Ann Intern Med. 2014 Apr 1;160(7):468-76. doi: 10.7326/M13-2526.
Some patients do not tolerate or respond to high-intensity statin monotherapy. Lower-intensity statin combined with nonstatin medication may be an alternative, but the benefits and risks compared with those of higher-intensity statin monotherapy are unclear.
To compare the clinical benefits, adherence, and harms of lower-intensity statin combination therapy with those of higher-intensity statin monotherapy among adults at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to July 2013, with an updated MEDLINE search through November 2013.
Randomized, controlled trials published in English.
Two reviewers extracted information on study design, population characteristics, interventions, and outcomes (deaths, ASCVD events, low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol level, adherence, and adverse events). Two independent reviewers assessed risk of bias.
A total of 36 trials were included. Low-intensity statin plus bile acid sequestrant decreased LDL cholesterol level 0% to 14% more than mid-intensity monotherapy among high-risk hyperlipidemic patients. Mid-intensity statin plus ezetimibe decreased LDL cholesterol level 5% to 15% and 3% to 21% more than high-intensity monotherapy among patients with ASCVD and diabetes mellitus, respectively. Evidence was insufficient to evaluate LDL cholesterol for fibrates, niacin, and ω-3 fatty acids. Evidence was insufficient for long-term clinical outcomes, adherence, and harms for all regimens.
Many trials had short durations and high attrition rates, lacked blinding, and did not assess long-term clinical benefits or harms.
Clinicians could consider using lower-intensity statin combined with bile acid sequestrant or ezetimibe among high-risk patients intolerant of or unresponsive to statins; however, this strategy should be used with caution given the lack of evidence on long-term clinical benefits and harms.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
有些患者不能耐受或对高强度他汀类药物单药治疗无反应。低强度他汀类药物联合非他汀类药物可能是一种替代方法,但与高强度他汀类药物单药治疗相比,其益处和风险尚不清楚。
比较高强度他汀类药物单药治疗不耐受或无反应的高危动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(ASCVD)成人患者使用低强度他汀类药物联合疗法与高强度他汀类药物单药治疗的临床获益、治疗依从性和安全性。
从建库至 2013 年 7 月,MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库,通过 2013 年 11 月 MEDLINE 更新搜索。
发表于英文期刊的随机对照试验。
两名评审员提取研究设计、人群特征、干预措施和结局(死亡、ASCVD 事件、低密度脂蛋白[LDL]胆固醇水平、治疗依从性和不良反应)信息。两名独立评审员评估偏倚风险。
共纳入 36 项试验。对于高危高脂血症患者,低强度他汀类药物联合胆汁酸螯合剂比中强度他汀类药物单药治疗 LDL 胆固醇水平降低幅度多 0%至 14%。对于 ASCVD 和糖尿病患者,中强度他汀类药物联合依折麦布分别使 LDL 胆固醇水平降低 5%至 15%和 3%至 21%,比高强度他汀类药物单药治疗降低幅度更大。对于贝特类药物、烟酸和ω-3 脂肪酸,目前没有足够证据评估 LDL 胆固醇水平。对于所有治疗方案,长期临床结局、治疗依从性和安全性证据不足。
许多试验持续时间短、失访率高,缺乏盲法,且未评估长期临床获益和安全性。
对于不耐受或无反应的高危患者,临床医生可以考虑使用低强度他汀类药物联合胆汁酸螯合剂或依折麦布;但鉴于缺乏长期临床获益和安全性的证据,该策略应谨慎使用。
美国医疗保健研究与质量局。