为他汀不耐受患者选择最佳的非他汀类降脂疗法:一项系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

IF 4.6 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Wattakorn Laohapiboolrattana, Paisit Kosum, Mantiwee Nimworapan, Piyameth Dilokthornsakul, Kansak Boonpattharatthiti, Nonthikorn Theerasuwipakorn, Duangnapa Roongpiboonsopit, Pattamawan Kosuma, Teerapon Dhippayom
{"title":"为他汀不耐受患者选择最佳的非他汀类降脂疗法:一项系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Wattakorn Laohapiboolrattana, Paisit Kosum, Mantiwee Nimworapan, Piyameth Dilokthornsakul, Kansak Boonpattharatthiti, Nonthikorn Theerasuwipakorn, Duangnapa Roongpiboonsopit, Pattamawan Kosuma, Teerapon Dhippayom","doi":"10.1016/j.jacl.2025.07.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Statin intolerance presents a considerable challenge in managing patients at risk for cardiovascular diseases, as it limits patients' access to standard lipid-lowering therapies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of various nonstatin lipid-lowering therapies in patients who are intolerant to statins.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and EBSCO open dissertations through September 2023 for randomized controlled trials in statin-intolerant patients comparing nonstatin lipid-lowering agents. The primary outcome was low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). A random-effects model estimated comparative effects using mean differences (MDs) for LDL-C reduction and relative risks (RRs) for safety outcomes, specifically trial withdrawal due to adverse events. Results were reported with 95% CIs, and therapies ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Evidence certainty was assessed with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) platform.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1533 articles, 6 studies (1326 patients) met inclusion criteria. Evolocumab combined with ezetimibe achieved the greatest LDL-C reduction (MD: 48.98%; 95% CI: 59.19, -38.77) vs ezetimibe alone, with moderate evidence certainty. Evolocumab, alirocumab, and the combination of bempedoic acid and ezetimibe, also showed significant reductions in LDL-C compared to ezetimibe monotherapy, though the magnitude of their effects was smaller than that of the evolocumab and ezetimibe combination. The SUCRA of evolocumab and ezetimibe (99.7%) aligns with its highest comparative efficacy. No significant differences in safety outcomes were observed across treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evolocumab combined with ezetimibe is the most effective regimen for LDL-C reduction, with a safety profile comparable to other treatments, making it a viable alternative for patients with statin intolerance.</p>","PeriodicalId":15392,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical lipidology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Choosing the optimal nonstatin lipid lowering therapies for statin-intolerant patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Wattakorn Laohapiboolrattana, Paisit Kosum, Mantiwee Nimworapan, Piyameth Dilokthornsakul, Kansak Boonpattharatthiti, Nonthikorn Theerasuwipakorn, Duangnapa Roongpiboonsopit, Pattamawan Kosuma, Teerapon Dhippayom\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jacl.2025.07.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Statin intolerance presents a considerable challenge in managing patients at risk for cardiovascular diseases, as it limits patients' access to standard lipid-lowering therapies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of various nonstatin lipid-lowering therapies in patients who are intolerant to statins.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and EBSCO open dissertations through September 2023 for randomized controlled trials in statin-intolerant patients comparing nonstatin lipid-lowering agents. The primary outcome was low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). A random-effects model estimated comparative effects using mean differences (MDs) for LDL-C reduction and relative risks (RRs) for safety outcomes, specifically trial withdrawal due to adverse events. Results were reported with 95% CIs, and therapies ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Evidence certainty was assessed with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) platform.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1533 articles, 6 studies (1326 patients) met inclusion criteria. Evolocumab combined with ezetimibe achieved the greatest LDL-C reduction (MD: 48.98%; 95% CI: 59.19, -38.77) vs ezetimibe alone, with moderate evidence certainty. Evolocumab, alirocumab, and the combination of bempedoic acid and ezetimibe, also showed significant reductions in LDL-C compared to ezetimibe monotherapy, though the magnitude of their effects was smaller than that of the evolocumab and ezetimibe combination. The SUCRA of evolocumab and ezetimibe (99.7%) aligns with its highest comparative efficacy. No significant differences in safety outcomes were observed across treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evolocumab combined with ezetimibe is the most effective regimen for LDL-C reduction, with a safety profile comparable to other treatments, making it a viable alternative for patients with statin intolerance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical lipidology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical lipidology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacl.2025.07.012\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical lipidology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacl.2025.07.012","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:他汀类药物不耐受对心血管疾病风险患者的管理提出了相当大的挑战,因为它限制了患者获得标准降脂治疗的机会。目的:本研究旨在比较各种非他汀类降脂疗法对他汀类药物不耐受患者的疗效和安全性。方法:我们检索PubMed、Embase、CENTRAL和EBSCO截至2023年9月的公开论文,在他汀不耐受患者中比较非他汀类降脂药物的随机对照试验。主要终点是低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)。随机效应模型使用LDL-C降低的平均差异(md)和安全结局的相对风险(rr)来估计比较效应,特别是由于不良事件而退出试验。结果报告为95% ci,并使用累积排名曲线(SUCRA)下的表面对治疗进行排名。证据确定性通过网络元分析(CINeMA)平台的可信度进行评估。结果:1533篇文章中,6项研究(1326例患者)符合纳入标准。Evolocumab联合依zetimibe与单用依zetimibe相比,达到了最大的LDL-C降低(MD: 48.98%; 95% CI: 59.19, -38.77),具有中等证据确定性。Evolocumab, alirocumab,以及与ezetimibe单药治疗相比,苯培多酸和ezetimibe联合治疗也显示出LDL-C的显著降低,尽管它们的作用幅度小于Evolocumab和ezetimibe联合治疗。evolocumab和ezetimibe的SUCRA(99.7%)符合其最高的比较疗效。不同治疗的安全性结果无显著差异。结论:Evolocumab联合依zetimibe是降低LDL-C最有效的方案,其安全性与其他治疗方法相当,使其成为他汀类药物不耐受患者的可行替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Choosing the optimal nonstatin lipid lowering therapies for statin-intolerant patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: Statin intolerance presents a considerable challenge in managing patients at risk for cardiovascular diseases, as it limits patients' access to standard lipid-lowering therapies.

Objective: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of various nonstatin lipid-lowering therapies in patients who are intolerant to statins.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and EBSCO open dissertations through September 2023 for randomized controlled trials in statin-intolerant patients comparing nonstatin lipid-lowering agents. The primary outcome was low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). A random-effects model estimated comparative effects using mean differences (MDs) for LDL-C reduction and relative risks (RRs) for safety outcomes, specifically trial withdrawal due to adverse events. Results were reported with 95% CIs, and therapies ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Evidence certainty was assessed with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) platform.

Results: Of 1533 articles, 6 studies (1326 patients) met inclusion criteria. Evolocumab combined with ezetimibe achieved the greatest LDL-C reduction (MD: 48.98%; 95% CI: 59.19, -38.77) vs ezetimibe alone, with moderate evidence certainty. Evolocumab, alirocumab, and the combination of bempedoic acid and ezetimibe, also showed significant reductions in LDL-C compared to ezetimibe monotherapy, though the magnitude of their effects was smaller than that of the evolocumab and ezetimibe combination. The SUCRA of evolocumab and ezetimibe (99.7%) aligns with its highest comparative efficacy. No significant differences in safety outcomes were observed across treatments.

Conclusion: Evolocumab combined with ezetimibe is the most effective regimen for LDL-C reduction, with a safety profile comparable to other treatments, making it a viable alternative for patients with statin intolerance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
6.80%
发文量
209
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: Because the scope of clinical lipidology is broad, the topics addressed by the Journal are equally diverse. Typical articles explore lipidology as it is practiced in the treatment setting, recent developments in pharmacological research, reports of treatment and trials, case studies, the impact of lifestyle modification, and similar academic material of interest to the practitioner. Sections of Journal of clinical lipidology will address pioneering studies and the clinicians who conduct them, case studies, ethical standards and conduct, professional guidance such as ATP and NCEP, editorial commentary, letters from readers, National Lipid Association (NLA) news and upcoming event information, as well as abstracts from the NLA annual scientific sessions and the scientific forums held by its chapters, when appropriate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信