Schandelmaier Stefan, Briel Matthias, Saccilotto Ramon, Olu Kelechi K, Arpagaus Armon, Hemkens Lars G, Nordmann Alain J
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, Canada, L8S4L8.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 14;6(6):CD009744. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009744.pub2.
Nicotinic acid (niacin) is known to decrease LDL-cholesterol, and triglycerides, and increase HDL-cholesterol levels. The evidence of benefits with niacin monotherapy or add-on to statin-based therapy is controversial.
To assess the effectiveness of niacin therapy versus placebo, administered as monotherapy or add-on to statin-based therapy in people with or at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in terms of mortality, CVD events, and side effects.
Two reviewers independently and in duplicate screened records and potentially eligible full texts identified through electronic searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, two trial registries, and reference lists of relevant articles (latest search in August 2016).
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that either compared niacin monotherapy to placebo/usual care or niacin in combination with other component versus other component alone. We considered RCTs that administered niacin for at least six months, reported a clinical outcome, and included adults with or without established CVD.
Two reviewers used pre-piloted forms to independently and in duplicate extract trials characteristics, risk of bias items, and outcomes data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus or third party arbitration. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses, sensitivity analyses based on risk of bias and different assumptions for missing data, and used meta-regression analyses to investigate potential relationships between treatment effects and duration of treatment, proportion of participants with established coronary heart disease and proportion of participants receiving background statin therapy. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence.
We included 23 RCTs that were published between 1968 and 2015 and included 39,195 participants in total. The mean age ranged from 33 to 71 years. The median duration of treatment was 11.5 months, and the median dose of niacin was 2 g/day. The proportion of participants with prior myocardial infarction ranged from 0% (4 trials) to 100% (2 trials, median proportion 48%); the proportion of participants taking statin ranged from 0% (4 trials) to 100% (12 trials, median proportion 100%).Using available cases, niacin did not reduce overall mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.12; participants = 35,543; studies = 12; I = 0%; high-quality evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12; participants = 32,966; studies = 5; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), non-cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.28; participants = 32,966; studies = 5; I = 0%; high-quality evidence), the number of fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarctions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.00; participants = 34,829; studies = 9; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), nor the number of fatal or non-fatal strokes (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.22; participants = 33,661; studies = 7; I = 42%; low-quality evidence). Participants randomised to niacin were more likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects than participants randomised to control group (RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.70 to 2.77; participants = 33,539; studies = 17; I = 77%; moderate-quality evidence). The results were robust to sensitivity analyses using different assumptions for missing data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate- to high-quality evidence suggests that niacin does not reduce mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-cardiovascular mortality, the number of fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarctions, nor the number of fatal or non-fatal strokes but is associated with side effects. Benefits from niacin therapy in the prevention of cardiovascular disease events are unlikely.
已知烟酸可降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇和甘油三酯水平,并提高高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平。烟酸单药治疗或联合他汀类药物治疗的益处证据存在争议。
评估烟酸治疗与安慰剂相比,作为单药治疗或联合他汀类药物治疗对有心血管疾病(CVD)或有CVD风险人群的死亡率、CVD事件及副作用方面的有效性。
两名综述作者独立且重复筛选通过CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、Web of Science、两个试验注册库及相关文章参考文献列表(2016年8月最新检索)电子检索出的记录及潜在合格全文。
我们纳入了所有比较烟酸单药治疗与安慰剂/常规治疗,或烟酸与其他成分联合治疗与单独其他成分治疗的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们考虑了给药至少6个月、报告了临床结局且纳入了有或无已确诊CVD的成年人的RCT。
两名综述作者使用预试验表格独立且重复提取试验特征、偏倚风险项目及结局数据。分歧通过共识或第三方仲裁解决。我们进行了随机效应荟萃分析、基于偏倚风险和缺失数据不同假设的敏感性分析,并使用荟萃回归分析研究治疗效果与治疗持续时间、已确诊冠心病参与者比例及接受背景他汀类药物治疗参与者比例之间的潜在关系。我们使用GRADE评估证据质量。
我们纳入了1968年至2015年间发表的23项RCT,共纳入39195名参与者。平均年龄在33至71岁之间。治疗的中位持续时间为11.5个月,烟酸的中位剂量为2克/天。既往有心肌梗死的参与者比例从0%(4项试验)至100%(2项试验,中位比例48%);服用他汀类药物的参与者比例从0%(4项试验)至100%(12项试验,中位比例100%)。采用可用病例分析,烟酸未降低总死亡率(风险比(RR)1.05,95%置信区间(CI)0.97至1.12;参与者 = 35543;研究 = 12;I² = 0%;高质量证据)、心血管死亡率(RR 1.02,95% CI 0.93至1.12;参与者 = 32966;研究 = 5;I² = 0%;中等质量证据)、非心血管死亡率(RR 1.12,95% CI 0.98至1.28;参与者 = 32966;研究 = 5;I² = 0%;高质量证据)、致命或非致命心肌梗死的数量(RR 0.93,95% CI 0.87至1.00;参与者 = 34829;研究 = 9;I² = 0%;中等质量证据),也未降低致命或非致命中风的数量(RR 0.95,95% CI 0.74至1.22;参与者 = 33661;研究 = 7;I² = 42%;低质量证据)。随机分配至烟酸组的参与者因副作用而停药的可能性高于随机分配至对照组的参与者(RR 2.17,95% CI 1.70至2.77;参与者 = 33539;研究 = 17;I² = 77%;中等质量证据)。使用不同缺失数据假设进行敏感性分析时,结果稳健。
中到高质量证据表明,烟酸不能降低死亡率、心血管死亡率、非心血管死亡率、致命或非致命心肌梗死的数量,也不能降低致命或非致命中风的数量,但与副作用相关。烟酸治疗预防心血管疾病事件的益处不太可能存在。