Asian Science Citation Index is committed to provide an authoritative, trusted and significant information by the coverage of the most important and influential journals to meet the needs of the global scientific community.  
ASCI Database
308-Lasani Town,
Sargodha Road,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Fax: +92-41-8815544
Contact Via Web
Suggest a Journal
 
Articles by Christie M. Ballantyne
Total Records ( 22 ) for Christie M. Ballantyne
  Christie M. Ballantyne , Michael H. Davidson , James M. McKenney , Laurence H. Keller , Daiva R. Bajorunas and Richard H. Karas
 

Background

The number of patients with multiple lipid abnormalities is increasing. Lipid treatment guidelines are established for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C). The importance of treating HDL-C and triglycerides is gaining recognition.

Objective

To determine, in patients who had been treated previously with simvastatin 40 mg/day, the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of two regimens of a combination of proprietary niacin, extended-release core, coated with 40 mg/day simvastatin (NER/S), compared to 80 mg/day simvastatin monotherapy (S80).

Methods

High-risk patients (n = 343) with dyslipidemia were treated for 24 weeks with NER/S (1000/40 mg/day or 2000/40 mg/day) or S80.

Results

Median percentage change from baseline to week 24 in non-HDL-C in either NER/S group was noninferior to S80 (−11.3%, −17.1%, and −10.1%, respectively). Changes in LDL-C were comparable (−8.6%, −11.6%, and −12.7%, respectively). Doubling the dose of simvastatin (S80) did not alter HDL-C, triglycerides, or lipoprotein(a); however, both NER/S doses resulted in significant improvements in all three parameters (+21.9%, −31.8%, and −21.0%, respectively, for NER/S 2000/40 mg/day). The safety of NER/S was consistent with the safety profile of each individual component. Treatment with both doses of NER/S was well tolerated; 59% of patients experienced flushing, 78% of flushing was mild or moderate in intensity, 49% of those who flushed during dose titration did not flush during weeks 13 to 24, and only 4.6% of patients discontinued because of flushing.

Conclusion

NER/S provides similar reductions in non-HDL-C and LDL-C compared to doubling the simvastatin dose to 80 mg; however, only NER/S resulted in improvements in HDL-C, triglycerides, and lipoprotein(a).

  Nicola Abate , Alberico L. Catapano , Christie M. Ballantyne , Michael H. Davidson , Adam Polis , Steven S. Smugar and Andrew M. Tershakovec
 

Background

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and metabolic syndrome (MS) are at increased risk of developing coronary heart disease.

Objective

To compare the effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin (E/S) combination therapy, atorvastatin, and rosuvastatin in patients with DM, MS without DM, or neither disease.

Methods

Subgroup analysis of data from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind trials comparing E/S 10/10, 10/20, 10/40, or 10/80 mg with either atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg (Study 1), or rosuvastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg (Study 2). Treatments were compared by pooling across all doses for effects on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B (ApoB), LDL-C:HDL-C, TC:HDL-C, and LDL-C goal attainment.

Results

E/S provided greater improvements than atorvastatin or rosuvastatin in LDL-C, TC, HDL-C (vs atorvastatin only), non-HDL-C, LDL-C:HDL-C, TC:HDL-C, and ApoB in all disease subgroups. There were no interactions of treatment by disease subgroup for these parameters, indicating a consistent treatment difference favoring E/S effect across the disease subgroups. A greater percentage of patients receiving E/S than atorvastatin or rosuvastatin attained their individual National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III LDL-C goals, LDL-C <100 mg/dL, LDL-C <70 mg/dL, and non-HDL-C goals regardless of subgroup. All treatments were well-tolerated, with generally similar adverse experience rates.

Conclusions

Overall, E/S generally provided greater efficacy than either atorvastatin or rosuvastatin that was consistent across the subgroups of patients with DM, MS, or neither, in agreement with the results from the full study cohorts.

  Venkat Polsani , Christie M. Ballantyne , Peter H. Jones , Vijay Nambi , Salim S. Virani and Daniele Zoch
  not available
  Salim S. Virani , Mahboob Alam , Christie M. Ballantyne , McArthur A. Elayda , Vei-Vei Lee , Vijay Nambi , Wei Pan , Venkatesh Polsani and James M. Wilson
  not available
  Richard H. Karas , Daiva R. Bajorunas , Christie M. Ballantyne , Michael H. Davidson , Laurence H. Keller , James McKenney , Robert J. Padley and Roopal B. Thakkar
  not available
  Michael H. Davidson , Nicola Abate , Christie M. Ballantyne , Alberico L. Catapano , Xia Xu , Jianxin Lin , Elizabeth Rosenberg and Andrew M. Tershakovec
 

Background

Recent evidence suggests that in addition to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), apolipoprotein B (Apo-B), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), some lipoprotein ratios, and C-reactive protein (CRP) are predictive of coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. This post-hoc analysis of two trials comparing single-tablet ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) to atorvastatin (ATORVA) or rosuvastatin (ROSUVA) evaluates the proportion of patients attaining LDL-C <70 mg/dL and specific levels of these emerging risk factors.

Methods

These were double-blind, 6-week, parallel group trials of hypercholesterolemic patients randomized to milligram equivalent doses of ATORVA versus EZE 10 mg/SIMVA, or to usual starting, next higher, and maximum doses of ROSUVA versus EZE/SIMVA. This analysis examined the percent of patients in prespecified dose comparisons and overall achievement of LDL-C <70 mg/dL and/or Apo-B <90 mg/dL, total cholesterol (TC)/HDL-C <4.0, or Apo-B/Apo-A-I <0.7 among all treated patients, non-HDL-C <100 mg/dL among patients with baseline triglycerides ≥200 mg/dL, or CRP <2.0 mg/L among patients with baseline CRP ≥2.0 mg/L.

Results

Within each trial, baseline characteristics were similar among groups. At all dose comparisons, significantly more patients receiving EZE/SIMVA reached LDL-C <70 mg/dL and achieved both LDL-C <70 mg/dL and either Apo-B <90 mg/dL, TC/HDL-C <4.0, or Apo-B/Apo-A-I <0.7 (EZE/SIMVA versus ATORVA) compared to ATORVA and ROSUVA. For most dose comparisons, significantly more patients receiving EZE/SIMVA attained both LDL-C <70 mg/dL and either non-HDL-C <100 mg/dL or CRP <2 mg/L compared to ATORVA or ROSUVA.

Conclusion

The greater efficacy related to changes in blood lipids of EZE/SIMVA compared with both ATORVA and ROSUVA extends to changes in many emerging risk factors. Ultimate clinical implications of these findings still need to be defined.

  Michael H. Davidson , Kevin C. Maki , Harold Bays , Roderick Carter and Christie M. Ballantyne
 

Background

Prescription omega-3-acid ethyl esters (P-OM3) often are used for hypertriglyceridemic patients receiving statin therapy who have residual increases in atherogenic lipoprotein lipid levels. To date, limited information has been published regarding the effects of omega-3 fatty acid consumption on lipoprotein particle concentrations.

Objective

We evaluated the effects of adding P-OM3 4 g/d to an ongoing regimen of simvastatin 40 mg/d on lipoprotein particles (P) in subjects with hypertriglyceridemia.

Methods

Data were analyzed from the multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Combination of Prescription Omega-3s with Simvastatin (COMBOS) study. After an 8-week simvastatin lead-in, 254 subjects received P-OM3 (n=122) or placebo (n=132) for an additional 8 weeks. Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy was used to assess lipoprotein concentrations and sizes. Remnant-like particle cholesterol, apolipoprotein (Apo) CIII, Apo AI, and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) levels also were measured.

Results

Compared with placebo, P-OM3 reduced mean very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL-P) size and increased low-density lipoprotein particle (LDL-P) size (P < .006 for both) without altering high-density lipoprotein particle (HDL-P) size. P-OM3 did not significantly change total VLDL-P or LDL-P concentrations relative to placebo, but large VLDL-P and intermediate-density lipoprotein particle (IDL-P) concentrations were lowered (P < .01 for both), and the large LDL-P concentration was increased (P < .0001). HDL-P concentration was reduced (P < .0001) as the result of a decrease in medium HDL-P. Remnant-like particle cholesterol, Apo CIII, and Lp-PLA2 concentrations were reduced compared with placebo (all P < .003).

Conclusions

P-OM3 induces changes in sizes, concentrations, and compositions of lipoproteins that may have relevance for the atherothrombotic process.

  James McKenney , Harold Bays , Michael Koren , Christie M. Ballantyne , John F. Paolini , Yale Mitchel , Abigaile Betteridge , Olga Kuznetsova , Aditi Sapre , Christine McCrary Sisk and Darbie Maccubbin
 

Objective

To evaluate the safety profile of extended-release niacin/laropiprant (ERN/LRPT), pooling data from studies in the clinical development program.

Methods

Data were pooled from three active- or placebo-controlled phase 3 studies and three 1-year extensions of phase 2 studies that ranged from 12 to 52 weeks (N = 4747): ERN/LRPT = 2548; ERN or Niaspan® (ERN-NSP = 1268); or simvastatin or placebo (SIMVA-PBO = 931).

Results

The safety and tolerability profile for ERN/LRPT was similar to that of ERN-NSP, except for fewer flushing-related adverse experiences and discontinuations with ERN/LRPT than ERN-NSP. The incidence of consecutive ≥3x the upper limit of normal increases in alanine aminotransferase and/or aspartate aminotransferase was numerically (but not statistically) greater with ERN/LRPT (1.0%) than ERN-NSP (0.5%) and similar to SIMVA-PBO (0.9%). Elevations were reversible with therapy discontinuation and not associated with clinical hepatotoxicity. There was no evidence that ERN/LRPT administered alone or concurrently with a statin had adverse effects on muscle. ERN/LRPT and ERN-NSP produced small median increases in fasting blood glucose levels (∼4 mg/dL) after 24 weeks of treatment, consistent with known effects of niacin.

Conclusion

The favorable safety and tolerability profile of ERN/LRPT for up to 1 year supports the use of LRPT to achieve improved therapeutic dosing of niacin, an agent with comprehensive lipid-modifying efficacy and shown to reduce cardiovascular risk.

  Smita Negi and Christie M. Ballantyne
 

Background

Although low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) traditionally has been the focus of treatment guidelines and clinical trials of lipid therapy, patients continue to have cardiovascular disease (CVD) events despite effective lowering of their LDL-C levels, suggesting the influence of other risk factors. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels have been shown to be inversely associated with CVD risk in epidemiological studies.

Methods

Meta-analyses and clinical trials that reported on the potential relation between HDL-C and CVD were reviewed.

Results

Low HDL-C level is associated with increased CVD risk. Statins reduce CVD events in patients with low HDL-C, and fibrates benefit patients with low HDL-C and high triglyceride levels. The benefit of statins on event reduction may be related to their effects on HDL-C. However, not all therapies that increase HDL-C reduce CVD events. Imaging trials have provided evidence of the combined influence of HDL-C and LDL-C on surrogate end points.

Conclusion

Drugs in the same class may have different effects on HDL-C, and these different lipid effects may translate into different effects on atherosclerosis and CVD events. A new class of agents, cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors, is being examined in ongoing trials to determine whether dalcetrapib may have different effects than torcetrapib, which increased levels of HDL-C but was associated with increased adverse events. In addition, ongoing trials are examining whether targeting both HDL-C and LDL-C, by combining a second agent such as niacin with a statin, leads to greater benefit on CVD and clinical events.

  Anne C. Goldberg , Paul N. Hopkins , Peter P. Toth , Christie M. Ballantyne , Daniel J. Rader , Jennifer G. Robinson , Stephen R. Daniels , Samuel S. Gidding , Sarah D. de Ferranti , Matthew K. Ito , Mary P. McGowan , Patrick M. Moriarty , William C. Cromwell , Joyce L. Ross and Paul E. Ziajka
  The familial hypercholesterolemias (FH) are a group of genetic defects resulting in severe elevations of blood cholesterol levels and increased risk of premature coronary heart disease. FH is among the most commonly occurring congenital metabolic disorders. FH is a treatable disease. Aggressive lipid lowering is necessary to achieve the target LDL cholesterol reduction of at least 50% or more. Even greater target LDL cholesterol reductions may be necessary for FH patients who have other CHD risk factors. Despite the prevalence of this disease and the availability of effective treatment options, FH is both underdiagnosed and undertreated, particularly among children. Deficiencies in the diagnosis and treatment of FH indicate the need for greatly increased awareness and understanding of this disease, both on the part of the public and of healthcare practitioners. This document provides recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and treatment of FH in pediatric and adult patients developed by the National Lipid Association Expert Panel on Familial Hypercholesterolemia. This report goes beyond previously published guidelines by providing specific clinical guidance for the primary care clinician and lipid specialist with the goal of improving care of patients with FH and reducing their elevated risk for CHD.
  Michael H. Davidson , Christie M. Ballantyne , Terry A. Jacobson , Vera A. Bittner , Lynne T. Braun , Alan S. Brown , W. Virgil Brown , William C. Cromwell , Ronald B. Goldberg , James M. McKenney , Alan T. Remaley , Allan D. Sniderman , Peter P. Toth , Sotirios Tsimikas , Paul E. Ziajka , Kevin C. Maki and Mary R. Dicklin
  The National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel guidelines have established low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment goals, and secondary non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-C treatment goals for persons with hypertriglyceridemia. The use of lipid-lowering therapies, particularly statins, to achieve these goals has reduced cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality; however, significant residual risk for events remains. This, combined with the rising prevalence of obesity, which has shifted the risk profile of the population toward patients in whom LDL-C is less predictive of CVD events (metabolic syndrome, low HDL-C, elevated triglycerides), has increased interest in the clinical use of inflammatory and lipid biomarker assessments. Furthermore, the cost effectiveness of pharmacological intervention for both the initiation of therapy and the intensification of therapy has been enhanced by the availability of a variety of generic statins. This report describes the consensus view of an expert panel convened by the National Lipid Association to evaluate the use of selected biomarkers [C-reactive protein, lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2, apolipoprotein B, LDL particle concentration, lipoprotein(a), and LDL and HDL subfractions] to improve risk assessment, or to adjust therapy. These panel recommendations are intended to provide practical advice to clinicians who wrestle with the challenges of identifying the patients who are most likely to benefit from therapy, or intensification of therapy, to provide the optimum protection from CV risk.
  Venkateshwar R. Polsani , Vijay Nambi , Salim S. Virani , Daniele Zoch , Eric Y. Yang , Peter H. Jones and Christie M. Ballantyne
 

Background

Although there is clinical evidence for the safety and efficacy of single-drug therapy and some two-drug combinations for the treatment of hypertriglyceridemia, information is limited on the use of more than 2 drugs.

Objective

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of multidrug regimens (≥3 agents) in the management of hypertriglyceridemia.

Methods

The study included 40 individuals in an academic lipid referral clinic with mean follow-up of 1.98 years and an average use of 3.5 medications.

Results

During the study, mean body mass index decreased significantly (P=.0127), from 29.2 kg/m2 to 28.7 kg/m2, and mean hemoglobin A1C showed a trend towards decreasing (P=.06), from 7.9% to 7.2% in patients with diabetes (n=17). All lipid parameters decreased significantly: total cholesterol level decreased significantly from (mean±SD) 334.3±282.9 mg/dL to 183.8±54.8 mg/dL (P=.001, mean reduction of 45%), mean (± SD) triglyceride level decreased significantly from 1900.9±4576.8 mg/dL to 300.7±372.2 mg/dL (P=.02), median (range) triglyceride level decreased from 599 (242-28,550) mg/dL to 301 (40-1960) mg/dL (P < .001, mean reduction of 50%), and mean (± SD) non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased significantly from 189.9±131.6 mg/dL to 138.4±49.1 mg/dL (P=.014, mean reduction of 27%). There were no serious adverse effects (rhabdomyolysis or increased liver function tests >3 times upper limit of normal).

Conclusion

In a 2-year follow-up of 40 individuals on multidrug therapy (average of 3.5 drugs) for severe hypertriglyceridemia, combination therapy was efficacious and well tolerated.

  Christie M. Ballantyne , Michael H. Davidson , Carolyn M. Setze and Maureen T. Kelly
 

Background

Elevated levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) correlate with an increased risk for cardiovascular events. Combination therapy with a statin and a fibrate may be more effective than statin monotherapy for reducing hsCRP, especially in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

Objective

To characterize the treatment effects of rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid combination therapy compared with individual monotherapies in mixed dyslipidemic patients with baseline hsCRP ≥2 mg/L versus <2 mg/L and to determine the effects of long-term treatment with rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid combination therapy on hsCRP and other lipids for patients with hsCRP ≥2 mg/L after treatment with rosuvastatin monotherapy.

Methods

Data for the post hoc analysis were derived from two 12-week controlled studies and a 52-week extension study. Patients were treated with fenofibric acid 135 mg; rosuvastatin 5, 10, 20, or 40 mg; or rosuvastatin 5, 10, or 20 mg and fenofibric acid 135 mg in the controlled studies; and with rosuvastatin 20 mg and fenofibric acid 135 mg in the extension study.

Results

In this analysis, 65% (1416/2182) of patients had pretreatment baseline hsCRP ≥2 mg/L. Among all treatment groups, larger decreases in hsCRP were observed in patients with greater baseline hsCRP; however, improvements in other lipids/apolipoprotein were comparable between the baseline hsCRP categories. Among patients with high hsCRP (≥2 mg/L) remaining after 12 weeks of rosuvastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg monotherapy, hsCRP was reduced by ∼36% after switching to rosuvastatin 20 mg and fenofibric acid 135 mg for up to 52 weeks, and ∼36% of patients shifted from hsCRP ≥2 mg/L to <2 mg/L.

Conclusions

Combination therapy with rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid may be effective for improving the inflammatory biomarker, hsCRP as well as other lipid abnormalities in patients with mixed dyslipidemia and high hsCRP.

  Jennifer G. Robinson , Christie M. Ballantyne , Willa Hsueh , Jeffrey Rosen , Jianxin Lin , Arvind Shah , Robert S. Lowe , Mary E. Hanson and Andrew M. Tershakovec
 

Background

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and atherosclerotic vascular disease (AVD) are associated with increased coronary heart disease risk.

Objective

To assess percent change from baseline in lipids and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels and the proportion of subjects reaching specified low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (Apo B) single, dual, and triple targets and hs-CRP <2 mg/L among subjects with and without AVD treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin or atorvastatin for 6 weeks.

Methods

Adults (N = 1143) with MetS and hypercholesterolemia were randomized to starting and next higher doses of ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 or 10/40 mg) or atorvastatin (10, 20, or 40 mg).

Results

Ezetimibe/simvastatin produced significantly greater reductions in evaluated lipids than atorvastatin for most prespecified dose comparisons. More subjects without AVD achieved LDL-C levels <100 mg/dL, non-HDL-C levels <130 mg/dL, and dual LDL-C/non-HDL targets (83%-92% vs 62%-76%) and Apo B <90 mg/dL or triple targets (65%-75% vs 41%-49%) with 40 mg of atorvastatin or 10/20-40 mg of ezetimibe/simvastatin compared with 10 or 20 mg of atorvastatin, respectively. More subjects with AVD achieved LDL-C<70 mg/dL and non-HDL-C<100 mg/dL single and dual targets (65%-80%) and Apo B <80 mg/dL (53%-63%) with 10/20-40 mg of ezetimibe/simvastatin than with 40 mg of atorvastatin (40%-49%). More subjects achieved triple lipid targets with 10/20-40 mg of ezetimibe/simvastatin versus 1040 mg of atorvastatin (50%-63% vs 24%-40%). Achievement of hs-CRP <2 mg/L was similar across all doses regardless of AVD status.

Conclusions

More intensive therapy was required for >80% of subjects to achieve LDL-C <100 mg/dL and non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL and for the majority of subjects to achieve lower levels of LDL-C <70 mg/dL, non-HDL-C <100 mg/dL, and/or Apo B <90 mg/dL. The effect of ezetimibe on cardiovascular risk reduction has yet to be established. (Clintrials.gov no: NCT00409773)

  Peter P. Toth , Christie M. Ballantyne , Michael H. Davidson , Joanne E. Tomassini , Dena Rosen Ramey , David Neff , Andrew M. Tershakovec , X. Henry Hu and Kaan Tunceli
 

Background

Recent trends suggest a decreased use of ezetimibe/simvastatin combination and coadministered ezetimibe plus statin therapies.

Objective

This analysis evaluated changes in prescription patterns for ezetimibe/simvastatin, ezetimibe plus statins, and statin therapies and expected effects on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering during 2007 to 2008.

Methods

Prescription pattern changes were assessed by the use of patient-level data from the IMS Health Longitudinal Rx database during two time periods, July 14, 2007 to January 13, 2008 (n = 8,813,674) and January 14, 2008 to July 13, 2008 (n = 9,131,030), 6 months before and after reporting of the results of The Ezetimibe and Simvastatin in Hypercholesterolemia Enhances Atherosclerosis Regression trial (ENHANCE) trial on January 14, 2008. Expected LDL-C reductions were estimated using data from previous controlled clinical trials.

Results

During 6 months post-ENHANCE, greater proportions of patients were switched from ezetimibe/simvastatin and ezetimibe plus statins to other lipid-lowering therapies by health care providers than 6 months pre-ENHANCE (21.1% vs 6.0% and 46.9% vs 38.5%, differences: −15.06% [95% confidence interval −15.14%, −14.97%] and −8.43% [95% confidence interval −8.70%, −8.17%], respectively). Greater proportions of these patients switched to statin monotherapy in the later than earlier period. Prescription patterns were similar for statins during both time periods, although fewer patients switched to ezetimibe/simvastatin and ezetimibe plus statin therapies post-ENHANCE. In both time periods, greater proportions of patients on ezetimibe/simvastatin and ezetimibe plus statins switched to less-than-equivalent LDL-C lowering efficacy doses of statins than those on statin therapy. On the basis of previous clinical data for these therapies, smaller LDL-C reductions would be expected in patients who switched from ezetimibe/simvastatin and ezetimibe plus statins to statins, despite a trend toward switching to greater statin doses in the later time period.

Conclusions

More patients switched from ezetimibe/simvastatin and ezetimibe plus statin to statin monotherapy 6 months after the reporting of the ENHANCE trial, the majority of which were prescribed less potent, LDL-C-lowering therapies. On the basis of the known LDL-C lowering efficacies for these therapies, such changes would be expected to increase LDL-C levels in these patients and may reduce the proportion of patients who achieve guideline-recommended LDL-C goals.

  Christie M. Ballantyne , Stephen J. Nicholls , Philip J. Barter , Valerie A. Cain and Joel S. Raichlen
  Racial and ethnic subgroups are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials of statin therapy. Apolipoprotein (Apo) B provides a measure of atherogenic particles in blood, a predictor for coronary heart disease (CHD) events. Reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to current goals may still leave an excess of atherogenic lipoproteins. A study of predominantly white high-risk patients suggested that statin therapy may alter the relationship between Apo B and commonly measured lipoproteins.
  Harold E. Bays , Rene A. Braeckman , Christie M. Ballantyne , John J. Kastelein , James D. Otvos , William G. Stirtan and Paresh N. Soni
 

Background

Icosapent ethyl (IPE; formerly AMR101) is a high-purity prescription form of eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester. In the MARINE study we evaluated the efficacy and safety of IPE in patients with very high triglycerides (TG; ≥500 mg/dL) and previously demonstrated significant reductions in TG levels with no significant increases in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels.

Objectives

In this follow-up, exploratory analysis, we report the effects of IPE on lipoprotein particle concentration and size.

Methods

MARINE was a phase 3, multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, 12-week study. Hypertriglyceridemic patients (N = 229) were randomized to three treatment groups: IPE 4 g/day, IPE 2 g/day, or placebo. Lipoprotein particle concentrations and sizes were measured by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Results

Compared with placebo, IPE 4 g/day significantly reduced median concentrations of large very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL; −27.9%; P = .0211), total LDL (−16.3%; P = .0006), small LDL (−25.6%; P < .0001), and total high-density lipoprotein (HDL; −7.4%; P = .0063) particles and reduced VLDL particle size (−8.6%; P = .0017). In this patient population with TG ≥500 mg/dL, IPE did not significantly change the overall sizes of LDL or HDL particles.

Conclusion

IPE 4 g/day significantly reduced large VLDL, total LDL, small LDL, and total HDL particle concentrations and VLDL particle size in patients with TG ≥500 mg/dL. Changes in VLDL particle concentration and size reflect the TG-lowering effects of eicosapentaenoic acid. The reduction in LDL particle concentration with IPE is novel among ω-3 therapies and is consistent with the previously reported reduction in apolipoprotein B and lack of LDL-C increase with IPE in patients with very high TG levels.

  Smita I. Negi , Ariel Brautbar , Salim S. Virani , Aashish Anand , Eliana Polisecki , Bela F. Asztalos , Christie M. Ballantyne , Ernst J. Schaefer and Peter H. Jones
  Tangier disease is a rare autosomal-recessive disorder caused by mutation in the ATP binding cassette transporter 1 (ABCA1) gene. Typically, Tangier disease manifests with symptoms and signs resulting from the deposition of cholesteryl esters in nonadipose tissues; chiefly, in peripheral nerves leading to neuropathy and in reticulo-endothelial organs, such as liver, spleen, lymph nodes, and tonsils, causing their enlargement and discoloration. An association with early cardiovascular disease can be variable. We describe a patient with a unique phenotype of Tangier disease from a novel splice site mutation in the ABCA1 gene that is associated with a central nervous system presentation resembling multiple sclerosis, and the presence of premature atherosclerosis.
  Jennifer G. Robinson , Christie M. Ballantyne , Willa A. Hsueh , Jeffrey B. Rosen , Jianxin Lin , Arvind K. Shah , Joanne E. Tomassini , Robert S. Lowe and Andrew M. Tershakovec
 

Background

Treatment response to lipid-lowering therapy can vary in patients with the metabolic syndrome (MetS) due to various patient demographic and baseline characteristics.

Objective

This study assessed the relationships between baseline characteristics and changes in lipid variables, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and attainment of prespecified low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels in MetS patients treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin.

Methods

This is a post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, 6-week parallel study in >1000 hypercholesterolemic subjects (median age of 59 years) with MetS and moderately high/high coronary heart disease risk who were treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 and 10/40 mg) or atorvastatin (10, 20, 40 mg). Factors that could affect these treatments were assessed by multivariate analysis.

Results

Increasing age, abdominal obesity (waist circumference ≥40/35 inches for men/women), and lower baseline hs-CRP were significant predictors of greater reductions in LDL-C, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol but not for changes in HDL-C or apolipoprotein AI; effects of race and baseline triglycerides, non-HDL-C, LDL-C, or HDL-C levels were more limited. Age ≥65 years (versus <65 years) was also associated with significantly greater attainment of all LDL-C and non-HDL-C targets, whereas abdominal obesity, gender (female > male) and lower baseline LDL-C, non-HDL-C, triglycerides, and hs-CRP were associated with improved attainment for some of these targets. Blood pressure, fasting glucose, Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance tertiles, and diabetes did not predict response for any efficacy variable. Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment (versus atorvastatin) was a significant predictor for change in most efficacy variables.

Conclusions

Treatment responses to ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin in at-risk patients with the MetS were related to age (≥65 years), abdominal obesity, and lower baseline hs-CRP. Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment was found to be consistently more effective than atorvastatin at the specified dose comparisons across these subgroups. The clinical value of predictive factors requires further study in outcome trials.

  Madhuri Vasudevan , Urbain Tchoua , Baiba K. Gillard , Peter H. Jones , Christie M. Ballantyne and Henry J. Pownall
 

Background

Obesity-linked metabolic syndrome (MetS) is associated with a dyslipidemic profile that includes hypertriglyceridemia and low plasma high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. HDL initiates reverse cholesterol transport via macrophage cholesterol efflux (MCE). Some hypothesize that dyslipidemic patients have impaired reverse cholesterol transport. MCE to patient plasma, a metric of HDL function, inversely correlates with atherosclerotic burden. Paradoxically, MCE to plasma of hypertriglyceridemic subjects is higher than that to normolipidemic (NL) plasma.

Objective

Although weight loss reduces dyslipidemia, its effect on MCE to the plasma of obese patients with MetS is unknown. Thus, we tested the hypothesis that reducing dyslipidemia with weight loss reduces the MCE capacity of MetS plasma to that of NL plasma.

Methods

Cholesterol efflux (MCE) from THP-1 macrophages to plasma from NL controls and to obese patients with MetS before and after weight loss was measured.

Results

MCE to plasma of obese patients with MetS was higher than that of control plasma (P = .006). Weight loss in patients with MetS (mean, -9.77 kg) reduced dyslipidemia, insulin resistance, and systolic blood pressure. HDL cholesterol was unchanged, and apolipoprotein A-I decreased with weight loss. Weight loss in patients with MetS normalized MCE (P < .001) to that of NL subjects. MCE correlated with apolipoprotein B levels (r2 = 0.13-0.38). Chromatography showed that macrophage cholesterol initially associates with HDL but accumulates in apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins at later times.

Conclusions

Although the initial acceptor of MCE is HDL, the elevated apolipoprotein B lipoproteins are a cholesterol sink that increases MCE in patients with MetS. Weight loss results in decreased apolipoprotein B lipoproteins and decreased MCE to plasma of patients with MetS.

  Smita I. Negi , Lynne Steinberg , Venkateshwar R. Polsani , Saqib A. Gowani , Vijay Nambi , Varinder Kumar , Victor Marinescu , Peter H. Jones , Laura A. Petersen , Christie M. Ballantyne and Salim S. Virani
 

Background

Non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) goal attainment per Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines remains low.

Objective

To understand gaps in knowledge and practices of physicians-in-training (internal medicine, family medicine, cardiology, endocrinology) towards non-HDL-C.

Methods

A survey based on a conceptual model to assess the trainee's knowledge, attitudes, and practice regarding non-HDL-C was developed and administered to physicians-in-training (n = 655) at 26 training programs in the United States. Responses of those in internal medicine and family medicine (residents-in-training; n = 418) were compared with those in cardiology and endocrinology (fellows-in-training; n = 124).

Results

Response rate was 83.7%. Fifty-three percent of residents and 31% of fellows-in-training had not read the ATP III guidelines (P < .001). Thirty-three percent of the residents and 35% fellows-in-training could not calculate non-HDL-C from a standard lipid panel (P = .7). Sixty-seven percent of the residents and 52% of fellows were not aware of treatment goals for non-HDL-C (P = .004 for comparison between residents and fellows). Both residents and fellows reported infrequent calculation of non-HDL-C levels in patients with elevated triglycerides (≥200 mg/dL; 32.5% vs 35.4%, respectively, P = .6). Lack of familiarity with ATP III guidelines, lack of knowledge regarding importance of non-HDL-C, lack of institutional mandate to calculate non-HDL-C, and lack of emphasis on non-HDL-C by teaching staff were reported as barriers to non-HDL-C use in routine clinical practice.

Conclusions

At least one-third of physicians-in-training could not calculate non-HDL-C from a standard lipid panel, and a large number were not aware of ATP III treatment goals pertaining to non-HDL-C. This area represents one for improvement if non-HDL-C is to be retained as a treatment target in the forthcoming ATP-IV guidelines.

  Salim S. Virani , Degang Wang , LeChauncy D. Woodard , Supicha S. Chitwood , Cassie R. Landrum , Franklin J. Zieve , Christie M. Ballantyne and Laura A. Petersen
 

Background

The Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines established non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) as a secondary treatment target. However, non-HDL-C levels are not reported on standard lipid panels by many hospital-based and/or commercial biochemical laboratories.

Objective

We determined whether reporting non-HDL-C was associated with improved non-HDL-C goal attainment.

Methods

We identified patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and/or diabetes receiving care within the Veterans Health Administration. We matched a facility that reported non-HDL-C levels on lipid panels (3994 CVD and 5108 diabetes patients) to a facility with similar size, patient complexity, and academic mission that did not report non-HDL-C (4269 CVD and 6591 diabetes patients). We performed patient-level analysis to assess differences in non-HDL-C from baseline to the most recent lipid panel at these facilities.

Results

Baseline non-HDL-C levels for CVD patients were 114 mg/dL and 107 mg/dL at the reporting and nonreporting facilities, respectively. At 2.3-year follow-up, non-HDL-C levels decreased at both facilities but by a greater amount at the reporting facility (−11 mg/dL vs −3 mg/dL at the nonreporting facility, P < .001). Results remained significant (P < .001) after we adjusted for patient's age, race, gender, illness burden, history of diabetes, hypertension, medication adherence, statin use, number of lipid panels, and number of primary care visits between baseline and follow-up. Reductions were greater among CVD patients with triglycerides ≥200 mg/dL (−25 mg/dL vs −16 mg/dL at the respective facilities, P = .004). Results were similar in diabetes patients. Reporting was also associated with greater proportions of patients meeting non-HDL-C treatment goal of <130 mg/dL.

Conclusion

Non-HDL-C reporting could improve non-HDL-C goal attainment.

 
 
 
Copyright   |   Desclaimer   |    Privacy Policy   |   Browsers   |   Accessibility