METHODS: We conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases until 31st December 2014 for randomized control trials (RCTs) in HF evaluating statins versus placebo. Identified RCTs and their respective abstracted information were grouped according to statin type evaluated and analyzed separately. Outcomes were initially pooled with the Peto's one-step method, producing odd ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for each statin type. Using these pooled estimates, we performed adjusted indirect comparisons of lipophilic versus hydrophilic statin for each outcome.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies involving 10,966 patients were identified and analyzed. Lipophilic statins were superior to hydrophilic rosuvastatin regarding all-cause mortality (OR 0 · 50; 95 % CI, 0 · 11-0 · 89; p = 0 · 01), cardiovascular mortality (OR 0 · 61; 0 · 25-0 · 97; p = 0 · 009), and hospitalization for worsening HF (OR 0 · 52; 0 · 21-0 · 83; p = 0 · 0005). However, both statins were comparable with regards to cardiovascular hospitalization [OR 0 · 80 (0 · 31, 1 · 28); p = 0 · 36].
CONCLUSIONS: Lipophilic statin treatment shows significant decreases in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization for worsening HF compared with rosuvastatin treatment. This meta-analysis provides preliminary evidence that lipophilic statins offer better clinical outcomes in HF till data from head to head comparisons are available.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of statins as an adjunct therapy for asthma in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched for studies in the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE Ovid SP and Embase Ovid SP, from their inception dates We handsearched the proceedings of major respiratory conferences. We also searched clinical trials registries for completed, ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews to identify additional studies. The search is current to 7 February 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a parallel-group design that assessed statins for at least 12 weeks' duration. We considered all participants with a clinical diagnosis of asthma to be eligible, regardless of age, sex, disease severity and previous or current treatment. We planned to include studies reported as full text, those published as abstract only, and unpublished data.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened and selected the studies, extracted outcome data and intervention characteristics from included studies, and assessed risk of bias according to standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We resolved any disagreement through discussion.
MAIN RESULTS: We found only one trial involving a total of 60 people living with asthma. The trial compared the effect of atorvastatin with a placebo (dummy treatment containing lactose) in treating people with chronic asthma. The trial did not report data for the primary outcomes or adverse events. There was uncertainty about the relative effect on forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow (PEF) in the atorvastatin group compared with the placebo group. The study did not report serious adverse effects for the interventions. The included study had internal discrepancies in its reported data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence was of very low certainty, so we are unable to draw conclusions about the effectiveness and safety of statins to treat asthma. High-quality RCTs are needed to assess the effect of statins on people with asthma. Well-designed multicentre trials with larger samples and longer duration of treatment are required, which assess outcomes such as adverse events, hospital utilisation and costs, to provide better quality evidence. Future studies that include subgroups of obese people with asthma are also required.
METHODS: Consecutive NAFLD patients attending five clinics in Asia were included in this study. The 10-year cardiovascular disease risk was calculated based on the Framingham Heart Study, and patients were categorized as moderate, high, or very high risk for cardiovascular disease on the basis of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologist 2017 Guidelines. The low-density lipoprotein cholesterol treatment goal for each of the risk groups was 2.6, 2.6, and 1.8 mmol/L, respectively.
RESULTS: The data for 428 patients were analyzed (mean age 54.4 ± 11.1 years, 52.1% male). Dyslipidemia was seen in 60.5% (259/428), but only 43.2% (185/428) were on a statin. The percentage of patients who were at moderate, high, and very high risk for cardiovascular disease was 36.7% (157/428), 27.3% (117/428), and 36.0% (154/428), respectively. Among patients who were on a statin, 58.9% (109/185) did not achieve the treatment target. Among patients who were not on a statin, 74.1% (180/243) should be receiving statin therapy. The percentage of patients who were not treated to target or who should be on statin was highest among patients at very high risk for cardiovascular disease at 79.6% (78/98) or 94.6% (53/56), respectively.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the suboptimal treatment of dyslipidemia and calls for action to improve the treatment of dyslipidemia in NAFLD patients.
OBJECTIVE: To determine (i) proportions of patients with CHD in Singapore who achieved goals for serum low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C); and (ii) factors influencing goal attainment.
METHODS: A historical cohort study was conducted using records from the Singapore Cardiac Databank, a national registry of CHD patients. Serum LDL-C goal attainment was assessed in 5174 survivors of acute myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization (i.e. coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary interventions), of whom 3811 (73.7%) were at very high risk.
RESULTS: At baseline, the mean patient age was 60.3 years, mean serum value of total cholesterol was 228 mg/dL, and mean LDL-C was 163 mg/dL. Of all CHD patients, approximately 70% did not achieve a serum LDL-C target of <100 mg/dL. Most patients receiving HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) regimens were treated initially with low- to medium-equipotency regimens and were never titrated to stronger regimens. The vast majority (approximately 94%) of patients at very high risk did not achieve the stringent serum LDL-C target of <70 mg/dL. Patients receiving higher potency statins were significantly more likely to achieve LDL-C goals, whereas those with higher baseline LDL-C levels or Malaysian ethnicity were less likely to achieve LDL-C goals.
CONCLUSIONS: Most CHD patients in the large group of Singapore residents with CHD in the present study did not achieve recommended LDL-C targets. A more effective disease-management approach, including patient education concerning lifestyle modification (e.g. diet, physical activity), efforts to enhance medication adherence, and more effective, well tolerated therapies such as high-equipotency or high-dose statins and statin combination regimens, may be needed to improve achievement of consensus cholesterol targets. This is the first study of cholesterol goal attainment in a large group of Southeast Asians and serves as a baseline for future evaluations in Asian populations.
OBJECTIVES: To study the trends in sex and gender differences in ACS using the Malaysian NCVD-ACS Registry.
METHODS: Data from 24 hospitals involving 35,232 ACS patients (79.44% men and 20.56% women) from 1st. Jan 2012 to 31st. Dec 2016 were analysed. Data were collected on demographic characteristics, coronary risk factors, anthropometrics, treatments and outcomes. Analyses were done for ACS as a whole and separately for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), Non-STEMI and unstable angina. These were then compared to published data from March 2006 to February 2010 which included 13,591 ACS patients (75.8% men and 24.2% women).
RESULTS: Women were older and more likely to have diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, previous heart failure and renal failure than men. Women remained less likely to receive aspirin, beta-blocker, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) and statin. Women were less likely to undergo angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) despite an overall increase. In the STEMI cohort, despite a marked increase in presentation with Killip class IV, women were less likely to received primary PCI or fibrinolysis and had longer median door-to-needle and door-to-balloon time compared to men, although these had improved. Women had higher unadjusted in-hospital, 30-Day and 1-year mortality rates compared to men for the STEMI and NSTEMI cohorts. After multivariate adjustments, 1-year mortality remained significantly higher for women with STEMI (adjusted OR: 1.31 (1.09-1.57), p<0.003) but were no longer significant for NSTEMI cohort.
CONCLUSION: Women continued to have longer system delays, receive less aggressive pharmacotherapies and invasive treatments with poorer outcome. There is an urgent need for increased effort from all stakeholders if we are to narrow this gap.