Cardiac Rehabilitation Institute, Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Israel.
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2010 Jun 15;9:24. doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-9-24.
Even using intensive statin monotherapy, many patients fail to achieve all the desired lipid goals and remain at high residual risk of cardiovascular events. In view of the still unproven decisively intensive "statin as monotherapy" strategy and "residual risk" concept, it is logical to ask whether other strategies, particularly fibrate/statin combination therapy, could be more beneficial and safer. A clear benefit of fibrate monotherapy did emerge previously among patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia (particularly high triglycerides and low high density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C]) typically present in the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes. In contrast, in patients without atherogenic dyslipidemia this favorable effect was not demonstrated. The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study investigated whether combination therapy with a statin plus a fibrate, as compared with statin monotherapy, would reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, relevant patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia represented less than 17 percent of the ACCORD Lipid population (941 out of 5518 patients). In this prespecified subgroup, the patients benefited from fenofibrate therapy in addition to simvastatin similar to the previous "fibrate's as monotherapy" trials: the primary outcome rate was 12.4% in the fenofibrate group, versus 17.3% in the placebo group (28% crude HR reduction, CI less than 1, e.g. statistically significant findings). Among all other 4548 patients without atherogenic dyslipidemia such rates were 10.1% in both fenofibrate and placebo study groups. Authors concluded that in the overall cohort of patients the combination of fenofibrate and simvastatin did not reduce the rate of the cardiovascular events as compared with simvastatin alone. Thus, their results do not support the routine use of combination therapy with fenofibrate and simvastatin to reduce cardiovascular risk in the general patients with type 2 diabetes. A recent large meta-analysis regarding effects of fibrates on cardiovascular outcomes noted greater effect sizes in trials that recorded a higher mean baseline triglyceride concentration (p = 0.030). As expected, in a so called "general population", reflecting a blend of effects in patients with and without atherogenic dyslipidemia, a mean "diluted" effect of fibrate therapy was reduced, but still producing a significant 10% relative risk (RR) decrease in major cardiovascular events (p = 0.048) and a 13% RR reduction for coronary events (p < 0.0001). It should be pinpointed that the epidemiological characteristics of the ACCORD Lipid study depart from those seen in real clinical practice: among people with type 2 diabetes, there is a high prevalence of atherogenic dyslipidemia and metabolic syndrome. For example, an analysis of NHANES III data in adults aged >or=50 years showed that approximately 86% of patients with type 2 diabetes also had the metabolic syndrome. Therefore, an important finding of ACCORD Lipid study was the observation that fibrates may lead to cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia not only as monotherapy but in combination with statins as well. In conclusion, in patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia (high triglycerides and low HDL-C, fibrates -- either as monotherapy or combined with statins - were associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular events. In patients without dyslipidemia this favorable effect - as expected - was absent.
即使使用强化他汀类药物单药治疗,许多患者仍无法达到所有理想的血脂目标,心血管事件的残余风险仍然很高。鉴于他汀类药物单药治疗的“强化”策略和“残余风险”概念仍未得到证实,因此,很有必要探讨其他策略,特别是贝特类药物/他汀类药物联合治疗是否更有益和更安全。
先前在存在动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常(尤其是高甘油三酯和低高密度脂蛋白胆固醇[HDL-C])的患者中,贝特类药物单药治疗具有明确的益处,这类患者通常存在代谢综合征和 2 型糖尿病。相比之下,在没有动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常的患者中,这种有益作用并未得到证实。
心血管风险控制行动(ACCORD)研究探讨了与他汀类药物单药治疗相比,他汀类药物联合贝特类药物治疗是否会降低 2 型糖尿病患者的心血管疾病风险。然而,相关的具有动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常的患者在 ACCORD 血脂研究人群中不足 17%(5518 例患者中有 941 例)。在这个预先指定的亚组中,与安慰剂组相比,辛伐他汀联合非诺贝特治疗的患者获益,与之前的“贝特类药物单药治疗”试验相似:非诺贝特组的主要终点发生率为 12.4%,安慰剂组为 17.3%(28%的粗 HR 降低,CI 小于 1,即有统计学意义的发现)。在其他没有动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常的 4548 例患者中,非诺贝特组和安慰剂组的发生率分别为 10.1%。作者得出结论,在总体患者队列中,与辛伐他汀单药治疗相比,非诺贝特联合辛伐他汀并未降低心血管事件的发生率。因此,他们的结果不支持常规使用非诺贝特联合辛伐他汀联合治疗来降低 2 型糖尿病患者的心血管风险。
最近一项关于贝特类药物对心血管结局影响的大型荟萃分析指出,在记录较高平均基线甘油三酯浓度的试验中,贝特类药物的效果大小更大(p=0.030)。正如预期的那样,在所谓的“一般人群”中,反映了具有和不具有动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常的患者的混合效应,贝特类药物治疗的平均“稀释”效应降低,但仍产生显著的 10%相对风险(RR)降低(p=0.048)和冠心病事件的 13%RR 降低(p<0.0001)。
需要指出的是,ACCORD 血脂研究的流行病学特征与实际临床实践不同:在 2 型糖尿病患者中,动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常和代谢综合征的患病率很高。例如,对 NHANES III 数据中年龄>50 岁的成年人进行的分析显示,约 86%的 2 型糖尿病患者也存在代谢综合征。因此,ACCORD 血脂研究的一个重要发现是观察到贝特类药物不仅可以作为单药治疗,而且可以与他汀类药物联合治疗,降低动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常患者的心血管风险。
总之,在存在动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常(高甘油三酯和低 HDL-C)的患者中,贝特类药物(无论是单药治疗还是联合他汀类药物)与心血管事件风险降低相关。在没有血脂异常的患者中,这种有益作用(如预期的那样)不存在。