 |
|
JAMA-EXPRESS
Effect of Very High-Intensity Statin Therapy on Regression of Coronary Atherosclerosis
The ASTEROID Trial
Steven E. Nissen, MD;
Stephen J. Nicholls, MBBS, PhD;
Ilke Sipahi, MD;
Peter Libby, MD;
Joel S. Raichlen, MD;
Christie M. Ballantyne, MD;
Jean Davignon, MD;
Raymond Erbel, MD;
Jean Charles Fruchart, PhD;
Jean-Claude Tardif, MD;
Paul Schoenhagen, MD;
Tim Crowe, BS;
Valerie Cain, MS;
Kathy Wolski, MPH;
Marlene Goormastic, MPH;
E. Murat Tuzcu, MD; for the ASTEROID Investigators
JAMA. 2006;295:(doi:10.1001/jama.295.13.jpc60002).
ABSTRACT
| |
Context Prior intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) trials have demonstrated slowing or halting of atherosclerosis progression with statin therapy but have not shown convincing evidence of regression using percent atheroma volume (PAV), the most rigorous IVUS measure of disease progression and regression.
Objective To assess whether very intensive statin therapy could regress coronary atherosclerosis as determined by IVUS imaging.
Design and Setting Prospective, open-label blinded end-points trial (A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden [ASTEROID]) was performed at 53 community and tertiary care centers in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia. A motorized IVUS pullback was used to assess coronary atheroma burden at baseline and after 24 months of treatment. Each pair of baseline and follow-up IVUS assessments was analyzed in a blinded fashion.
Patients Between November 2002 and October 2003, 507 patients had a baseline IVUS examination and received at least 1 dose of study drug. After 24 months, 349 patients had evaluable serial IVUS examinations.
Intervention All patients received intensive statin therapy with rosuvastatin, 40 mg/d.
Main Outcome Measures Two primary efficacy parameters were prespecified: the change in PAV and the change in nominal atheroma volume in the 10-mm subsegment with the greatest disease severity at baseline. A secondary efficacy variable, change in normalized total atheroma volume for the entire artery, was also prespecified.
Results The mean (SD) baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level of 130.4 (34.3) mg/dL declined to 60.8 (20.0) mg/dL, a mean reduction of 53.2% (P<.001). Mean (SD) high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) level at baseline was 43.1 (11.1) mg/dL, increasing to 49.0 (12.6) mg/dL, an increase of 14.7% (P<.001). The mean (SD) change in PAV for the entire vessel was –0.98% (3.15%), with a median of –0.79% (97.5% CI, –1.21% to –0.53%) (P<.001 vs baseline). The mean (SD) change in atheroma volume in the most diseased 10-mm subsegment was –6.1 (10.1) mm3, with a median of –5.6 mm3 (97.5% CI, –6.8 to –4.0 mm3) (P<.001 vs baseline). Change in total atheroma volume showed a 6.8% median reduction; with a mean (SD) reduction of –14.7 (25.7) mm3, with a median of –12.5 mm3 (95% CI, –15.1 to –10.5 mm3) (P<.001 vs baseline). Adverse events were infrequent and similar to other statin trials.
Conclusions Very high-intensity statin therapy using rosuvastatin 40 mg/d achieved an average LDL-C of 60.8 mg/dL and increased HDL-C by 14.7%, resulting in significant regression of atherosclerosis for all 3 prespecified IVUS measures of disease burden. Treatment to LDL-C levels below currently accepted guidelines, when accompanied by significant HDL-C increases, can regress atherosclerosis in coronary disease patients. Further studies are needed to determine the effect of the observed changes on clinical outcome.
Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00240318
Published online March 13, 2006 (doi:10.1001/jama.295.13.jpc60002).
INTRODUCTION
Atherosclerosis is generally viewed as a chronic, progressive disease characterized by continuous accumulation of atheromatous plaque within the arterial wall. The last 2 decades have witnessed the introduction of a variety of antiatherosclerotic therapies, most notably the 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins). Although statins rank among the most extensively studied therapies in contemporary medicine, the optimal target levels for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) remain controversial. Recently, several active control trials have reported that more intensive statin therapy results in a greater reduction in adverse cardiovascular outcomes compared with more moderate treatment.1-3 Accordingly, guidelines now recommend achieving more aggressive target levels (an LDL-C level of <70 mg/dL [1.8 mmol/L]) in certain very high-risk secondary prevention patients.4
In parallel to clinical outcomes trials, imaging studies have examined the effects of antiatherosclerotic therapies on the progression of atherosclerosis. Initial trials used quantitative coronary angiography or carotid ultrasound to determine the progression rates.5-10 More recently, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imaging has emerged as the predominant approach for evaluating the progression of coronary atherosclerosis.11-19 IVUS provides a precise and reproducible method for determining the change in atheroma burden during treatment. Trials using IVUS have successfully investigated the effects of a variety of antiatherosclerotic therapies, including statins,12, 16-17,19 blood pressure–lowering drugs,14 reduction of inflammatory markers,19 administration of a high-density lipoprotein (HDL) mimetic,11 and novel investigative therapies.13, 15, 18
The most positive IVUS trials to date have demonstrated a slowing or halting of progression of atherosclerosis during statin treatment. However, none of the major trials has provided convincing evidence of regression using rigorous IVUS measures of disease burden. We hypothesized that high-intensity statin therapy, designed to reach very low levels of LDL-C, particularly if achieved in conjunction with substantial elevation of HDL-C, might result in regression of coronary atherosclerosis. Accordingly, we designed the ASTEROID trial (A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden) to examine the effects of high-intensity statin therapy on IVUS-derived measures of coronary disease progression. Rosuvastatin is the most recently introduced statin and typically produces greater reductions in LDL-C and larger increases in HDL-C than previously available agents.20
METHODS
Selection of Study Patients
The institutional review boards of all participating centers approved the protocol and all patients provided written informed consent. The protocol specified enrollment of patients at least 18 years of age who required coronary angiography for a clinical indication, which typically consisted of stable or unstable ischemic chest pain syndromes or abnormal functional studies, such as exercise testing. Inclusion required demonstration of at least 1 obstruction with more than 20% angiographic luminal diameter narrowing in any coronary vessel. The target vessel for IVUS interrogation must not have undergone angioplasty nor have more than 50% luminal narrowing throughout a target segment with a minimum length of 40 mm.
All patients were statin-naive, defined as receiving no statin therapy for more than 3 months during the previous 12 months. Patients treated with any lipid-lowering medication within the previous 4 weeks required a 4-week washout period before enrollment to obtain accurate baseline lipid values. Any baseline level of LDL-C was permitted; however, patients with uncontrolled triglyceride levels ( 500 mg/dL [5.7 mmol/L]) or poorly controlled diabetes (glycosylated hemoglobin levels 10%) were excluded.
Selection of Regimens
The study sought to determine the effects of high-intensity lipid lowering on coronary disease progression. Accordingly, we selected a regimen, rosuvastatin, 40 mg/d, that had previously demonstrated the largest reduction in LDL-C of any available statin therapy at the time of study initiation.20 Rosuvastatin was also selected because previous studies had shown this agent to significantly increase HDL-C at the maximum therapeutic dosage.20 Because all enrolled patients had established coronary disease and because other trials had demonstrated substantially improved outcomes with intensive therapy, it was deemed ethically unacceptable to randomize patients in this high-risk group to low-intensity treatment. Accordingly, all patients received active treatment with rosuvastatin, 40 mg/d.
Baseline Catheterization and IVUS
Prior publications have thoroughly described the methods for IVUS interrogation.11-12,14, 19 Following diagnostic angiography, the operator selected a target vessel for IVUS interrogation, defined as the longest and least-angulated vessel meeting inclusion criteria. After administration of 100 to 300 µg of intracoronary nitroglycerin, a 40-MHz ultrasonography catheter (Atlantis, Boston Scientific Scimed Inc, Maple Grove, Minn) was advanced into the target vessel and the transducer was positioned distal to a side branch. The operator was instructed to select a starting point for interrogation as far distally as could be safely reached. This procedure was designed to provide the longest possible vessel segment for analysis. After selection of a starting point, the operator engaged a motor drive that progressively withdrew the transducer at a speed of 0.5 mm/s. During this pullback, images were obtained at 30 frames per second and recorded on super-VHS videotape. The study was screened for image quality at a core laboratory at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, and only patients whose IVUS results met prespecified image quality requirements were eligible for inclusion in the study.
Clinic Visits and Laboratory Tests
Patients were examined during scheduled clinic visits every 3 months. A central laboratory performed all biochemical determinations (Medical Research Laboratory, Highland Heights, Ky). Lipid levels were obtained every 3 months and mean levels during treatment were computed from the time-weighted average of these values.
Follow-up Catheterization and IVUS
After a 24-month treatment period, actively participating patients underwent repeat IVUS examination. If a patient required coronary angiography between 18 and 24 months following enrollment, an end-of-study IVUS examination was performed then, to avoid subjecting patients to an additional invasive procedure at the 24-month visit. The operator placed the IVUS catheter in the vessel originally interrogated and positioned the transducer distal to the original branch site. A motorized pullback was repeated under conditions identical to the baseline study. This procedure was designed to obtain a series of cross-sectional images at sites identical to the original examination.
Randomization for Sequence Concealment
Videotapes containing baseline and follow-up pullbacks were analyzed in the Intravascular Ultrasound Core Laboratory at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. All measurements were performed at the end of the study, after both the baseline and follow-up IVUS examinations were available. The baseline and follow-up pullbacks were reviewed as a pair. However, to conceal the imaging sequence, personnel not otherwise involved in the study performed blinding and randomization. As each baseline videotape was received, the images were digitized and the date imprinted on the videotape was removed from each image using digital processing. A similar procedure was performed for each follow-up videotape.
The 2 examination results were then resequenced using random assignments generated by an outside statistician. Personnel who were unaware of the coding and were therefore blinded to the sequence subsequently analyzed both videotapes. After the trial was concluded and all measurements were completed, the sequence coding was unblinded to enable calculation of changes from baseline to follow-up examination.
IVUS Analysis
A technician selected a distal branch site as the beginning point for analysis. Subsequently, every 60th image was analyzed, representing cross-sections spaced exactly 1.0 mm apart. IVUS measurements were performed in accordance with the standards of the American College of Cardiology and the European Society of Cardiology.21 Using customized public-domain software (ImageJ, version 1.29w, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md), the technician performed a calibration by measuring 1-mm grid marks in the image. Manual planimetry was used to trace the leading edges of the luminal and external elastic membrane (EEM) borders. Previous reports have established the accuracy and reproducibility of this method.22
Derived IVUS Measurements
The primary efficacy parameter of percent atheroma volume (PAV) was calculated as
where EEMCSA is the external elastic membrane cross-sectional area and LUMENCSA is the luminal cross-sectional area. For each patient, the change in PAV was computed as PAV (end of treatment) – PAV (baseline).
The second prespecified primary efficacy parameter was the nominal change (end of treatment minus baseline) in total atheroma volume (TAV) in the 10-mm subsegment of the coronary artery with the largest plaque volume at baseline (the most diseased segment). The atheroma volume in the most diseased 10-mm segment was calculated as  (EEMCSA – LUMENCSA), where EEMCSA is the external elastic membrane cross-sectional area and LUMENCSA is the luminal cross-sectional area, and the difference is summed over the 10-mm segment. For patients without 10 contiguous evaluable cross-sections, 8 or 9 cross-sections were used and the results were normalized to compensate for the missing cross-sections.
A secondary efficacy parameter, the change in normalized TAV, was calculated by first determining the average atheroma area per cross-section as
where EEMCSA is the external elastic membrane cross-sectional area, LUMENCSA is the luminal cross-sectional area, and n is the number of evaluable cross-sections in the pullback.
Normalized TAV for each patient was calculated as the average atheroma area multiplied by the median number of comparable cross-sections in pullbacks for all patients completing the trial. The efficacy parameter of change in normalized TAV was calculated as normalized TAV (follow-up) – normalized TAV (baseline). This procedure adjusts for pullbacks of differing lengths, resulting in an equal weighting of each individual patient in computing the final efficacy results.
Statistical Analysis
To allow for 2 primary efficacy parameters, a Bonferroni correction was prespecified and a significance level of .025 was assigned for each end point. For the first primary efficacy parameter, change in PAV, a sample size of approximately 313 patients was specified for 80% power and a 2-sided  level of .025 to detect an expected change of –0.7%, assuming an SD of 4.0%. For the second primary efficacy parameter, change in the most diseased 10-mm subsegment at baseline, a sample size of approximately 171 patients was required for 80% power and a 2-sided level of .025 to detect an expected change in normalized TAV of –3.0 mm3, assuming an SD of 12.6 mm3. If approximately 25% of patients discontinued early from the study, then 450 patients allocated to study medication would result in approximately 335 patients completing the study, which would provide sufficient power to assess both of the primary end points.
The statistical analysis plan defined tests of normality for the efficacy parameters and specified nonparametric testing if the data were not normally distributed. The efficacy results are presented as mean and SD and median and interquartile range for the change from baseline. If IVUS data were normally distributed, analysis of covariance, with baseline as a covariate and region as a factor, was specified. Otherwise, P values were to be calculated using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Analysis of variance, with region as a factor, was used for analysis of the percentage of change in lipid values. Demographic and laboratory characteristics were calculated at baseline and follow-up for all patients completing the trial. A safety analysis was performed in all patients who received at least 1 dose of the study drug. Categorical variables are described using frequencies, while continuous variables are reported as means (with SDs) and medians (with 97.5% or 95% confidence intervals [CIs] or interquartile ranges). Analyses were performed using SAS software, version 8.2 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC).
RESULTS
Patient Population
Between November 2002 and October 2003, 1183 patients were screened and 507 met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, including an acceptable baseline IVUS result, and received study drug at 53 centers. A total of 349 patients had evaluable IVUS examinations at both baseline and after 24 months of treatment (Figure 1). Of the 158 patients who were not included in the IVUS analysis, 14 were lost to follow-up, 2 were withdrawn per investigator discretion, 3 were withdrawn for protocol violations, 32 patients withdrew consent, 63 were withdrawn for an adverse event, and 11 withdrew for other reasons. Thirty-three patients did not have a final IVUS result analyzed, 13 of whom did not undergo a final IVUS examination and 20 of whom had IVUS results that were not analyzable because of artifacts or pullbacks shorter than the prespecified 40-mm minimum length.
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Flow of Patients Through the Trial
|
|
|
Baseline demographic characteristics and concomitant medications for the 349 patients completing the trial and the 158 patients not completing the trial are summarized in Table 1. The characteristics of the 158 noncompleters were very similar to those of the 349 completers in terms of age, sex, weight, body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters), and prevalence of hypertension and diabetes. Race/ethnicity was assessed by the investigator or study coordinator. This information was collected to determine whether the response to therapy (efficacy and safety) differed among individuals with different racial/ethnic backgrounds. The disposition of these patients is summarized in Figure 1.
|
|
|
|
Table 1. Baseline Patient Characteristics*
|
|
|
Laboratory Outcomes
Table 2 summarizes laboratory values obtained during the study for patients completing the trial. The mean (SD) LDL-C level during treatment was 60.8 (20.0) mg/dL (1.6 [0.5] mmol/L), representing a 53.2% reduction from baseline (P<.001). Approximately 75% of patients achieved a mean LDL-C level of less than 70 mg/dL (1.8 mmol/L) during treatment. The mean (SD) HDL-C level during the trial was 49.0 (12.6) mg/dL (1.3 [0.3] mmol/L), an increase of 14.7% from baseline (P<.001). The mean LDL-C/HDL-C ratio was reduced from 3.2 to 1.3 (P<.001). Baseline lipid values for the 349 patients completing the trial and the 158 patients not completing the trial were very closely matched.
|
|
|
|
Table 2. Laboratory Results (n = 346)*
|
|
|
Efficacy Analyses
Table 3 shows the results for both the primary and the secondary efficacy parameters. All 3 efficacy parameters showed statistically significant regression. For the primary efficacy parameter of PAV, the mean (SD) decrease was –0.98% (3.15%) and the median was –0.79% (97.5% CI, –1.21% to –0.53%) (P<.001 compared with baseline). For the second primary efficacy parameter, change in atheroma volume in the 10-mm subsegment with the greatest disease severity, the mean (SD) change was –6.1 (10.1) mm3, and the median change was –5.6 mm3 (97.5% CI, –6.8 to –4.0 mm3) (P<.001 compared with baseline).This change represents a median reduction of 9.1% in atheroma volume in the 10-mm segment with the greatest disease severity.
|
|
|
|
Table 3. Baseline and Follow-up Intravascular Ultrasound Results
|
|
|
For the prespecified secondary efficacy parameter, normalized TAV, the mean (SD) change was –14.7 (25.7) mm3, with a median change of –12.5 mm3 (95% CI, –15.1 to –10.5 mm3) (P<.001 compared with baseline). This change represents a median reduction of 6.8% in atheroma volume in the full arterial pullback.
For the primary efficacy parameter of PAV, 63.6% of patients showed regression and 36.4% showed progression. For the second primary efficacy parameter, change in the 10-mm subsegment with the greatest disease severity, 78.1% of patients demonstrated regression and 21.9% showed progression.
Table 4 shows the results for the primary end points for prespecified subgroups. There was no significant heterogeneity in the response to treatment for either of the 2 primary efficacy parameters for subgroups defined by age, sex, body mass index, history of diabetes mellitus, LDL-C levels, or HDL-C levels.
|
|
|
|
Table 4. Primary Efficacy Parameters in Prespecified Subgroups
|
|
|
A post hoc sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the potential impact of patients not completing the trial on IVUS measures of efficacy. One approach imputed all 158 noncompleting patients as showing no change in atheroma burden (neither progression nor regression). Using this method, statistically significant regression was still observed for both PAV (P<.001) and change in atheroma volume for the most diseased 10-mm subsegment (P<.001). A second imputation method assigned the 22 patients who discontinued the study because of ischemic events to a progression rate calculated from the median value for all patients completing the trial who showed progression. Using this method, regression was still observed for PAV (P<.001) and for the most diseased 10-mm subsegment (P<.001).
Adverse Events
Table 5 shows the treatment-emergent adverse events encountered in the trial. The regimen of 40 mg/d of rosuvastatin was well tolerated. Rates of elevation of hepatic enzymes were comparable with those reported in other recent trials using maximal statin dosages. There were no cases of rhabdomyolysis. Two patients experienced serious adverse events based on local, non–study-related laboratory values. A 79-year-old man had an elevated creatine kinase level following an episode of lower back pain that occurred after heavy lifting. After he received a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent, renal failure developed, the family declined dialysis, and the patient died 5 days later. Postmortem examination revealed a fracture of the T11 vertebral body with local muscle hemorrhage. Multiple muscle biopsies found no evidence of rhabdomyolysis. A second patient had an elevated creatine kinase level after a seizure but continued taking the study drug, and creatine kinase levels returned to normal during therapy.
|
|
|
|
Table 5. Adverse Events, Drug Discontinuations, and Clinical End Points in the Safety Population (N = 507)
|
|
|
The number of clinical events in this 24-month trial was too small for any meaningful analysis of the relationship between progression rate and morbidity or mortality. Of the 3 remaining deaths, 2 were due to sudden cardiac death and 1 to gastric carcinoma.
COMMENT
For the past 2 decades, clinical trials of antiatherosclerotic drug therapies have sought to reduce coronary disease morbidity and mortality, presumably by decreasing the rate of progression of the underlying atherosclerosis. An implicit objective of these therapies is the regression of atherosclerotic plaque, defined as a statistically significant reduction in disease burden. Unfortunately, the goal of inducing actual regression of atherosclerosis has remained elusive. Most atherosclerosis trials have demonstrated that active lipid-modulating therapy, primarily using statin drugs, can reduce the rate of disease progression.12-14,19 Two small, single-center trials have suggested that statins might induce regression, but methodological issues including small sample size have limited interpretation and generalization of results.16-17
The current study, ASTEROID, sought to achieve atherosclerotic regression as an explicit goal in the design of the trial. Accordingly, the prespecified efficacy parameters were selected and the study was designed so that either frank progression or absence of progression would fail to meet the primary end point. Only regression, defined as a reduction in IVUS measures of atheroma burden with CIs not including zero, would yield a successful outcome. Despite the higher standard of evidence required, the current study demonstrated regression for all 3 prespecified IVUS end points with a high level of statistical significance (Table 3). Figure 2 shows a representative cross-section at baseline and follow-up for a patient who exhibited marked regression of disease.
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Example of Regression of Atherosclerosis in a Patient in the Trial
The top left panel illustrates the appearance of a single cross-section at baseline intravascular ultrasound examination, while the top right panel shows the same cross-section after 24 months of treatment. The bottom 2 panels illustrate the same cross-sections, but with measurements superimposed. Atheroma area was reduced from 10.16 mm2 to 5.81 mm2. EEM indicates external elastic membrane.
|
|
|
Regression was achieved by reducing LDL-C levels to a mean of 60.8 mg/dL (1.6 mmol/L) (median, 57.6 mg/dL [1.5 mmol/L]), along with a significant increase in HDL-C levels (14.7%). The achieved LDL-C levels were the lowest values ever observed in a statin atherosclerosis progression trial, and the magnitude of the HDL-C increase also exceeded effects reported in previous statin trials.
Prior well-designed IVUS studies of statin therapy have not yielded compelling evidence for regression. Two small, single-center studies have suggested reduction in disease burden following statin therapy, but design limitations make interpretation difficult.16-17 The first, a study of 40 patients, showed a reduction in atheroma volume after 12 months of open-label simvastatin therapy, but the authors investigated an average arterial segment length of only 5.9 mm.16 The second study, in 24 patients with acute coronary syndromes, showed regression within a segment length of only 8.9 mm after 6 months of atorvastatin therapy.17 In both trials, the short segment length likely included only coronary lesions, making the studies vulnerable to the regression to the mean phenomenon. Moreover, arteries undergoing mechanical interventions were included, which could have affected atheroma measurements. Neither study used the most rigorous IVUS measure of global atherosclerosis burden, PAV. No large-scale IVUS trials in which patients received statins have demonstrated statistically significant regression.
In the current study, the choice of 2 primary efficacy parameters allowed testing of drug effects on regression using 2 different standards of evidence. The change in the 10-mm segment with the most severe disease is analogous to the methods used by investigators who examined only short segments with visible angiographic disease.16 This end point is a substantially less rigorous test for regression. Percent atheroma volume assesses drug effects within the full arterial pullback and represents the highest standard of evidence for regression. Using this more conservative end point, only a small study of patients administered an intravenous HDL-C mimetic (apolipoprotein A-1 Milano phospholipid) has previously shown regression.11
Designing a contemporary IVUS regression-progression trial creates major challenges that warrant further comment. Because contemporary guidelines and practice patterns require intensive treatment of secondary prevention patients, randomization of patients with established coronary disease to placebo or a low-intensity statin regimen was deemed ethically unacceptable.4 In the absence of a less intensively treated control group, special design considerations are required to avoid observer bias in an IVUS outcome study. In the current trial, each pair of baseline and follow-up IVUS images underwent digital processing to remove date identifiers, performed by technicians not otherwise involved in the study. The paired studies were then randomly resequenced using codes provided by an outside statistician. This procedure blinded technicians from knowing whether an examination was obtained at baseline or follow-up and thereby eliminated any systematic bias in measurement of paired studies.
The magnitude and consistency of regression observed in the current trial are noteworthy. Table 4 demonstrates that regression occurred in virtually all subgroups, including men and women, older and younger patients, and most subgroups defined by lipid levels.
Despite the known limitations of cross-trial comparisons, many observers will likely compare these results with other recent IVUS regression-progression trials. The LDL-C levels achieved and the IVUS progression rates for several of these studies are shown in Figure 3. Linear regression analysis shows a high correlation between the mean LDL-C achieved in various trials and the mean progression rate for the most robust IVUS end point, PAV (r2 = 0.97; P<.001). When viewed in this context, the results of the current study demonstrate that there exists no apparent threshold LDL-C level beyond which the benefits of statin therapy are no longer evident. If regression of disease is the desired outcome, then lower LDL-C is better.
|
|
|
|
Figure 3. Relationship Between Mean Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels and Median Change in Percent Atheroma Volume for Several Intravascular Ultrasound Trials
There is a close correlation between these 2 variables (r2 = 0.97). REVERSAL indicates Reversal of Atherosclerosis With Aggressive Lipid-Lowering12; CAMELOT, Comparison of Amlodipine vs Enalapril to Limit Occurrences of Thrombosis14; A-Plus, Avasimibe and Progression of Lesions on Ultrasound13; and ASTEROID, A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden.
|
|
|
We believe that the current study has important implications for understanding the pathophysiology and optimal treatment of coronary artery disease. Traditional thinking has viewed atherosclerosis as an inexorably progressive disease for which even the most active therapies can merely slow advancement. The current study suggests that there is potential for a more optimistic strategy, in which aggressive lipid-modulating strategies can actually reverse the atherosclerotic disease process. The observed increases in HDL-C in the current study suggest that therapies designed to simultaneously lower LDL-C while raising HDL-C have the potential to substantially reduce lesion burden in patients with established disease. Clinical trials of combination therapies designed to both lower LDL-C and raise HDL-C using novel antiatherosclerotic therapies are currently under way and will report results within the next 18 months.
We recognize the limitations of the current study. Because it was deemed ethically unacceptable to administer low-intensity statin therapy to patients with advanced coronary disease, we could not include a control group who received either placebo or a less active statin. We compensated for the absence of placebo controls by blinding date information on IVUS studies and resequencing the examinations to eliminate observer bias in interpretation. The 22 patients who were withdrawn for ischemic events may represent progressors, a potential source of bias in the trial. However, exploratory analyses imputing less favorable IVUS outcomes for these patients did not alter the conclusions. Despite the utility of IVUS demonstrated in several efficacy trials, the degree to which regression documented by IVUS will translate into a reduction in morbidity and mortality remains speculative. When feasible, clinical outcome trials to assess the effects of therapies on morbidity and mortality always provide more convincing evidence than intermediate end-point studies. However, randomized controlled trials of statins in this population are no longer ethically acceptable.
The current study supports several conclusions. For secondary prevention patients, very intensive statin therapy using 40 mg/d of rosuvastatin in patients with preexisting coronary disease reduced LDL-C to 60.8 mg/dL while raising HDL-C by 14.7%. These changes were larger in magnitude than has been observed in previous statin trials. The very low LDL-C levels and increase in HDL-C levels resulted in significant regression in atheroma burden for all 3 primary and secondary efficacy parameters. This very intensive statin regimen was well tolerated. These observations support the recommendation to administer very intensive statin therapy for high-risk patients with established coronary disease.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author: Steven E. Nissen, MD, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44195 (nissens{at}ccf.org).
Published Online: March 13, 2006 (doi:10.1001/jama.295.13.jpc60002).
Author Contributions: Dr Nissen had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Study concept and design: Nissen, Nicholls, Libby, Raichlen, Ballantyne, Davignon, Erbel, Tardif, Schoenhagen, Goormastic, Tuzcu.
Acquisition of data: Nissen, Nicholls, Tardif, Schoenhagen, Crowe, Tuzcu.
Analysis and interpretation of data: Nissen, Nicholls, Sipahi, Libby, Raichlen, Davignon, Erbel, Fruchart, Tardif, Schoenhagen, Crowe, Cain, Wolski, Goormastic, Tuzcu.
Drafting of the manuscript: Nissen, Libby, Fruchart, Tuzcu.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Nissen, Nicholls, Sipahi, Libby, Raichlen, Ballantyne, Davignon, Erbel, Tardif, Schoenhagen, Crowe, Cain, Wolski, Goormastic, Tuzcu.
Statistical analysis: Nissen, Nicholls, Sipahi, Cain, Wolski, Goormastic.
Obtained funding: Nissen.
Administrative, technical, or material support: Nissen, Nicholls, Schoenhagen, Crowe, Tuzcu.
Study supervision: Nissen, Raichlen, Erbel, Tardif, Tuzcu.
Financial Disclosures: Dr Nissen has received research support from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Takeda, Sankyo, and Sanofi-Aventis. He has consulted for a number of pharmaceutical companies without financial compensation. All honoraria, consulting fees, or other payments from any for-profit entity are paid directly to charity, so that neither income nor any tax deduction is received. Dr Libby has received honoraria for lectures and consulting on behalf of AstraZeneca. Dr Ballantyne has received grants or research support from AstraZeneca, diaDexus, Gene Logic, GlaxoSmithKline, Integrated Therapeutics, Kos, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sankyo Pharma, Sanofi-Synthelabo, and Schering-Plough; has consulted for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Reliant, Roche, Sanofi-Synthelabo, and Schering-Plough; and has served on the speakers' bureaus for AstraZeneca, Kos, Merck, Pfizer, Reliant, and Schering-Plough. Dr Davignon has received research support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. Dr Tardif holds a Pfizer and Canadian Institute of Health Research Chair in Atherosclerosis, partially funded by Pfizer, and has received honoraria from Pfizer and AstraZeneca. No other financial disclosures were reported.
Funding/Support: This study was funded by AstraZeneca.
Role of the Sponsor: The sponsor participated in discussions regarding study design and protocol development and provided logistical support during the trial. Monitoring of the study and maintenance of the trial database was performed by a contract research organization, Omnicare, under contract to the sponsor. The IVUS end points were verified by the Cleveland Clinic Cardiovascular Coordinating Center. Statistical analysis was performed by the sponsor and the contract research organization under contract with the sponsor. The manuscript was prepared by the corresponding author and modified after consultation with the other authors. The sponsor was permitted to review the manuscript and suggest changes, but the final decision on content was exclusively retained by the authors.
Independent Statistical Analysis: An independent statistical analysis was conducted by Kathy Wolski, MPH, and Marlene Goormastic, MPH, both from the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. These statisticians received the trial database simultaneously with the sponsor, which included all raw data, not just derived data sets, and independently computed the IVUS efficacy parameters and confirmed the lipid level outcomes and basic demographic variables. Mss Wolski and Goormastic are employed by the Cleveland Clinic Cardiovascular Coordinating Center, which received compensation for conducting the trial, including reimbursement for statistical services.
ASTEROID Investigators: Australia: John Hunter Hospital, New Lambton, New South Wales (G. Bellamy, MD); Wesley Medical Center, Auchenflower, Queensland (D. Colquhoun, MD); Austin and Repatriation Medical Center, Heidelberg, Victoria (M. Horrigan, MD). Belgium: Hôpital de la Citadelle, Liege (P. Materne, MD); Onze Lieve Vrouw Ziekenhuis, Aalst (G. Heyndrickz, MD); University Hospital Saint-Luc, Bruxelles (J. Renkin, MD); Antwerp University, Antwerp (C. Vrints, MD). Canada: Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Center, Halifax, Nova Scotia (M. Love, MD); Hospital Laval–Quebec Heart-Lung Institute, Ste-Foy (O. Bertrand, MD); Hospital Maisonneuve-Rosemont Polyclinique Research, Montreal, Quebec (C. Constance, MD); Montreal Heart Institute, Montreal, Quebec (J. Tardif, MD); Notre Dame Hospital, Montreal (F. Reeves, MD). France: Purpan University Hospital, Toulouse (J. Puel, MD); Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris (A. Lafont, MD); Hôpital Haut Lévèque, Pessac (P. Coste, MD); Institute Jaques Cartier, Massy (M. Morice, MD). Italy: Cardiologia Ospedale Civile, Venezia (B. Reimers, MD); Divisione di Cardiologia Policlinico San Mateo, Pavia (E. Bramucci, MD); Unita di Emodinamica e Cardiologia Interventistica, Milan (A. Colombo, MD); Unità Operativa Distrettuale Cardiologia Invasiva e Emodinamica, Milan (P. Presbitero, MD); Unità Operativa Distrettuale Cardiologia-Laboratorio di Emodinamica, Rome (F. Prati, MD); Unità Operativa Distrettuale Emodinamica Haemodynamic Unit, Siena (A. Bravi, MD); Struttura Operativa Complesso di Cardiologia- Sezione Emodinamica, Udine (G. Bernardi, MD). The Netherlands: Isala Klinieken, Zwolle (M. Grosselink, MD); Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam (J. Herrman, MD); St Antonius Ziekenhuis–Department of Cardiology, Nieuwegein (B. Rensing, MD). United Kingdom:Edinburgh Royal Infirmary Cardiology Department, Edinburgh, Scotland (N. Uren, MD). Spain: Hospital de Bellvitge, Barcelona (E. Esplugas Oliveras, MD); Hospital Clinic i Provinicial, Barcelona (A. Betriu Gilbert, MD); Hospital Clínico de San Carlos, Madrid (C. Macaya Miguel, MD); Hospital Gregorio Marañón, Madrid (J. Botas Rodriguez, MD); Hospital Universitario de Malaga, Malaga (J. Hernandez Garcia, MD). United States: University of Alabama Hospital, Birmingham (B. Brott, MD); Sutter Medical Center, Santa Rosa, Calif (P. Coleman, MD); University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver (J. Messenger, MD); Littleton Medical Center, Denver, Colo (I. Dauber, MD); Hartford Hospital, Hartford, Conn (P. Thompson, MD); JFK Medical Center, Atlantis, Fla (M. Rothenberg, MD); Rush Medical Center, Chicago, Ill (R. Snell, MD); Iowa Heart Center, Des Moines (M. Ghali, MD); University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor (S. Chetcuti, MD); McLaren Regional Medical, Flint, Mich (J. Harris, MD); Cardiac and Vascular Research Center of Northern Michigan, Petoskey (L. Cannon, MD); St Mary Medical Center, Duluth, Minn (A. Deibele, MD); United's John Nasseff Heart Hospital, St Paul, Minn (K. Baran, MD); Buffalo Heart Group, Buffalo, NY (J. Gelormini, MD); Millard Filmore Hospital, Williamsville, NY (J. Corbelli, MD); Moses Cone Health System, Greensboro, NC (B. Brodie, MD); Medical College of Ohio, Toledo (C. Cooper, MD); Geisinger Clinic, Danville, Pa (J. Blankenship, MD); Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI (P. Gordon, MD); Houston Northwest Medical Center, Houston, Tex (B. Lachterman, MD); Aurora Sinai Medical Center, Milwaukee, Wis (Y. Shalev, MD).
Acknowledgment: We thank Nadine Juran, RN, project manager, and Craig Balog, BS, statistician, Cleveland Clinic Cardiovascular Coordinating Center; Helena Melezinkova, MD, AstraZeneca, who monitored adverse events in Europe and Australia and reviewed an earlier version of the manuscript; Joseph Neubauer, AstraZeneca, who provided administrative support of the trial and study supervision; Rohini Chitra, PhD, and Richard Caplan, PhD, AstraZeneca, who provided statistical support in the design of the study; and the Intravascular Ultrasound Core Laboratory staff: Aaron Loyd, William Magyar, Tammy Churchill, Jay Zhitnik, Jordan Andrews, Teresa Fonk, Anne Colagiovanni, Andrea Winkhart, Jessica Fox, Troy Schweitzer, and Paula Shalling.
Author Affiliations: Departments of Cardiovascular Medicine (Drs Nissen, Nicholls, Sipahi, Schoenhagen, and Tuzcu, Mr Crowe, and Mss Wolski and Goormastic) and Diagnostic Radiology (Dr Schoenhagen), Cleveland Clinic Lerner School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio; Donald W. Reynolds Cardiovascular Clinical Research Center, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (Dr Libby); AstraZeneca, Wilmington, Del (Dr Raichlen and Ms Cain); Section of Atherosclerosis and Lipoprotein Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, and Center for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention, Methodist DeBakey Heart Center, Houston, Tex (Dr Ballantyne); Hyperlipidemia and Atherosclerosis Research Group, Clinical Research Institute of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec (Dr Davignon); Department of Cardiology, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany (Dr Erbel); Département de Recherche sur les Lipoproteines et l’Atherosclerose, Pasteur de Lille, Inserm U545 et Faculté de Pharmacie, Université du Droit et de la Santé de Lille 2, Lille, France (Dr Fruchart); and MHI Research Center, Montreal Heart Institute, Montreal, Quebec (Dr Tardif).
REFERENCES
| |
1. Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:1495-1504.
FREE FULL TEXT
2. LaRosa JC, Grundy SM, Waters DD, et al, Treating to New Targets (TNT) Investigators. Intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin in patients with stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1425-1435.
FREE FULL TEXT
3. Pedersen TR, Faergeman O, Kastelein JJ, et al, Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL) Study Group. High-dose atorvastatin vs usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;294:2437-2445.
FREE FULL TEXT
4. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, et al, Coordinating Committee of the National Cholesterol Education Program. Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:720-732.
FREE FULL TEXT
5. Blankenhorn DH, Azen SP, Kramsch DM, et al, MARS Research Group. Coronary angiographic changes with lovastatin therapy: the Monitored Atherosclerosis Regression Study (MARS). Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:969-976.
FREE FULL TEXT
6. Waters D, Higginson L, Gladstone P, et al. Effects of monotherapy with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor on the progression of coronary atherosclerosis as assessed be serial quantitative arteriography: the Canadian Coronary Atherosclerosis Intervention Trial (CCAIT). Circulation. 1994;89:959-968.
FREE FULL TEXT
7. Jukema JW, Bruschke AV, van Boven AJ, et al. Effects of lipid lowering by pravastatin on progression and regression of coronary artery disease in symptomatic men with normal to moderately elevated serum cholesterol levels: the Regression Growth Evaluation Statin Study (REGRESS). Circulation. 1995;91:2528-2540.
FREE FULL TEXT
8. Pitt B, Mancini GB, Ellis SG, Rosman HS, Park J-S, McGovern ME. Pravastatin limitation of atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries (PLAC I): reduction in atherosclerosis progression and clinical events. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26:1133-1139.
ABSTRACT
9. Brown G, Albers JJ, Fisher LD, et al. Regression of coronary artery disease as a result of intensive lipid-lowering therapy in men with high levels of apolipoprotein B. N Engl J Med. 1990;323:1289-1298.
ABSTRACT
10. MAAS Study Group. Effect of simvastatin on coronary atheroma: the Multicentre Anti-atheroma Study (MAAS). Lancet. 1994;344:633-638.
PUBMED
11. Nissen SE, Tsunoda T, Tuzcu EM, et al. Effect of recombinant ApoA-I Milano on coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003;290:2292-2300.
FREE FULL TEXT
12. Nissen SE, Tuzcu EM, Brown BG, et al. Effect of intensive compared with moderate lipid-lowering therapy on progression of coronary atherosclerosis: a randomized controlled trial JAMA. 2004;291:1071-1080.
FREE FULL TEXT
13. Tardif JC, Gregoire J, L’Allier PL, et al, Avasimibe and Progression of Lesions on Ultrasound (A-PLUS) Investigators. Effects of the acyl coenzyme A:cholesterol acyltransferase inhibitor avasimibe on human atherosclerotic lesions. Circulation. 2004;110:3372-3377.
FREE FULL TEXT
14. Nissen SE, Tuzcu EM, Libby P, Thompson PD, et al. Effect of antihypertensive agents on cardiovascular events in patients with coronary disease and normal blood pressure: the CAMELOT study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-2226.
FREE FULL TEXT
15. Eisen HJ, Tuzcu EM, Dorent R, et al, RAD B253 Study Group. Everolimus for the prevention of allograft rejection and vasculopathy in cardiac-transplant recipients. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:847-858.
FREE FULL TEXT
16. Jensen LO, Thayssen P, Pedersen KE, Stender S, Haghfelt T. Regression of coronary atherosclerosis by simvastatin: a serial intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation. 2004;110:265-270.
FREE FULL TEXT
17. Okazaki S, Yokoyama T, Miyauchi K, et al. Early statin treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome: demonstration of the beneficial effect on atherosclerotic lesions by serial volumetric intravascular ultrasound analysis during half a year after coronary event: the ESTABLISH study. Circulation. 2004;110:1061-1068.
FREE FULL TEXT
18. Tardif JC, Gregoire J, Schwartz L, et al, Canadian Antioxidant Restenosis Trial (CART-1) Investigators. Effects of AGI-1067 and probucol after percutaneous coronary interventions. Circulation. 2003;107:552-558.
FREE FULL TEXT
19. Nissen SE, Tuzcu EM, Schoenhagen P, et al. Statin therapy, LDL cholesterol, C-reactive protein, and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:29-38.
FREE FULL TEXT
20. Davidson M, Ma P, Stein EA, et al. Comparison of effects on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol with rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin in patients with type IIa or IIb hypercholesterolemia. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89:268-275.
PUBMED
21. Mintz GS, Nissen SE, Anderson WD, et al. American College of Cardiology Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Standards for Acquisition, Measurement and Reporting of Intravascular Ultrasound Studies (IVUS): a report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:1478-1492.
FREE FULL TEXT
22. Schoenhagen P, Sapp SK, Tuzcu EM, et al. Variability of area measurements obtained with different intravascular ultrasound catheter systems: impact on clinical trials and a method for accurate calibration. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2003;16:277-284.
PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED LETTERS
High-Dose Statins and Atherosclerosis Regression
Sid C. Port
JAMA. 2006;296(15):1836.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
High-Dose Statins and Atherosclerosis Regression
Yoseph Rozenman
JAMA. 2006;296(15):1836.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
High-Dose Statins and Atherosclerosis Regression
Clemens von Birgelen and Marc Hartmann
JAMA. 2006;296(15):1837.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
High-Dose Statins and Atherosclerosis Regression—Reply
Steven E. Nissen
JAMA. 2006;296(15):1837.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLE
Can a Potent Statin Actually Regress Coronary Atherosclerosis?
Roger S. Blumenthal and Navin K. Kapur
JAMA. 2006;295(13):1583-1584.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Efficacy of aggressive lipid controlling therapy for preventing saphenous vein graft disease.
Hata et al.
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2009;88:1440-1444.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Assessment of Coronary Plaque Progression in Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Using a Semiquantitative Score
Lehman et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2009;2:1262-1270.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cholesteryl ester transfer protein: at the heart of the action of lipid-modulating therapy with statins, fibrates, niacin, and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors
Chapman et al.
Eur Heart J 2009;0:ehp399v1-ehp399.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Statins in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Do the Guideline Recommendations Match the Evidence?
Morrissey et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:1425-1433.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Advances in Intravascular Imaging
Maehara et al.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2009;2:482-490.
FULL TEXT
High-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol: Current Perspective for Clinicians
Whayne
ANGIOLOGY 2009;60:644-649.
ABSTRACT
ACCF/AHA/ACP 2009 competence and training statement: a curriculum on prevention of cardiovascular disease.
American College of Cardiology Foundation et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:1336-1363.
FULL TEXT
ACCF/AHA/ACP 2009 Competence and Training Statement: A Curriculum on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians Task Force on Competence and Training (Writing Committee to Develop a Competence and Training Statement on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease): Developed in Collaboration With the American Academy of Neurology; American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation; American College of Preventive Medicine; American College of Sports Medicine; American Diabetes Association; American Society of Hypertension; Association of Black Cardiologists; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Lipid Association; and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association
WRITING COMMITTEE MEMBERS et al.
Circulation 2009;120:e100-e126.
FULL TEXT
Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases: A Practical Evidence-Based Approach
O'Keefe et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2009;84:741-757.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and atherosclerotic plaque: a key role in the cardiovascular protection of patients with coronary artery disease
Tardif
Eur Heart J Suppl 2009;11:E9-E16.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of intensive statin therapy on regression of coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a multicenter randomized trial evaluated by volumetric intravascular ultrasound using pitavastatin versus atorvastatin (JAPAN-ACS [Japan assessment of pitavastatin and atorvastatin in acute coronary syndrome] study).
Hiro et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:293-302.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Structural and functional manifestations of human atherosclerosis: do they run in parallel?
Ganz et al.
Eur Heart J 2009;30:1556-1558.
FULL TEXT
Attenuated Plaque at Nonculprit Lesions in Patients Enrolled in Intravascular Ultrasound Atherosclerosis Progression Trials
Bayturan et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2009;2:672-678.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effects of Statin Treatments on Coronary Plaques Assessed by Volumetric Virtual Histology Intravascular Ultrasound Analysis
Hong et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2009;2:679-688.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of Fluvastatin on Progression of Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque Evaluated by Virtual Histology Intravascular Ultrasound
Nasu et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2009;2:689-696.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Can Statins Alter Coronary Plaque Composition Assessed by Radiofrequency Backscatter Intravascular Ultrasound?
Samady and McDaniel
J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2009;2:697-700.
FULL TEXT
The Vytorin on Carotid Intima-Media Thickness and Overall Arterial Rigidity (VYCTOR) Study
Meaney et al.
J Clin Pharmacol 2009;49:838-847.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The ATHEROMA (Atorvastatin Therapy: Effects on Reduction of Macrophage Activity) Study: Evaluation Using Ultrasmall Superparamagnetic Iron Oxide-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Carotid Disease
Tang et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:2039-2050.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Rosuvastatin 20 mg restores normal HDL-apoA-I kinetics in type 2 diabetes
Verges et al.
J. Lipid Res. 2009;50:1209-1215.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Disease progression in nonintervened saphenous vein graft segments a serial intravascular ultrasound analysis.
Hong et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:1257-1264.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and blood pressure and progression of coronary atherosclerosis.
Chhatriwalla et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:1110-1115.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Atheroma volume by intravascular ultrasound as a surrogate for clinical end points.
Tobis and Perlowski
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:1116-1118.
FULL TEXT
Loss of small heterodimer partner expression in the liver protects against dyslipidemia
Hartman et al.
J. Lipid Res. 2009;50:193-203.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Response to Letter of Mascitelli L, Ravnskov U, Pezzetta F, and Goldstein M
Whayne
ANGIOLOGY 2009;60:129-130.
JUPITER to Earth: A statin helps people with normal LDL-C and high hs-CRP, but what does it mean?
SHISHEHBOR and HAZEN
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine 2009;76:37-44.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Effect of Atorvastatin in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study
Sathyapalan et al.
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2009;94:103-108.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition, High-Density Lipoprotein Raising, and Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis: Insights From ILLUSTRATE (Investigation of Lipid Level Management Using Coronary Ultrasound to Assess Reduction of Atherosclerosis by CETP Inhibition and HDL Elevation)
Nicholls et al.
Circulation 2008;118:2506-2514.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Its Comorbidities
Luppi et al.
Proc Am Thorac Soc 2008;5:848-856.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Statins: established indications and controversial subgroups
Jukema and Bergheanu
Heart 2008;94:1656-1662.
FULL TEXT
Letter by Kaneda Regarding Article, "Effect of Rosuvastatin Therapy on Coronary Artery Stenoses Assessed by Quantitative Coronary Angiography: A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden"
Kaneda
Circulation 2008;118:e706-e706.
FULL TEXT
Letter by Sutton et al Regarding Article, "Effect of Rosuvastatin Therapy on Coronary Artery Stenoses Assessed by Quantitative Coronary Angiography: A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden"
Sutton et al.
Circulation 2008;118:e707-e707.
FULL TEXT
Response to Letters Regarding Article, "Effect of Rosuvastatin Therapy on Coronary Artery Stenoses Assessed by Quantitative Coronary Angiography: A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden"
Ballantyne et al.
Circulation 2008;118:e708-e708.
FULL TEXT
Is Carotid Intima-Media Thickness a Reliable Clinical Predictor?-Reply-I
O'Keefe et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:1300-1301.
FULL TEXT
Targeting residual cardiovascular risk: raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels
Hausenloy and Yellon
Postgrad. Med. J. 2008;84:590-598.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effects of rosuvastatin on cardiovascular morphology and function in an ApoE-knockout mouse model of atherosclerosis
Gronros et al.
Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 2008;295:H2046-H2053.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effects of the Direct Lipoprotein-Associated Phospholipase A2 Inhibitor Darapladib on Human Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque
Serruys et al.
Circulation 2008;118:1172-1182.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
An Overview of the Extra-Lipid Effects of Rosuvastatin
Kostapanos et al.
J CARDIOVASC PHARMACOL THER 2008;13:157-174.
ABSTRACT
Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride in the PERISCOPE Trial
Fresco
JAMA 2008;300:787-787.
FULL TEXT
Unraveling Pleiotropic Effects Of Statins: Bit By Bit, a Slow Case With Perspective
Arslan et al.
Circ. Res. 2008;103:334-336.
FULL TEXT
Dose-Dependent Effect of Rosuvastatin on VLDL-Apolipoprotein C-III Kinetics in the Metabolic Syndrome
Ooi et al.
Diabetes Care 2008;31:1656-1661.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Intensive Lipid Intervention in the Post-ENHANCE Era
O'Keefe et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:867-869.
FULL TEXT
Rosuvastatin and Cardiovascular Disease: Did the Strongest Statin Hold the Initial Promises?
Efthimiadis
ANGIOLOGY 2008;59:62S-64S.
ABSTRACT
Effect of Diabetes on Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis and Arterial Remodeling: A Pooled Analysis of 5 Intravascular Ultrasound Trials
Nicholls et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:255-262.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Relationship Between Biomarkers of Oxidized Low-Density Lipoprotein, Statin Therapy, Quantitative Coronary Angiography, and Atheroma Volume Observations From the REVERSAL (Reversal of Atherosclerosis with Aggressive Lipid Lowering) Study.
Choi et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:24-32.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Is ezetimibe/simvastatin no better than simvastatin alone? Lessons learned and clinical implications
DAVIDSON
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine 2008;75:479-496.
FULL TEXT
Targeting residual cardiovascular risk: raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels
Hausenloy and Yellon
Heart 2008;94:706-714.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of Rosuvastatin Therapy on Coronary Artery Stenoses Assessed by Quantitative Coronary Angiography: A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden
Ballantyne et al.
Circulation 2008;117:2458-2466.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Vascular effects of diets, especially plant sterol ester consumption.
Miettinen and Gylling
J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:1562-1563.
FULL TEXT
Comparison of Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride on Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: The PERISCOPE Randomized Controlled Trial
Nissen et al.
JAMA 2008;299:1561-1573.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of Rimonabant on Progression of Atherosclerosis in Patients With Abdominal Obesity and Coronary Artery Disease: The STRADIVARIUS Randomized Controlled Trial
Nissen et al.
JAMA 2008;299:1547-1560.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Ultrasound imaging techniques for the evaluation of cardiovascular therapies
Kastelein and de Groot
Eur Heart J 2008;29:849-858.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Rapid change in plaque size, composition, and molecular footprint after recombinant apolipoprotein A-I Milano (ETC-216) administration: magnetic resonance imaging study in an experimental model of atherosclerosis.
Ibanez et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:1104-1109.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Applications of statins in cardiothoracic surgery: more than just lipid-lowering
Paraskevas
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2008;33:377-390.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Myriocin slows the progression of established atherosclerotic lesions in apolipoprotein E gene knockout mice
Glaros et al.
J. Lipid Res. 2008;49:324-331.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Dose-Dependent Regulation of High-Density Lipoprotein Metabolism with Rosuvastatin in the Metabolic Syndrome
Ooi et al.
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2008;93:430-437.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Lipid Management to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk: A New Strategy Is Required
Superko and King
Circulation 2008;117:560-568.
FULL TEXT
Clinical Relevance of Non-HDL Cholesterol in Patients With Diabetes
Peters
Clin. Diabetes 2008;26:3-7.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Sex-Dependent Attenuation of Plaque Growth After Treatment With Bone Marrow Mononuclear Cells
Nelson et al.
Circ. Res. 2007;101:1319-1327.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Resolution of Asymptomatic Myocardial Ischemia in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in the Detection of Ischemia in Asymptomatic Diabetics (DIAD) Study
Wackers et al.
Diabetes Care 2007;30:2892-2898.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Beyond Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol: Defining the Role of Low-Density Lipoprotein Heterogeneity in Coronary Artery Disease
Mudd et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1735-1741.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Intensity of Statin Therapy in Relation to Myocardial Ischemia, Troponin T Release, and Clinical Cardiac Outcome in Patients Undergoing Major Vascular Surgery
Feringa et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:1649-1656.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Long-Term Follow-up of the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study
Ford et al.
NEJM 2007;357:1477-1486.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: executive summary: Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (Constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts)
Authors/Task Force Members et al.
Eur Heart J 2007;28:2375-2414.
FULL TEXT
Assessment of Culprit Lesion Morphology in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Ability of Optical Coherence Tomography Compared With Intravascular Ultrasound and Coronary Angioscopy
Kubo et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:933-939.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Review: Statin plus thiazolidinedione use in patients with diabetes at high cardiovascular risk
Erdmann
British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease 2007;7:211-216.
ABSTRACT
Should Statins Be Given Routinely Before Carotid Endarterectomy?
Perler
PERSPECT VASC SURG ENDOVASC THER 2007;19:240-245.
ABSTRACT
ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) Developed in Collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
Anderson et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:e1-e157.
FULL TEXT
Intensive statin therapy in acute coronary syndromes and stable coronary heart disease: a comparative meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Afilalo et al.
Heart 2007;93:914-921.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Atorvastatin Treatment and Vaccination Efficacy
Packard et al.
J Clin Pharmacol 2007;47:1022-1027.
FULL TEXT
{beta}-Blockers and Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis: Pooled Analysis of 4 Intravascular Ultrasonography Trials
Sipahi et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2007;147:10-18.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Review: Imaging to assess effect of medical therapy in patients with diabetes mellitus
Raggi and Bellasi
British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease 2007;7:157-164.
ABSTRACT
Do statins have an antiarrhythmic activity?
Kostapanos et al.
Cardiovasc Res 2007;75:10-20.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Response to anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha blockade is associated with reduction of carotid intima-media thickness in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis
Del Porto et al.
Rheumatology (Oxford) 2007;46:1111-1115.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The significance of low HDL-cholesterol levels in an ageing society at increased risk for cardiovascular disease
Windler et al.
Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research 2007;4:136-142.
ABSTRACT
Do Statins Lower Blood Pressure?
Mangat et al.
J CARDIOVASC PHARMACOL THER 2007;12:112-123.
ABSTRACT
Intravascular ultrasound radiofrequency analysis of coronary atherosclerosis: an emerging technology for the assessment of vulnerable plaque
Mehta et al.
Eur Heart J 2007;28:1283-1288.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Type 2 diabetes patients: profiles, treatment and daily practice
Zambon
Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research 2007;4:S12-S16.
Lower Progression Rate of End-Stage Renal Disease in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease Using Statins or Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors
Feringa et al.
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2007;18:1872-1879.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Local Production of Lipoprotein-Associated Phospholipase A2 and Lysophosphatidylcholine in the Coronary Circulation: Association With Early Coronary Atherosclerosis and Endothelial Dysfunction in Humans
Lavi et al.
Circulation 2007;115:2715-2721.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Recurrent angina after coronary revascularization: a clinical challenge
Abbate et al.
Eur Heart J 2007;28:1057-1065.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Safety of Aggressive Lipid Management
Davidson and Robinson
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:1753-1762.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Achieving Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goals in High-Risk Patients in Managed Care: Comparison of Rosuvastatin, Atorvastatin, and Simvastatin in the SOLAR Trial
Insull et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82:543-550.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Year in Atherothrombosis
Sanz et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:1740-1749.
FULL TEXT
Effects of Reconstituted High-Density Lipoprotein Infusions on Coronary Atherosclerosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Tardif et al.
JAMA 2007;297:1675-1682.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Direct Comparison of Intravascular Ultrasound and Quantitative Coronary Arteriography: Implications for Measures of Atherosclerosis as Clinical Surrogates
Brown
Circulation 2007;115:1824-1826.
FULL TEXT
|
