recent studies have shown that some GAG compounds are able to reduce micro-and macroalbuminuria in diabetic nephropathy, and hard exudates in diabetic retinopathy, but it is as yet unknown whether these agents also influence the natural history of microvascular complications of diabetes. Lifestyle changes and physical exercise are also essential in preventing cardiovascular events in diabetic patients.Available data on the control of the metabolic state and the main risk factors show that careful adjustment of blood sugar and glycated haemoglobin is more effective in counteracting microvascular damage than in preventing major cardiovascular events. The latter objective requires a more comprehensive approach to the whole constellation of risk factors both specific for diabetes and common to atherothrombosis. This approach includes lifestyle modifications, such as dietary changes and smoking cessation and the use of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), which are able to correct the lipid status and to prevent major cardiovascular events independently of the baseline lipidaemic or cardiovascular status.Tight control of hypertension is essential to reduce not only major cardiovascular events but also microvascular complications. Among antihypertensive measures, blockade of the RAAS by means of ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor antagonists recently emerged as a potentially polyvalent approach, not only for treating hypertension and reducing cardiovascular events, but also to prevent or reduce albuminuria, counteract diabetic nephropathy and lower the occurrence of new type 2 diabetes in individuals at risk.
7853311
Prevalence and control of dyslipidemia among persons with diabetes in the United States.
OBJECTIVE
We assessed the prevalence, treatment, and control of dyslipidemia among United States (U.S.) adults with diabetes.


METHODS
Among 498 adults (projected to 13.4 million) aged >or=18 years with diabetes representative of the U.S. population and surveyed within the cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2000, control of lipids was classified according to American Diabetes Association criteria. The extent of low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C), high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglyceride (TG) control was examined by gender and ethnicity, in comparison to those without diabetes, and according to lipid-lowering treatment. Analyses were weighted to the U.S. population.


RESULTS
Less than one-third of men and only one-fifth of women with diabetes are in control for LDL-C, defined as <2.6 mmol/l (<100mg/dl); over 70% are not at goal. Over half of men and over two-thirds of women have low levels of HDL-C (<or=1.0 mmol/l [<40 mg/dl] in men or <or=1.3 mmol/l [<or=50mg/dl] in women) and over half have elevated levels of triglycerides (>or=1.7 mmol/l [150 mg/dl]). Low HDL-C was more common in Caucasians (70.1%) than in Hispanics (58.8%) or African-Americans (41.5%) (p<0.001). 28.2% of subjects with diabetes were on lipid-lowering treatment. Control of LDL-C did not differ by treatment status and only 3% of subjects were controlled to target levels for all lipids.


CONCLUSION
Many persons with diabetes remain uncontrolled for dyslipidemia. Intensified efforts at screening and treatment according to current guidelines are warranted.
5913946
Prevalence of self-reported diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and associated risk factors in a national survey in the US population: SHIELD (Study to Help Improve Early evaluation and management of risk factors Leading to Diabetes)
BackgroundStudies derived from continuous national surveys have shown that the prevalence of diagnosed diabetes mellitus in the US is increasing. This study estimated the prevalence in 2004 of self-reported diagnosis of diabetes and other conditions in a community-based population, using data from the Study to Help Improve Early evaluation and management of risk factors Leading to Diabetes (SHIELD).MethodsThe initial screening questionnaire was mailed in 2004 to a stratified random sample of 200,000 households in the US, to identify individuals, age ≥ 18 years of age, with diabetes or risk factors associated with diabetes. Follow-up disease impact questionnaires were then mailed to a representative, stratified random sample of individuals (n = 22,001) in each subgroup of interest (those with diabetes or different numbers of risk factors for diabetes). Estimated national prevalence of diabetes and other conditions was calculated, and compared to prevalence estimates from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999–2002.ResultsResponse rates were 63.7% for the screening, and 71.8% for the follow-up baseline survey. The SHIELD screening survey found overall prevalence of self-reported diagnosis of diabetes (either type 1 or type 2) was 8.2%, with increased prevalence with increasing age and decreasing income. In logistic regression modeling, individuals were more likely to be diagnosed with type 2 diabetes if they had abdominal obesity (odds ratio [OR] = 3.50; p < 0.0001), BMI ≥28 kg/m2 (OR = 4.04; p < 0.0001), or had been diagnosed with dyslipidemia (OR = 3.95; p < 0.0001), hypertension (OR = 4.82; p < 0.0001), or with cardiovascular disease (OR = 3.38; p < 0.0001).ConclusionThe SHIELD design allowed for a very large, community-based sample with broad demographic representation of the population of interest. When comparing results from the SHIELD screening survey (self-report only) to those from NHANES 1999–2002 (self-report, clinical and laboratory evaluations), the prevalence of diabetes was similar. SHIELD allows the identification of respondents with and without a current diagnosis of the illness of interest, and potential longitudinal evaluation of risk factors for future diagnosis of that illness.
21189270
Small, dense, low-density lipoprotein and atherosclerosis
Disorders of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) subclass distribution are more common contributors to coronary artery disease (CAD) than is elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC). Recent research has emphasized the importance of LDL and HDL subclass distribution in patient management and response to treatments. Laboratory determination of LDL and HDL subclass distribution involves analytic ultracentrifugation or polyacrylalmide gradient gel electrophoresis. If subclass distribution is to be used for patient management, research quality control and standards are necessary in order to assure that the patient’s values accurately reflect the metabolic disorder. The importance of this topic for patient care has been recognized by the medical insurance industry. Investigations employing electron beam computed tomography in asymptomatic individuals has revealed that 50% with established CAD have normal lipids by National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) criteria. However, a large proportion of other metabolic contributors to CAD are not revealed by routine blood tests.
28885209
Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with atorvastatin in type 2 diabetes in the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS): multicentre randomised placebo-controlled trial
BACKGROUND
Type 2 diabetes is associated with a substantially increased risk of cardiovascular disease, but the role of lipid-lowering therapy with statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in diabetes is inadequately defined. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of atorvastatin 10 mg daily for primary prevention of major cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes without high concentrations of LDL-cholesterol.


METHODS
2838 patients aged 40-75 years in 132 centres in the UK and Ireland were randomised to placebo (n=1410) or atorvastatin 10 mg daily (n=1428). Study entrants had no documented previous history of cardiovascular disease, an LDL-cholesterol concentration of 4.14 mmol/L or lower, a fasting triglyceride amount of 6.78 mmol/L or less, and at least one of the following: retinopathy, albuminuria, current smoking, or hypertension. The primary endpoint was time to first occurrence of the following: acute coronary heart disease events, coronary revascularisation, or stroke. Analysis was by intention to treat.


FINDINGS
The trial was terminated 2 years earlier than expected because the prespecified early stopping rule for efficacy had been met. Median duration of follow-up was 3.9 years (IQR 3.0-4.7). 127 patients allocated placebo (2.46 per 100 person-years at risk) and 83 allocated atorvastatin (1.54 per 100 person-years at risk) had at least one major cardiovascular event (rate reduction 37% [95% CI -52 to -17], p=0.001). Treatment would be expected to prevent at least 37 major vascular events per 1000 such people treated for 4 years. Assessed separately, acute coronary heart disease events were reduced by 36% (-55 to -9), coronary revascularisations by 31% (-59 to 16), and rate of stroke by 48% (-69 to -11). Atorvastatin reduced the death rate by 27% (-48 to 1, p=0.059). No excess of adverse events was noted in the atorvastatin group.


INTERPRETATION
Atorvastatin 10 mg daily is safe and efficacious in reducing the risk of first cardiovascular disease events, including stroke, in patients with type 2 diabetes without high LDL-cholesterol. No justification is available for having a particular threshold level of LDL-cholesterol as the sole arbiter of which patients with type 2 diabetes should receive statins. The debate about whether all people with this disorder warrant statin treatment should now focus on whether any patients are at sufficiently low risk for this treatment to be withheld.
3955831
Reduction in cardiovascular events with atorvastatin in 2,532 patients with type 2 diabetes: Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial--lipid-lowering arm (ASCOT-LLA).
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to establish the benefits of lowering cholesterol in diabetic patients with well-controlled hypertension and average/below-average cholesterol concentrations, but without established coronary disease.


RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
In the lipid-lowering arm of the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT-LLA), 10,305 hypertensive patients with no history of coronary heart disease (CHD) but at least three cardiovascular risk factors were randomly assigned to receive 10 mg atorvastatin or placebo. Effects on total cardiovascular outcomes in 2,532 patients who had type 2 diabetes at randomization were compared.


RESULTS
During a median follow-up of 3.3 years, concentrations of total and LDL cholesterol among diabetic participants included in ASCOT-LLA were approximately 1 mmol/l lower in those allocated atorvastatin compared with placebo. There were 116 (9.2%) major cardiovascular events or procedures in the atorvastatin group and 151 (11.9%) events in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.98; P = 0.036). For the individual components of this composite end point, the number of events occurring in the diabetes subgroup was small. Therefore, although fewer coronary events (0.84, 0.55-1.29; P = 0.14) and strokes (0.67, 0.41-1.09; P = 0.66) were observed among the patients allocated atorvastatin, these reductions were not statistically significant.


CONCLUSIONS
Atorvastatin significantly reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events and procedures among diabetic patients with well-controlled hypertension and without a history of CHD or markedly elevated cholesterol concentrations. The proportional reduction in risk was similar to that among participants who did not have diagnosed diabetes. Allocation to atorvastatin prevented approximately 9 diabetic participants from suffering a first major cardiovascular event or procedure for every 1,000 treated for 1 year.
16821625
Effect of Lowering LDL Cholesterol Substantially Below Currently Recommended Levels in Patients With Coronary Heart Disease and Diabetes
OBJECTIVE—The Treating to New Targets study showed that intensive lipid-lowering therapy with atorvastatin 80 mg/day provides significant clinical benefit beyond that afforded by atorvastatin 10 mg/day in patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD). The objective of our study was to investigate whether similar benefits of high-dose intensive atorvastatin therapy can be achieved in patients with CHD and diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—A total of 1,501 patients with diabetes and CHD, with LDL cholesterol levels of <130 mg/dl, were randomized to double-blind therapy with either atorvastatin 10 (n = 753) or 80 (n = 748) mg/day. Patients were followed for a median of 4.9 years. The primary end point was the time to first major cardiovascular event, defined as death from CHD, nonfatal non–procedure-related myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or fatal or nonfatal stroke. RESULTS—End-of-treatment mean LDL cholesterol levels were 98.6 mg/dl with atorvastatin 10 mg and 77.0 mg/dl with atorvastatin 80 mg. A primary event occurred in 135 patients (17.9%) receiving atorvastatin 10 mg, compared with 103 patients (13.8%) receiving atorvastatin 80 mg (hazard ratio 0.75 [95% CI 0.58–0.97], P = 0.026). Significant differences between the groups in favor of atorvastatin 80 mg were also observed for time to cerebrovascular event (0.69 [0.48–0.98], P = 0.037) and any cardiovascular event (0.85 [0.73–1.00], P = 0.044). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups in the rates of treatment-related adverse events and persistent elevations in liver enzymes. CONCLUSIONS—Among patients with clinically evident CHD and diabetes, intensive therapy with atorvastatin 80 mg significantly reduced the rate of major cardiovascular events by 25% compared with atorvastatin 10 mg.
31851131
Efficacy of cholesterol-lowering therapy in 18,686 people with diabetes in 14 randomised trials of statins: a meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Although statin therapy reduces the risk of occlusive vascular events in people with diabetes mellitus, there is uncertainty about the effects on particular outcomes and whether such effects depend on the type of diabetes, lipid profile, or other factors. We undertook a prospective meta-analysis to help resolve these uncertainties.


METHODS
We analysed data from 18 686 individuals with diabetes (1466 with type 1 and 17,220 with type 2) in the context of a further 71,370 without diabetes in 14 randomised trials of statin therapy. Weighted estimates were obtained of effects on clinical outcomes per 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol.


FINDINGS
During a mean follow-up of 4.3 years, there were 3247 major vascular events in people with diabetes. There was a 9% proportional reduction in all-cause mortality per mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol in participants with diabetes (rate ratio [RR] 0.91, 99% CI 0.82-1.01; p=0.02), which was similar to the 13% reduction in those without diabetes (0.87, 0.82-0.92; p<0.0001). This finding reflected a significant reduction in vascular mortality (0.87, 0.76-1.00; p=0.008) and no effect on non-vascular mortality (0.97, 0.82-1.16; p=0.7) in participants with diabetes. There was a significant 21% proportional reduction in major vascular events per mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol in people with diabetes (0.79, 0.72-0.86; p<0.0001), which was similar to the effect observed in those without diabetes (0.79, 0.76-0.82; p<0.0001). In diabetic participants there were reductions in myocardial infarction or coronary death (0.78, 0.69-0.87; p<0.0001), coronary revascularisation (0.75, 0.64-0.88; p<0.0001), and stroke (0.79, 0.67-0.93; p=0.0002). Among people with diabetes the proportional effects of statin therapy were similar irrespective of whether there was a prior history of vascular disease and irrespective of other baseline characteristics. After 5 years, 42 (95% CI 30-55) fewer people with diabetes had major vascular events per 1000 allocated statin therapy.


INTERPRETATION
Statin therapy should be considered for all diabetic individuals who are at sufficiently high risk of vascular events.
16024081
Association between change in high density lipoprotein cholesterol and cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality: systematic review and meta-regression analysis
Objective To investigate the association between treatment induced change in high density lipoprotein cholesterol and total death, coronary heart disease death, and coronary heart disease events (coronary heart disease death and non-fatal myocardial infarction) adjusted for changes in low density lipoprotein cholesterol and drug class in randomised trials of lipid modifying interventions. Design Systematic review and meta-regression analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Medline, Embase, Central, CINAHL, and AMED to October 2006 supplemented by contact with experts in the field. Study selection In teams of two, reviewers independently determined eligibility of randomised trials that tested lipid modifying interventions to reduce cardiovascular risk, reported high density lipoprotein cholesterol and mortality or myocardial infarctions separately for treatment groups, and treated and followed participants for at least six months. Data extraction and synthesis Using standardised, pre-piloted forms, reviewers independently extracted relevant information from each article. The change in lipid concentrations for each trial and the weighted risk ratios for clinical outcomes were calculated. Results The meta-regression analysis included 108 randomised trials involving 299 310 participants at risk of cardiovascular events. All analyses that adjusted for changes in low density lipoprotein cholesterol showed no association between treatment induced change in high density lipoprotein cholesterol and risk ratios for coronary heart disease deaths, coronary heart disease events, or total deaths. With all trials included, change in high density lipoprotein cholesterol explained almost no variability (<1%) in any of the outcomes. The change in the quotient of low density lipoprotein cholesterol and high density lipoprotein cholesterol did not explain more of the variability in any of the outcomes than did the change in low density lipoprotein cholesterol alone. For a 10 mg/dl (0.26 mmol/l) reduction in low density lipoprotein cholesterol, the relative risk reduction was 7.2% (95% confidence interval 3.1% to 11%; P=0.001) for coronary heart disease deaths, 7.1% (4.5% to 9.8%; P<0.001) for coronary heart disease events, and 4.4% (1.6% to 7.2%; P=0.002) for total deaths, when adjusted for change in high density lipoprotein cholesterol and drug class. Conclusions Available data suggest that simply increasing the amount of circulating high density lipoprotein cholesterol does not reduce the risk of coronary heart disease events, coronary heart disease deaths, or total deaths. The results support reduction in low density lipoprotein cholesterol as the primary goal for lipid modifying interventions.
19176722
Low-density lipoprotein particle number and risk for cardiovascular disease
The key role played by low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles in the pathogenesis of coronary heart disease (CHD) is well accepted, as is the benefit of lowering LDL in high-risk patients. What remains controversial is whether we are using the best measure(s) of LDL to identify all individuals who would benefit from therapy. Many studies have shown that, at a given level of LDL cholesterol, individuals with predominantly small LDL particles (pattern B) experience greater CHD risk than those with larger-size LDL. However, it is not clear from this observation that small LDL particles are inherently more atherogenic than large ones because, at a given level of LDL cholesterol, individuals with small LDL have more LDL particles in total. The phenotype of small LDL particle size co-segregates with a cluster of metabolic factors, including elevated triglycerides and reduced HDL cholesterol, and in multivariate analyses has generally been found not to be independently associated with CHD risk. In contrast, LDL particle number measured by nuclear magnetic resonance has consistently been shown to be a strong, independent predictor of CHD.
19862551
The contribution of ApoB and ApoA1 measurements to cardiovascular risk assessment
LDL has been widely recognized as the major atherogenic lipoprotein and designated as the primary target for prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD); however, there is growing evidence that other triglyceride‐rich lipoproteins, such as very low‐density lipoprotein (VLDL) and intermediate density lipoprotein (IDL) carry atherogenic potential as well. This led to the designation of non‐HDL cholesterol (HDL‐C) (LDL + IDL + VLDL) as a secondary target of treatment for hyperlipidaemia. As each one of LDL, IDL and VLDL particles carries only one apolipoprotein B‐100 (ApoB‐100) molecule, the total ApoB value represents the total number of potentially atherogenic lipoproteins, whereas non‐HDL‐C provides the cholesterol content of these same lipoproteins. Recent data from epidemiological, observational and interventional studies suggest that non‐HDL‐C, apolipoproteins ApoA1 and ApoB may improve CHD risk assessment by identifying more high‐risk individuals than the usual lipid profile alone. However, the targets for the optimal treatment of dyslipidaemia remain a subject of considerable debate. Further studies are needed to determine whether ApoB and ApoA1 are superior to conventional lipid parameters as predictors of cardiovascular disease or therapeutic targets of hyperlipidaemias. In this review, we summarize the current opinions on the use of ApoA1 and ApoB values as estimates of cardiovascular risk or as treatment goals in patients undergoing treatment for hyperlipidaemia.
32988265
Apo-B/AI ratio identifies cardiovascular risk in childhood:The Australian Aboriginal Birth Cohort study
We describe the lipoprotein and apolipoprotein profiles and their relationship to cardiovascular risk factors in Australian Aboriginal children. This cross-sectional study within a longitudinal birth cohort study involved Australian Aboriginal children born between 1987 and 1990 and re-examined between 1998 and 2001. Height, weight, blood pressure, waist circumference, body fat percentage, cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-c, LDL-c, apolipoprotein B and A1 were measured. Mean age was 11.4 years (52% male). Mean cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL-c and LDL-c did not differ from reference data. Measures of obesity, blood pressure and prevalence of the metabolic syndrome did not differ in those children with lipoproteins in the upper quartile of the cohort (lower quartile for HDL-c). Boys with an Apo-B/A1 ratio in the upper quartile of the cohort had higher BMI z-score, waist z-score, % body fat, diastolic blood pressure and frequency of the metabolic syndrome (p<0.05). In girls, waist circumference, % body fat and the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome was higher in those with an Apo-B/A1 ratio in the upper quartile (p<0.05).The Apo-B/A1 ratio may be useful to identify cardiovascular risk in Australian Aboriginal children and is suited to clinical practice as the assays are standardised, accurate, automated and a fasting sample is not required.
33894007
Redefining quality--implications of recent clinical trials.
The conventional wisdom for guidelines and performance measures has been that the clinician's key focus ought to be on reducing risk factors below specific levels. Drs. Harlan Krumholz and Thomas Lee argue that this approach neglects the importance of which specific strategies are used to modify these factors.
25087242
Assessment of reaching goal in patients with combined hyperlipidemia: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or apolipoprotein B.
It is well established that patients with combined hyperlipidemia, defined as elevated triglyceride levels between 200 and 500 mg/dL and elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol >130 mg/dL, are at increased risk for coronary artery disease. The optimal assessment of reaching lipid goals in patients with combined hyperlipidemia is still far from settled and has been an area of revision and modification in recent guidelines. Although controversy remains as to the best single measurement to be used in treatment goals, current focus is on the use of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B. This article reviews the use of these 3 biomarkers in assessing cardiovascular risk, and the strategies for managing combined hyperlipidemia.
41418108
Achieving LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B target levels in high-risk patients: Measuring Effective Reductions in Cholesterol Using Rosuvastatin therapY (MERCURY) II.
BACKGROUND
National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines for patients at a high risk of coronary heart disease set a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target of < 100 mg/dL. This target can be difficult to attain with diet and current therapy.


METHODS
In a 16-week multinational trial, 1993 high-risk patients were randomized to rosuvastatin 20 mg, atorvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, or simvastatin 40 mg for 8 weeks. Patients either remained on starting treatment or switched to lower or milligram-equivalent doses of rosuvastatin for 8 more weeks.


RESULTS
At 16 weeks, more patients achieved their LDL-C target by switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg than staying on atorvastatin 10 mg (66% vs 42%, P < .001) or simvastatin 20 mg (73% vs 32%, P < .001). Changing to rosuvastatin 20 mg brought more patients to their LDL-C target than staying on atorvastatin 20 mg (79% vs 64%, P < .001) or simvastatin 40 mg (84% vs 56%, P < .001). More very high risk patients achieved an LDL-C target of < 70 mg/dL when changed to rosuvastatin from atorvastatin or simvastatin (within-arm comparisons P < .01). More hypertriglyceridemic patients (triglycerides > or = 200 mg/dL) met LDL-C, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and apolipoprotein B targets by changing to rosuvastatin. Switching to rosuvastatin produced greater reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B, and lipid ratios. All treatments were well tolerated, with no differences among treatment groups in skeletal muscle, hepatic, or renal toxicity.


CONCLUSION
Rosuvastatin 10 or 20 mg is an effective and safe therapeutic option for high-risk patients to achieve their lipid and apolipoprotein targets.
41480519
Pharmacologic Treatment of Type 2 Diabetic Dyslipidemia
Patients with diabetes mellitus have a higher risk for cardiovascular heart disease (CHD) than does the general population, and once they develop CHD, mortality is higher. Good glycemic control will reduce CHD only modestly in patients with diabetes. Therefore, reduction in all cardiovascular risks such as dyslipidemia, hypertension, and smoking is warranted. The focus of this article is on therapy for dyslipidemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients with the metabolic syndrome (insulin resistance) share similarities with patients with type 2 diabetes and may have a comparable cardiovascular risk profile. Diabetic patients tend to have higher triglyceride, lower high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL), and similar low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) levels compared with those levels in nondiabetic patients. However, diabetic patients tend to have a higher concentration of small dense LDL particles, which are associated with higher CHD risk. Current recommendations are for an LDL goal of less than 100 mg/dl (an option of < 70 mg/dl in very high‐risk patients), an HDL goal greater than 40 mg/dl for men and greater than 50 mg/dl for women, and a triglyceride goal less than 150 mg/dl. Nonpharmacologic interventions (diet and exercise) are first‐line therapies and are used with pharmacologic therapy when necessary. Lowering LDL levels is the first priority in treating diabetic dyslipidemia. Statins are the first drug choice, followed by resins or ezetimibe, then fenofibrate or niacin. If a single agent is inadequate to achieve lipid goals, combinations of the preceding drugs may be used. For elevated triglyceride levels, hyperglycemia must be controlled first. If triglyceride or HDL levels remain uncontrolled, pharmacologic agents should be considered. Fibrates are slightly more effective than niacin in lowering triglyceride levels, but niacin increases HDL levels appreciably more than do fibrates. Unlike gemfibrozil, niacin selectively increases subfraction Lp A‐I, a cardioprotective HDL. Niacin is distinct in that it has a broad spectrum of beneficial effects on lipids and atherogenic lipoprotein subfraction levels. Niacin produces additive results when used in combination therapy. Recent data suggest that lower dosages and newer formulations of niacin can be used safely in diabetic patients with good glycemic control. Current evidence and guidelines mandate that diabetic dyslipidemia be treated aggressively, and lipid goals can be achieved in most patients with diabetes when all available products are considered and, if necessary, used in combination.
6754972
The effect of high dose atorvastatin therapy on lipids and lipoprotein subfractions in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes.
Few data are available on the effects of high dose statin therapy on lipoprotein subfractions in type 2 diabetes. In a double blind randomised placebo-controlled trial we have studied the effects of 80 mg atorvastatin over 8 weeks on LDL, VLDL and HDL subfractions in 40 overweight type 2 diabetes patients. VLDL and LDL subfractions were prepared by density gradient ultracentrifugation. Triglycerides, cholesterol, total protein and phospholipids were measured and mass of subfractions calculated. HDL subfractions were prepared by precipitation. Atorvastatin 80 mg produced significant falls in LDL subfractions (LDL(1) 66.2 mg/dl:36.6 mg/dl, LDL(2) 118:56.6 mg/dl, LDL(3) 36.9:19.9 mg/dl all P < 0.01 relative to placebo) and VLDL subfractions (VLDL(1) 55:22.1 mg/dl, VLDL(2) 40.1:19.1 mg/dl, VLDL(3) 52.6:30 mg/dl all P < 0.01 relative to placebo). There was no change in the proportion of LDL present as LDL(3). There was a reduction in the proportion of VLDL as VLDL(1) and a reciprocal increase in the proportion as VLDL(3). Changes in VLDL subfractions were associated with changes in lipid composition, particularly a reduction in cholesterol ester and a reduction in the cholesterol ester/triglyceride ratio. Effects on HDL subfractions were largely neutral. High dose atorvastatin produces favourable effects on lipoprotein subfractions in type 2 diabetes which may enhance antiatherogenic potential.
206434450
Laropiprant in Combination With Extended‐Release Niacin Does Not Alter Urine 11‐Dehydrothromboxane B2, a Marker of In Vivo Platelet Function, in Healthy, Hypercholesterolemic, and Diabetic Subjects
Laropiprant, an antagonist of the PGD2 receptor, DP1, is effective in reducing the flushing symptoms associated with extended‐release (ER) niacin and thereby improves the tolerability of niacin therapy for dyslipidemia. Because PGD2 has been reported to inhibit platelet aggregation in vitro, it has been speculated that antagonism of DP1 may enhance platelet reactivity. Three clinical studies evaluated the potential effect of laropiprant, with or without coadministration of ER niacin, on in vivo platelet function in healthy subjects and hypercholesterolemic or diabetic subjects by measuring urinary levels of 11‐dehydrothromboxane B2 (11‐dTxB2), a marker of in vivo platelet activation. Following 7 days of multiple‐dose administration, coadministration of laropiprant with ER niacin did not increase urinary 11‐dTxB2 levels compared to ER niacin alone in healthy, hypercholesterolemic, or diabetic subjects. In hypercholesterolemic and diabetic subjects, laropiprant did not increase urinary 11‐dTxB2 levels compared to placebo. These results demonstrate that laropiprant does not enhance in vivo platelet reactivity, either alone or in combination with niacin.
41546647
Efficacy and safety of extended‐release niacin/laropiprant plus statin vs. doubling the dose of statin in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia or mixed dyslipidaemia
Background:  Co‐administration of niacin with statin offers the potential for additional lipid management and cardiovascular risk reduction. However, niacin is underutilised because of the side effects of flushing, mediated primarily by prostaglandin D2 (PGD2). A combination tablet containing extended‐release niacin and laropiprant (ERN/LRPT), a PGD2 receptor (DP1) antagonist, offers improved tolerability. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of ERN/LRPT added to statin vs. doubling the dose of statin in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia or mixed dyslipidaemia who were not at their National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) goal based on their coronary heart disease risk category (high, moderate or low).
15015681
Effect of Ezetimibe Coadministered With Atorvastatin in 628 Patients With Primary Hypercholesterolemia: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial
Background—Despite the established efficacy of statins, many patients do not achieve recommended LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) goals. Contributing factors may be inadequate dosing, increased risk for adverse effects with high-dose monotherapy, and increased potential for intolerance and adverse effects with combinations of available agents. Methods and Results—In a double-blind study, 628 patients with baseline LDL-C 145 to 250 mg/dL and triglycerides ≤350 mg/dL were randomly assigned to receive 1 of the following for 12 weeks: ezetimibe (10 mg/d); atorvastatin (10, 20, 40, or 80 mg/d); ezetimibe (10 mg) plus atorvastatin (10, 20, 40, or 80 mg/d); or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was percentage reduction in LDL-C for pooled ezetimibe plus atorvastatin versus pooled atorvastatin treatment groups. Ezetimibe plus atorvastatin significantly improved LDL-C, HDL cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, total cholesterol:HDL-C, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) compared with atorvastatin alone (P <0.01). Coadministration of ezetimibe provided a significant additional 12% LDL-C reduction, 3% HDL-C increase, 8% triglyceride reduction, and 10% hs-CRP reduction versus atorvastatin alone. Ezetimibe plus atorvastatin provided LDL-C reductions of 50% to 60%, triglyceride reductions of 30% to 40%, and HDL-C increases of 5% to 9%, depending on atorvastatin dose. LDL-C reductions with ezetimibe plus 10 mg atorvastatin (50%) and 80 mg atorvastatin alone (51%) were similar. Conclusions—Ezetimibe plus atorvastatin was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to atorvastatin alone and to placebo. When coadministered with atorvastatin, ezetimibe provided significant incremental reductions in LDL-C and triglycerides and increases in HDL-C. Coadministration of ezetimibe and atorvastatin offers a well-tolerated and highly efficacious new treatment option for patients with hypercholesterolemia.
40744740
Effects of long-term fenofibrate therapy on cardiovascular events in 9795 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the FIELD study): randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND
Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, partly owing to dyslipidaemia, which can be amenable to fibrate therapy. We designed the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study to assess the effect of fenofibrate on cardiovascular disease events in these patients.


METHODS
We did a multinational, randomised controlled trial with 9795 participants aged 50-75 years, with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and not taking statin therapy at study entry. After a placebo and a fenofibrate run-in phase, we randomly assigned patients (2131 with previous cardiovascular disease and 7664 without) with a total-cholesterol concentration of 3.0-6.5 mmol/L and a total-cholesterol/HDL-cholesterol ratio of 4.0 or more or plasma triglyceride of 1.0-5.0 mmol/L to micronised fenofibrate 200 mg daily (n=4895) or matching placebo (n=4900). Our primary outcome was coronary events (coronary heart disease death or non-fatal myocardial infarction); the outcome for prespecified subgroup analyses was total cardiovascular events (the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary and carotid revascularisation). Analysis was by intention to treat. The study was prospectively registered (number ISRCTN 64783481).


FINDINGS
Vital status was confirmed on all but 22 patients. Averaged over the 5 years' study duration, similar proportions in each group discontinued study medication (10% placebo vs 11% fenofibrate) and more patients allocated placebo (17%) than fenofibrate (8%; p<0.0001) commenced other lipid treatments, predominantly statins. 5.9% (n=288) of patients on placebo and 5.2% (n=256) of those on fenofibrate had a coronary event (relative reduction of 11%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.05; p=0.16). This finding corresponds to a significant 24% reduction in non-fatal myocardial infarction (0.76, 0.62-0.94; p=0.010) and a non-significant increase in coronary heart disease mortality (1.19, 0.90-1.57; p=0.22). Total cardiovascular disease events were significantly reduced from 13.9% to 12.5% (0.89, 0.80-0.99; p=0.035). This finding included a 21% reduction in coronary revascularisation (0.79, 0.68-0.93; p=0.003). Total mortality was 6.6% in the placebo group and 7.3% in the fenofibrate group (p=0.18). Fenofibrate was associated with less albuminuria progression (p=0.002), and less retinopathy needing laser treatment (5.2%vs 3.6%, p=0.0003). There was a slight increase in pancreatitis (0.5%vs 0.8%, p=0.031) and pulmonary embolism (0.7%vs 1.1%, p=0.022), but no other significant adverse effects.


INTERPRETATION
Fenofibrate did not significantly reduce the risk of the primary outcome of coronary events. It did reduce total cardiovascular events, mainly due to fewer non-fatal myocardial infarctions and revascularisations. The higher rate of starting statin therapy in patients allocated placebo might have masked a moderately larger treatment benefit.
18032950
Effects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus.
BACKGROUND
We investigated whether combination therapy with a statin plus a fibrate, as compared with statin monotherapy, would reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were at high risk for cardiovascular disease.


METHODS
We randomly assigned 5518 patients with type 2 diabetes who were being treated with open-label simvastatin to receive either masked fenofibrate or placebo. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years.


RESULTS
The annual rate of the primary outcome was 2.2% in the fenofibrate group and 2.4% in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the fenofibrate group, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.08; P=0.32). There were also no significant differences between the two study groups with respect to any secondary outcome. Annual rates of death were 1.5% in the fenofibrate group and 1.6% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.10; P=0.33). Prespecified subgroup analyses suggested heterogeneity in treatment effect according to sex, with a benefit for men and possible harm for women (P=0.01 for interaction), and a possible interaction according to lipid subgroup, with a possible benefit for patients with both a high baseline triglyceride level and a low baseline level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.057 for interaction).


CONCLUSIONS
The combination of fenofibrate and simvastatin did not reduce the rate of fatal cardiovascular events, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, as compared with simvastatin alone. These results do not support the routine use of combination therapy with fenofibrate and simvastatin to reduce cardiovascular risk in the majority of high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)
21630530
Effects of fibrates on metabolism of statins in human hepatocytes.
This study investigated the metabolic interaction between fibrates and statin hydroxy acids in human hepatocytes. Gemfibrozil (GFZ) modestly affected the formation of beta-oxidative products and CYP3A4-mediated oxidative metabolites of simvastatin hydroxy acid (SVA) but markedly inhibited the glucuronidation-mediated lactonization of SVA and the glucuronidation of a beta-oxidation product (IC(50) approximately 50 and 15 microM, respectively). In contrast, fenofibrate had a minimal effect on all the metabolic pathways of SVA. GFZ also significantly inhibited (IC(50) approximately 50-60 microM) the oxidation of cerivastatin (CVA) and rosuvastatin (RVA), but not of atorvastatin (AVA), while effectively decreasing (IC(50) approximately 30 to 60 microM) the lactonization of all three statins. As was observed previously with other statin hydroxy acids, RVA underwent significant glucuronidation to form an acyl glucuronide conjugate and lactonization to form RVA lactone in human liver microsomes and by UGT 1A1 and 1A3. While GFZ is not an inhibitor of CYP3A4, it is a competitive inhibitor (K(i) = 87 microM) of CYP2C8, a major catalyzing enzyme for CVA oxidation. These results suggest that 1) the pharmacokinetic interaction observed between GFZ and statins was not likely mediated by the inhibitory effect of GFZ on the beta-oxidation, but rather by its effect primarily on the glucuronidation and non-CYP3A-mediated oxidation of statin hydroxy acids, and 2) there is a potential difference between fibrates in their ability to affect the pharmacokinetics of statins, and among statins in their susceptibility to metabolic interactions with GFZ in humans.
23387767
Pioglitazone hydrochloride in combination with sulfonylurea therapy improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of pioglitazone in combination with a sulfonylurea in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.


SUBJECTS AND METHODS
This 16-week, double-blind study included patients on a stable regimen of a sulfonylurea for > or = 30 days and with a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1C) level > or = 8.0%. Patients were randomly assigned to receive once daily pioglitazone 15 mg (n = 184), pioglitazone 30 mg (n = 189), or placebo plus sulfonylurea (n = 187).


RESULTS
Patients receiving pioglitazone + sulfonylurea had significant (P < 0.05) decreases from baseline in HbA1C and fasting plasma glucose levels compared with patients treated with placebo + sulfonylurea. As compared with placebo, HbA1C decreased by 0.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06% to 1.2%) with pioglitazone 15 mg and 1.3% (CI: 1% to 1.6%) with 30 mg pioglitazone; fasting plasma glucose levels decreased by 39 mg/dL (95% CI: 27 to 52 mg/dL) with pioglitazone 15 mg and by 58 mg/dL (95% CI: 46-70 mg/dL) with 30 mg pioglitazone. Both pioglitazone + sulfonylurea groups had significant (P < 0.05) mean percent decreases in triglyceride levels (17%, 95% CI: 6% to 27% for 15 mg; 26%, 95% CI: 16% to 36% for 30 mg) and increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (6%, 95% CI: 1% to 11% for 15 mg; 13%, CI: 8% to 18% for 30 mg) compared with placebo + sulfonylurea. There were small but statistically significant mean percent increases in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in all groups. Pioglitazone was well tolerated, and the rates of adverse events were similar in all groups.


CONCLUSION
In patients with type 2 diabetes, pioglitazone plus sulfonylurea significantly improves HbA1C and fasting plasma glucose levels with beneficial effects on serum triglyceride and HDL-cholesterol levels.
24494116
Effects of pioglitazone on lipid and lipoprotein profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia after treatment conversion from rosiglitazone while continuing stable statin therapy
4The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in lipid profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes after treatment conversion from rosiglitazone to pioglitazone while maintaining stable statin and other lipid-altering therapies. A total of 305 patients were enrolled in this open-label study. Patients had been taking stable dosages of rosiglitazone and statins for > 90 days. At baseline, patients discontinued rosiglitazone and started pioglitazone 30 mg/day, but continued statins and other lipid-altering therapies. The primary end point was change from baseline in fasting triglyceride levels. At 17 weeks after treatment conversion, patients had significant reductions in triglycerides (-15.2%), total cholesterol (-9.0%), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle concentration (-189 nmol/L), and increases in LDL cholesterol (+2.2%), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (+1.8%), and LDL particle diameter (+0.23 nm). In conclusion, after treatment conversion from rosiglitazone to pioglitazone while maintaining stable statin therapy, patients with type 2 diabetes had marked improvements in lipid profiles along with stable glycaemic control.
23864677
Effect of Acarbose on Carbohydrate and Lipid Metabolism in NIDDM Patients Poorly Controlled by Sulfonylureas
The ability of acarbose to lower plasma glucose concentration was studied in 12 patients with noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) who were poorly controlled by diet plus sulfonylurea drugs. Patients were studied before and 3 mo after the addition of acarbose to their treatment program, and a significant improvement in glycemic control was noted. Although the decrease in fasting plasma glucose concentration was modest (12.0 ± 0.8 to 10.8 ± 0.3 mM), average postprandial plasma glucose concentration decreased by 3.4 mM. When acarbose therapy was discontinued in 5 patients, plasma glucose levels rapidly returned toward pretreatment levels. In addition to the improvement in glycemia, acarbose treatment also led to a significant reduction in HbA1c (7.4 ± 0.2 to 6.4 ± 0.2%, P < 0.01) and triglyceride (2.4 ± 0.1 to 2.1 ± 0.1 mM, P < 0.01) concentrations. Neither the plasma insulin response to meals nor insulin-stimulated glucose uptake improved with acarbose therapy, consistent with the view that acarbose improves glycemic control by delaying glucose absorption. Considerable individual variation was noted in the response to acarbose, and the results in 4 patients were dramatic, with striking reductions in both fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations. The addition of acarbose to patients with NIDDM not well controlled by sulfonylureas appears to have significant clinical benefit.
20668983
Reducing Cardiovascular Complications of Type 2 Diabetes by Targeting Multiple Risk Factors
Insulin resistance syndrome is characterized by hyperglycemia, atherogenic dyslipidemia, hypertension, and abdominal obesity. Hyperglycemia is the major risk factor for microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes. However, 70% to 80% of patients with type 2 diabetes will die of macrovascular disease. Atherogenic dyslipidemia-characterized by elevated triglyceride levels, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) levels, and a preponderance of small, dense, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles-is the major cause of atherosclerosis in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Therefore, treatment of type 2 diabetes must address hyperglycemia to prevent microvascular disease (retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy) and atherogenic dyslipidemia to prevent macrovascular complications. Emerging evidence indicates lipid and glucose homeostasis are interrelated via bile acid-activated nuclear hormone receptor signaling pathways. Agents that act on these pathways could simultaneously address hyperglycemia and dyslipidemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. Recent studies have shown that bile acid sequestrants, including cholestyramine, colestimide, and colesevelam HCl, significantly improve glycemic control and reduce LDL cholesterol levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. This paper will review the effects of bile acid sequestrants on both glucose and lipid metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes.
40338536
Endocrine functions of bile acids
Bile acids (BAs), a group of structurally diverse molecules that are primarily synthesized in the liver from cholesterol, are the chief components of bile. Besides their well‐established roles in dietary lipid absorption and cholesterol homeostasis, it has recently emerged that BAs are also signaling molecules, with systemic endocrine functions. BAs activate mitogen‐activated protein kinase pathways, are ligands for the G‐protein‐coupled receptor TGR5, and activate nuclear hormone receptors such as farnesoid X receptor α. Through activation of these diverse signaling pathways, BAs can regulate their own enterohepatic circulation, but also triglyceride, cholesterol, energy, and glucose homeostasis. Thus, BA‐controlled signaling pathways are promising novel drug targets to treat common metabolic diseases, such as obesity, type II diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and atherosclerosis.
32306498
The ‘Forgotten’ Bile Acid Sequestrants: Is Now a Good Time to Remember?
Over 30 years ago, bile acid sequestrants (BAS) were among the first drugs approved to lower cholesterol levels. For over 10 years, BAS have been known to reduce glucose levels. Most importantly, BAS have been shown in outcomes studies to reduce cardiovascular events. Because they are true nonsystemic agents, BAS are generally safe and not associated with serious systemic adverse experiences. Despite their proven atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD) benefits, and irrespective of their favorable effects on major CHD risk factors (hypercholesterolemia and hyperglycemia), BAS are not among the more frequently used drug treatments for hypercholesterolemia, even in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Recent “high-profile” findings of investigational and approved lipid-altering and antidiabetes drug therapies illustrate that drug-induced improvements in lipid and glucose levels do not always reduce CHD risk. It may therefore be time to reconsider the clinical use of BAS. This review focuses on the recent lessons learned, and the potential mechanisms involved in efficacy and safety issues raised with torcetrapib and rosiglitazone with analogies related to the use of BAS therapy. Known and proposed mechanisms of how BAS may improve lipid and glucose levels are discussed, which are effects that may help explain how BAS reduce CHD risk. Improved tolerability of newer BAS (eg, colesevelam hydrochloride) and a “new” appreciation of the historic benefits of these “old” therapeutic agents may lead to an increased treatment role for these drugs, particularly in hypercholesterolemic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
20574762
Modulating LDL cholesterol and glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: targeting the bile acid pathway
Purpose of review Individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have a number of potentially modifiable risk factors, including dyslipidemia, hypertension, and hyperglycemia, that contribute to coronary artery disease risk. Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a major contributor to coronary artery disease, and clinical trials have demonstrated significant macrovascular benefits associated with lowering LDL-C in individuals with T2DM, even in those with only a modest LDL-C elevation. Intensive glycemic control has been shown to reduce microvascular complications associated with T2DM. Therefore, it is important to treat both dyslipidemia and hyperglycemia to reduce complications. In this paper, the effect of elevated LDL-C and glucose concentrations on T2DM outcomes is reviewed. Recent findings Lipid and glucose homeostasis are linked in part through bile acid pathways. Recent clinical trials demonstrate that bile acid sequestrants, which significantly reduce LDL-C, can also significantly reduce glucose levels in patients with T2DM. These findings supported recent Food and Drug Administration approval of the bile acid sequestrant colesevelam HCl for reducing glycemia in patients with T2DM. Summary A multitargeted therapeutic approach using a bile acid sequestrant to improve both cholesterol and glucose management in patients with T2DM may be clinically beneficial.
43117894
Effectiveness of colesevelam hydrochloride in decreasing LDL cholesterol in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: a 24-week randomized controlled trial.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of colesevelam hydrochloride, a new nonsystemic lipid-lowering agent.


PATIENTS AND METHODS
In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial performed in 1998, 494 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol level > or = 130 mg/dL and < or = 220 mg/dL) were randomized to receive placebo or colesevelam (2.3 g/d, 3.0 g/d, 3.8 g/d, or 4.5 g/d) for 24 weeks. Fasting serum lipid profiles were measured to assess efficacy. Adverse events were monitored, and discontinuation rates and compliance rates were analyzed. The primary outcome measure was the mean absolute change of LDL cholesterol from baseline to the end of the 24-week treatment period.


RESULTS
Colesevelam lowered mean LDL cholesterol levels 9% to 18% in a dose-dependent manner (P<.001), with a median LDL cholesterol reduction of 20% at 4.5 g/d. The reduction in LDL cholesterol levels was maximal after 2 weeks and sustained throughout the study. Mean total cholesterol levels decreased 4% to 10% (P<.001), while median high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased 3% to 4% (P<.001). Median triglyceride levels increased by 5% to 10% in placebo and colesevelam treatment groups relative to baseline (P<.05), but none of these differences were significantly different from placebo. Mean apolipoprotein B levels decreased 6% to 12% in an apparent dose-dependent manner (P<.001). No significant differences occurred in adverse events or discontinuation rates between groups, and compliance rates were between 88% and 92% for all groups.


CONCLUSIONS
Colesevelam was efficacious, decreasing mean LDL cholesterol levels by up to 18%, and well tolerated without serious adverse events.
27117570
Coadministration of colesevelam hydrochloride with atorvastatin lowers LDL cholesterol additively.
Colesevelam hydrochloride is a novel, potent, non-absorbed lipid-lowering agent previously shown to reduce low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. To examine the efficacy and safety of coadministration of colesevelam and atorvastatin, administration of these agents alone or in combination was examined in a double-blind study of 94 hypercholesterolemic men and women (baseline LDL cholesterol > or =160 mg/dl). After 4 weeks on the American Heart Association Step I diet, patients were randomized among five groups: placebo; colesevelam 3.8 g/day; atorvastatin 10 mg/day; coadminstered colesevelam 3.8 g/day plus atorvastatin 10 mg/day; or atorvastatin 80 mg/day. Fasting lipids were measured at screening, baseline and 2 and 4 weeks of treatment. LDL cholesterol decreased by 12-53% in all active treatment groups (P<0.01). LDL cholesterol reductions with combination therapy (48%) were statistically superior to colesevelam (12%) or low-dose atorvastatin (38%) alone (P<0.01), but similar to those achieved with atorvastatin 80 mg/day (53%). Total cholesterol decreased 6-39% in all active treatment groups (P<0.05). High density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly for all groups including placebo (P<0.05). Triglycerides decreased in patients taking atorvastatin alone (P<0.05), but were unaffected by colesevelam alone or in combination. The frequency of side effects did not differ among groups. At recommended starting doses of each agent, coadministration of colesevelam and atorvastatin was well tolerated, efficacious and produced additive LDL cholesterol reductions comparable to those observed with the maximum atorvastatin dose.
43038504
Results of the glucose-lowering effect of WelChol study (GLOWS): a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study evaluating the effect of colesevelam hydrochloride on glycemic control in subjects with type 2 diabetes.
OBJECTIVE
This study evaluated the glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)-lowering effect of colesevelam hydrochloride, a bile acid sequestrant, in subjects with type 2 diabetes that was inadequately controlled by existing antihyperglycemic therapy.


METHODS
After a 4-week placebo run-in period, subjects with type 2 diabetes and an HbA(1c) value of 7.0% to 10.0% were randomized to receive colesevelam 3.75 g/d or matching placebo for 12 weeks. Subjects' previous oral anti hyperglycemic medication (sulfonylurea and/or metformin) was continued throughout the study. Fasting blood samples were obtained at weeks -5, -1, 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12. The primary efficacy end point was the change in HbA(1c) from baseline to week 12. Secondary end points included changes in fructosamine levels, fasting plasma glucose levels, postprandial glucose level, and meal glucose response (ie, difference between preprandial and postprandial levels), and percent changes in lipid parameters from baseline to week 12.


RESULTS
The 65 randomized subjects (31 colesevelam, 34 placebo) had a mean age of 56.2 years and a mean body mass index of 32.4 kg/m(2); 55.4% were male and 53.8% were white. The difference in least squares (LS) mean (SE) change in HbA(1c) between the colesevelam group and the placebo group was -0.5% (0.18) (P = 0.007). In subjects with a baseline HbAIc > or = 8.0%, the difference in LS mean change in HbA(1c) was -1.0% (0.27) (P = 0.002). Relative to placebo, colesevelam treatment was associated with reductions in levels of fructosamine (-29.0 [10.9] pmol/L; P = 0.011) and postprandial glucose (-31.5 [13.6] mg/dL; P = 0.026). The mean percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was -9.6% in the colesevelam group, compared with 2.1% in the placebo group (treatment difference, -11.7% [4.2]; P = 0.007); the respective mean percent changes in total cholesterol were -4.0% and 3.4% (treatment difference, -7.3% [3.0]; P = 0.019). Colesevelam also was associated with significant decreases in the percent change in apolipoprotein B (P = 0.003) and low-density lipoprotein particle concentration (P = 0.037). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar in both groups, although treatment-related adverse events were more frequent in the colesevelam group than in the placebo group (29.0% vs 8.8%, respectively). The most frequent TEAEs in the colesevelam group were gastrointestinal disorders (22.6%), primarily constipation (19.4%), compared with an 8.8% incidence of gastrointestinal disorders (0% constipation) in the placebo group. There were no significant changes in body weight or the occurrence of hypoglycemia between treatment groups.


CONCLUSIONS
In these subjects with type 2 diabetes, 12 weeks of colesevelam treatment were associated with significant reductions in HbA(1c) and in fructosamine and postprandial glucose levels compared with placebo. The 2 groups had a similar adverse-event profile, with the exception of an increased incidence of constipation in the colesevelam group. These results suggest that colesevelam may improve both lipid control and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving oral antihyperglycemic medications.
18013914
Colesevelam hydrochloride therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with metformin: glucose and lipid effects.
BACKGROUND
Bile acid sequestrants are a well-accepted class of cholesterol-lowering drugs. Over the last decade, small studies have indicated that these agents may also lower glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).


METHODS
This 26-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted between August 2004 and July 2006 at 54 sites in the United States and 2 in Mexico to determine the effects of colesevelam hydrochloride, a bile acid sequestrant, in patients with inadequately controlled T2DM (hemoglobin A(1c) [HbA(1c)] level, 7.5%-9.5% [baseline HbA(1c) level, 8.1%]), who were receiving metformin monotherapy or metformin combined with additional oral anti-diabetes mellitus drugs. In total, 316 subjects were randomized (159 to colesevelam hydrochloride, 3.75 g/d, and 157 to matching placebo). The primary efficacy parameter was mean placebo-corrected change in HbA(1c) level from baseline to week 26 (analysis was on an intent-to-treat population using a last-observation-carried-forward approach).


RESULTS
Colesevelam lowered the mean HbA(1c) level compared with placebo at week 26 (-0.54%; P < .001). Similar results were observed in the metformin monotherapy (-0.47%; P = .002) and combination therapy cohorts (-0.62%; P < .001). In addition, colesevelam significantly (1) lowered fasting plasma glucose (-13.9 mg/dL P = .01), fructosamine (-23.2 micromol/L; P < .001), total cholesterol (TC) (-7.2%; P < .001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (-15.9%; P < .001), apolipoprotein B (-7.9%; P < .001), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) (-10.3%; P < .001), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (-14.4%; P = .02) levels and (2) improved other measures of glycemic response, as well as TC/HDL-C, LDL-C/HDL-C, non-HDL-C/HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B/apolipoprotein A-I ratios (P < .003 for all). Triglyceride, HDL-C, and apolipoprotein A-I levels were not statistically significantly increased.


CONCLUSION
Colesevelam improves glycemic and lipid parameters in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin-based therapy.
15597380
Colesevelam HCl Improves Glycemic Control and Reduces LDL Cholesterol in Patients With Inadequately Controlled Type 2 Diabetes on Sulfonylurea-Based Therapy
OBJECTIVE—Hyperglycemia is a risk factor for microvascular complications and may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. This study tested the LDL cholesterol–lowering agent colesevelam HCl (colesevelam) as a potential novel treatment for improving glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes on sulfonylurea-based therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—A 26-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study was carried out between August 2004 and August 2006 to evaluate the efficacy and safety of colesevelam for reducing A1C in adults with type 2 diabetes whose glycemic control was inadequate (A1C 7.5–9.5%) with existing sulfonylurea monotherapy or sulfonylurea in combination with additional oral antidiabetes agents. In total, 461 patients were randomized (230 given colesevelam 3.75 g/day and 231 given placebo). The primary efficacy measurement was mean placebo-corrected change in A1C from baseline to week 26 in the intent-to-treat population (last observation carried forward). RESULTS—The least squares (LS) mean change in A1C from baseline to week 26 was −0.32% in the colesevelam group and +0.23% in the placebo group, resulting in a treatment difference of −0.54% (P < 0.001). The LS mean percent change in LDL cholesterol from baseline to week 26 was −16.1% in the colesevelam group and +0.6% in the placebo group, resulting in a treatment difference of −16.7% (P < 0.001). Furthermore, significant reductions in fasting plasma glucose, fructosamine, total cholesterol, non–HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B were demonstrated in the colesevelam relative to placebo group at week 26. CONCLUSIONS—Colesevelam improved glycemic control and reduced LDL cholesterol levels in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving sulfonylurea-based therapy.
23876093
Colesevelam HCl effects on atherogenic lipoprotein subclasses in subjects with type 2 diabetes.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Glucose-Lowering Effect of Welchol Study (GLOWS) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to examine the effects of colesevelam HCl on glycemic and lipid control in type 2 diabetes patients with HbA1c (A1C) between 7.0% and 10.0%. After a 4-week placebo lead-in period, 65 subjects (31 colesevelam, 34 placebo) were randomized to receive colesevelam 3.75 g/day or matching placebo for 12 weeks in addition to maintaining their previous oral antihyperglycemic regimen (metformin, sulfonylurea, or both). Lipoprotein subclasses measured by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy were secondary efficacy variables evaluated in 56 subjects (26 colesevelam, 30 placebo) at baseline and week 12.


RESULTS
Previously published data demonstrated that colesevelam resulted in significant reductions in LDL-C, and Apo B. This analysis demonstrates that relative to placebo, colesevelam treatment reduced mean total LDL particle concentration (LDL-P) by 15.5% (-242 nmol/L [-412,-72], p=0.006) primarily due to lowering in small LDL-P (-207 nmol/L [-418,4], p=0.054) and a lesser reduction in large LDL-P [-30 nmol/L [-118,58], p=0.496) and IDL-P (-5 nmol/L [-21,11], p=0.557).


CONCLUSIONS
In type 2 diabetes patients, colesevelam improves glycemic status and reduces the concentration of LDL-C and LDL-P with little change in concentrations of other lipoprotein particles.
30537671
Bile Acid Sequestrants and the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Bile acids promote bile formation and facilitate dietary lipid absorption. Animal and human studies showing disturbed bile acid metabolism in diabetes mellitus suggest a link between bile acids and glucose control. Bile acids are activating ligands of the farnesoid X receptor (FXR), a nuclear receptor with an established role in bile acid and lipid metabolism. Evidence suggests a role for FXR also in maintenance of glucose homeostasis. Animal and human studies employing bile acid sequestrants (bile acid binding agents), which interrupt the enterohepatic circulation of bile acids and effectively reduce plasma cholesterol, support a link between bile acid and glucose metabolism. In lipid-lowering trials, bile acid sequestrants, such as colesevelam hydrochloride, colestyramine (cholestyramine) and colestilan (colestimide), have also been shown to lower plasma glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin levels, suggesting the utility of these agents as a potential therapy for type 2 diabetes. In this article, we review the relationship between bile acid metabolism and glucose homeostasis, and present data demonstrating the utility of bile acid sequestrants in the management of diabetes.
11676201
The Farnesoid X receptor: a molecular link between bile acid and lipid and glucose metabolism.
Bile acids are the end products of cholesterol metabolism. They are synthesized in the liver and secreted via bile into the intestine, where they aid in the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins and dietary fat. Subsequently, bile acids return to the liver to complete their enterohepatic circulation. The Farnesoid X receptor (FXR) is a member of the nuclear receptor superfamily and has emerged as a key player in the control of multiple metabolic pathways. On its activation by bile acids, FXR regulates bile acid synthesis, conjugation, and transport, as well as various aspects of lipid and glucose metabolism. This review summarizes recent advances in deciphering the role of FXR in the context of hepatic lipid and glucose homeostasis and discusses the potential of FXR as a pharmacological target for therapeutic applications.
181068
A Review of Bile Acid Sequestrants: Potential Mechanism(s) for Glucose-Lowering Effects in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Abstract Clinical evidence has demonstrated that bile acid sequestrants reduce glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This effect has been confi rmed in multiple double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies with the bile acid sequestrant colesevelam hydrochloride (HCl). Colesevelam HCl was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in January 2008 as an adjunctive therapy for patients with T2DM to improve glycemic control. However, the mechanism of action for the glucose-lowering effect of bile acid sequestrants is unclear. Bile acid sequestrants are nonsystemic pharmacological agents that bind bile acids in the gastrointestinal tract, thereby diverting bile acids from the enterohepatic circulation. This, in turn, upregulates bile acid synthesis (via cholesterol 7-alpha-hydroxylase), which utilizes cholesterol, resulting in reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Recent research has revealed that bile acids are tightly controlled signaling molecules that have metabolic effects beyond their primary role in bile to aid in the digestion of lipids and fat. Bile acids signal via various membrane and nuclear receptors. Therefore, bile acid sequestrants may exert glycemic effects by altering the interaction of these bile acid pathways. This article reviews the role for bile acids in glucose regulation and discusses the potential mechanism(s) of action for the glycemic effects of bile acid sequestrants.
24626406
Colestimide lowers plasma glucose levels and increases plasma glucagon-like PEPTIDE-1 (7-36) levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus complicated by hypercholesterolemia.
BACKGROUND
Colestimide has been reported to lower blood glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes complicated by hypercholesterolemia.


AIM
To examine the mechanism by which colestimide decreases plasma glucose levels in the above patients.


METHODS
A total of 16 inpatients with type 2 diabetes complicated by hypercholesterolemia received colestimide for 1 week after their plasma glucose levels stabilized. We measured plasma glucose, serum immunoreactive insulin (IRI), serum lipid, plasma glucagon, and plasma glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) levels. These variables at baseline and 1 week of colestimide administration were compared.


RESULTS
Preprandial plasma glucose levels (baseline: 132 +/- 33 mg/dL vs. completion: 118 +/- 43 mg/dL, P=0.073) tended to decrease after colestimide administration, while 1-hr postprandial plasma glucose levels (baseline: 208 +/- 49 mg/dL vs. completion: 166 +/- 30 mg/dL, P<0.001) and 2-hr postprandial plasma glucose levels (baseline: 209 +/- 56 mg/dL vs. completion: 178 +/- 39 mg/dL, P=0.015) decreased significantly at 1 week of colestimide administration. The 2-hr postprandial plasma GLP-1 level was significantly (P=0.015) higher at 1 week of colestimide administration as compared with the baseline level, while there were no significant changes in preprandial and 1-hr postprandial plasma GLP-1 levels.


CONCLUSIONS
The GLP-1-increasing activity of colestimide may explain, at least in part, the mechanism of its blood glucose-lowering activity in patients with type 2 diabetes complicated by hypercholesterolemia.
23769842
Effect of hypertension and its treatment on lipid, lipoprotein(a), fibrinogen, and bilirubin levels in patients referred for dyslipidemia.
We measured the serum lipid profile, together with plasma fibrinogen and serum lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), glucose, bilirubin, and albumin levels in 491 patients (310 men) who were referred for the management of primary dyslipidemia. All these variables have been shown to predict vascular events. The patients were not taking lipid-lowering drugs; hypertension was present in 156 (31.7%) of them. Of the hypertensive patients, 52 (33%) were not receiving any treatment to control their blood pressure. This omission was not due to a lower prevalence of established vascular disease. The treated hypertensives were divided into three groups according to their treatment: 62 were taking lipid-hostile antihypertensives (beta-blockers, thiazides), 37 were taking lipid-neutral antihypertensives (angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, Ca-channel blockers, angiotensin II receptor blockers, indapamide sustained release), and five were taking lipid-friendly antihypertensives (doxazosin). Lipid-hostile antihypertensive drugs were associated with a significantly higher fibrinogen concentration when compared with untreated hypertensives or those taking lipid-neutral/lipid-friendly drugs (median values: 383, 353, and 336 mg/dL, respectively; P < .01). Lipid-neutral/lipid-friendly antihypertensive drugs were associated with lower Lp(a) levels when compared with untreated hypertensives (median values: 22 and 45 mg/dL, respectively; P < .05). The serum bilirubin level was significantly lower in the untreated hypertensives when compared with normotensives or the treated hypertensives. There were no significant differences in lipids, glucose, or albumin among the groups of hypertensives or normotensives. The influence of antihypertensive drugs on additional cardiovascular risk factors should be considered when selecting medication to reduce blood pressure.
13580320
Statins: another class of antihypertensive agents?
The assessment of global cardiovascular risk is an essential step in the management of atherosclerotic disease prevention. Among the risk factors to be addressed are hypertension and hyperlipidaemia; these commonly coexist. A neutral or lipid-friendly antihypertensive agent is probably useful in the presence of lipid abnormalities. Similarly, statins have been shown to decrease cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients. There is also experimental and clinical evidence that statins have blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects. In this review, we discuss the beneficial effects of statins on BP, and provide an overview of the underlying pathophysiology. We also consider the evidence justifying the use of statins in the management of hypertensive patients.
23928525
Dyslipidemia and the progression of renal disease in chronic renal failure patients.
Dyslipidemia is a common complication of progressive kidney disease and contributes to the high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Recent evidence also suggests a role for dyslipidemia in the development and progression of renal disease. Experimental studies have demonstrated that lipids may induce glomerular and tubulointerstitial injury, and that lipid-lowering treatments ameliorate renal injury. Various lipid abnormalities have been associated with the development and progression of renal disease in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Population-based studies and studies of diabetic patients have reported associations of various lipid abnormalities with the development of renal disease. In patients with CKD, lipid abnormalities have also been associated with renal disease progression. Post hoc analyses of some large clinical trials on patients with vascular disease, diabetes, or dyslipidemia, and a meta-analysis of small, prospective, controlled studies on patients with CKD (diabetics and nondiabetics) suggest that statins may slow the progression of kidney disease. It is unclear whether the beneficial renal effects of statins are due to the reduction of serum cholesterol levels and/or their pleiotropic effects. There is also evidence for synergistic renoprotective effects between statins and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors. According to the results of post hoc analysis of several studies, treatment with fibrates does not seem to confer renoprotection, but evidence is scarce. In summary, there is growing evidence that lipid abnormalities may be a risk factor for renal disease, and that statins appear to confer a renoprotective effect.
19675908
Cholesterol and the risk of renal dysfunction in apparently healthy men.
Despite extensive knowledge about abnormal lipid patterns in patients with end-stage renal disease, the association between cholesterol and the development of renal dysfunction is unclear. We evaluated this association in a prospective cohort study among 4,483 initially healthy men participating in the Physicians' Health Study who provided blood samples in 1982 and 1996. Main outcome measures were elevated creatinine, defined as >/= 1.5 mg/dl (133 micromol/L), and reduced estimated creatinine clearance, defined as </=55 ml/min. Cholesterol parameters included total cholesterol (<200, 200 to 239, and >/= 240 mg/dl), HDL (<40 or >/= 40 mg/dl), total non-HDL cholesterol, and the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL. We used logistic regression to calculate age- and multivariable adjusted odds ratios as a measure for the relative risk. After 14 yr, 134 men (3.0%) had elevated creatinine and 244 (5.4%) had reduced creatinine clearance. The multivariable relative risk for elevated creatinine was 1.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10 to 2.86) for total cholesterol >/= 240 mg/dl, 2.16 (95% CI, 1.42 to 3.27) for HDL <40 mg/dl, 2.34 (95% CI, 1.34 to 4.07) for the highest quartile of total cholesterol/HDL ratio (>/= >6.8), and 2.16 (95% CI, 1.22 to 3.80) for the highest quartile of non-HDL cholesterol (>/= 196.1). Similar although smaller associations were observed between cholesterol parameters and reduced creatinine clearance. Elevated total cholesterol, high non-HDL cholesterol, a high ratio of total cholesterol/HDL, and low HDL in particular were significantly associated with an increased risk of developing renal dysfunction in men with an initial creatinine <1.5 mg/dl.
6249926
Cardiac disease in diabetic end-stage renal disease
SummaryLittle is known about the epidemiology of cardiac disease in diabetic end-stage renal disease. We therefore prospectively followed a cohort of 433 patients who survived 6 months after the inception of dialysis therapy for an average of 41 months. Clinical and echocardiographic data were collected yearly. At baseline, diabetic patients (n = 116) had more echocardiographic concentric left ventricular hypertrophy (50 vs 38 %, p = 0.04), clinically diagnosed ischaemic heart disease (32 vs 18%, p = 0.003) and cardiac failure (48 vs 24%, p < 0.00001) than non-diabetic patients (n = 317). After adjusting for age and sex, diabetic patients had similar rates of progression of echocardiographic disorders, and de novo cardiac failure, but higher rates of de novo clinically diagnosed ischaemic heart disease (RR 3.2, p = 0.0002), overall mortality (RR 2.3, p < 0.0001) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 2.6, p < 0.0001) than non-diabetic patients. Mortality was higher in diabetic patients following admission for clinically diagnosed ischaemic heart disease (RR 1.7, p = 0.05) and cardiac failure (RR 2.2, p = 0.0003). Among diabetic patients older age, left ventricular hypertrophy, smoking, clinically diagnosed ischaemic heart disease, cardiac failure and hypoalbuminaemia were independently associated with mortality. The excessive cardiac morbidity and mortality of diabetic patients seem to be mediated via ischaemic disease, rather than progression of cardiomyopathy while on dialysis therapy. Potentially remediable risk factors include smoking, left ventricular hypertrophy, and hypoalbuminaemia.
21090648
Effect of pravastatin on loss of renal function in people with moderate chronic renal insufficiency and cardiovascular disease.
Limited data suggest that HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) may slow loss of renal function in individuals with chronic renal insufficiency. This study was conducted to determine whether pravastatin reduced rates of loss of renal function in people with moderate chronic renal insufficiency. This was a post hoc subgroup analysis of a randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial. Data were analyzed from the CARE study (a randomized trial of pravastatin versus placebo in 4159 participants with previous myocardial infarction and total plasma cholesterol < 240 mg/dl). Participants with estimated GFR (MDRD-GFR) < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) body surface area at baseline were considered to have moderate chronic renal insufficiency. Multivariate regression was used to calculate rates of decline in MDRD-GFR for individuals receiving pravastatin and placebo, controlling for prospectively determined covariates that might influence rates of renal function loss. Change in renal function could be calculated in 3384 individuals, of whom 690 (20.4%) had MDRD-GFR < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) and were eligible for inclusion. Among all individuals with MDRD-GFR < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)), the MDRD-GFR decline in the pravastatin group was not significantly different from that in the placebo group (0.1 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)/yr slower; 95% CI, -0.2 to 0.4; P = 0.49). However, there was a significant stepwise inverse relation between MDRD-GFR before treatment and slowing of renal function loss with pravastatin use, with more benefit in those with lower MDRD-GFR at baseline (P = 0.04). Rate of change in MDRD-GFR in the pravastatin group was 0.6 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)/yr slower than placebo (95% CI, -0.1 to 1.2; P = 0.07) in those with MDRD-GFR < 50 ml/min, and 2.5 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)/yr slower (95% CI, 1.4 to 3.6 slower; P = 0.0001) in those with MDRD-GFR < 40 ml/min per 1.73 m(2)/yr. Pravastatin also reduced rates of renal loss to a greater extent in participants with than without proteinuria at baseline (P = 0.006). It is concluded that pravastatin may slow renal function loss in individuals with moderate to severe kidney disease, especially those with proteinuria. These findings require confirmation by a large randomized trial conducted specifically in people with chronic renal insufficiency.