Endocrinology (all articles)
Phase 2 RCT: Oral Muvalaplin Significantly Reduces Lipoprotein(a) Levels in High-Risk Patients
20 Nov, 2024 | 14:22h | UTCBackground: Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels are an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve stenosis. Current therapeutic options to lower Lp(a) are limited, and no approved pharmacotherapies specifically target Lp(a) reduction.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of muvalaplin, an oral small-molecule inhibitor of Lp(a) formation, in reducing Lp(a) levels in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events.
Methods: In this phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 233 adults aged 40 years or older with Lp(a) concentrations of 175 nmol/L or greater and high cardiovascular risk (due to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or familial hypercholesterolemia) were enrolled across 43 sites worldwide. Participants were randomized to receive muvalaplin at doses of 10 mg/d (n = 34), 60 mg/d (n = 64), or 240 mg/d (n = 68), or placebo (n = 67) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the placebo-adjusted percentage change from baseline in Lp(a) levels at week 12, measured using both an intact Lp(a) assay and a traditional apolipoprotein(a)-based assay.
Results
At week 12, muvalaplin achieved significant, dose-dependent reductions in Lp(a) levels compared with placebo. Using the intact Lp(a) assay, placebo-adjusted reductions were:
- 47.6% (95% CI, 35.1%-57.7%) for 10 mg/d
- 81.7% (95% CI, 78.1%-84.6%) for 60 mg/d
- 85.8% (95% CI, 83.1%-88.0%) for 240 mg/d
Using the apolipoprotein(a)-based assay, reductions were:
- 40.4% (95% CI, 28.3%-50.5%) for 10 mg/d
- 70.0% (95% CI, 65.0%-74.2%) for 60 mg/d
- 68.9% (95% CI, 63.8%-73.3%) for 240 mg/d
Dose-dependent decreases in apolipoprotein B levels were also observed, with placebo-adjusted reductions ranging from 8.9% to 16.1%. Muvalaplin was well tolerated across all doses, with no significant safety or tolerability concerns reported.
Conclusions: Muvalaplin significantly reduced Lp(a) levels in high-risk patients over a 12-week period and was well tolerated. These findings suggest that muvalaplin could be an effective oral therapy for lowering Lp(a) levels.
Implications for Practice: Muvalaplin may offer a convenient oral option to reduce elevated Lp(a) levels, potentially lowering cardiovascular risk in high-risk patient populations.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths of the study include its randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design and the use of both traditional and novel assays to accurately measure Lp(a) levels. Limitations involve the short duration of the trial, the relatively small sample size for each dosage group, and the lack of assessment of long-term cardiovascular outcomes and safety.
Future Research: Long-term studies are necessary to determine whether the reduction in Lp(a) levels with muvalaplin translates into decreased cardiovascular events. Future research should also explore optimal dosing strategies and assess the long-term safety profile of muvalaplin.
RCT: Intensive Systolic Blood Pressure Target Reduces Cardiovascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes
16 Nov, 2024 | 16:49h | UTCBackground: Patients with type 2 diabetes frequently have elevated systolic blood pressure, heightening their risk for cardiovascular disease. Optimal systolic blood-pressure targets in this population remain unclear due to inconclusive results from previous trials.
Objective: To determine whether intensive treatment targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg reduces major cardiovascular events compared to standard treatment targeting less than 140 mm Hg in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Methods: In this randomized controlled trial conducted at 145 sites in China, 12,821 patients aged 50 or older with type 2 diabetes, elevated systolic blood pressure, and increased cardiovascular risk were assigned to intensive treatment (target <120 mm Hg) or standard treatment (target <140 mm Hg). The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, treatment or hospitalization for heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes.
Results: Over a median follow-up of 4.2 years, the intensive-treatment group achieved a mean systolic blood pressure of 121.6 mm Hg versus 133.2 mm Hg in the standard-treatment group at 1 year. Primary outcome events occurred in 393 patients in the intensive group (1.65 events per 100 person-years) versus 492 patients in the standard group (2.09 events per 100 person-years) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.90; P<0.001). Serious adverse events were similar between groups, but symptomatic hypotension and hyperkalemia were more frequent in the intensive-treatment group.
Conclusions: Intensive systolic blood-pressure control to less than 120 mm Hg significantly reduced major cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to standard treatment.
Implications for Practice: These findings support adopting more aggressive systolic blood-pressure targets in patients with type 2 diabetes to prevent cardiovascular events. Clinicians should balance the benefits with potential risks, monitoring for hypotension and hyperkalemia.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large sample size, multicenter design, and sufficient power to detect differences in cardiovascular outcomes. Limitations involve unblinded treatment assignment, which may introduce bias, and reliance on self-reported home blood-pressure measurements during the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially affecting data accuracy. The exclusive enrollment of Chinese patients may limit generalizability to other populations. The increased incidence of hypotension and hyperkalemia raises concerns about the safety of intensive blood-pressure lowering in broader practice.
Future Research: Further studies should assess the long-term safety and efficacy of intensive blood-pressure control in diverse populations and explore strategies to minimize adverse events. Investigations into personalized blood-pressure targets based on patient characteristics may enhance clinical outcomes.
RCT: Tirzepatide Reduces Heart Failure Events and Improves Health Status in Obese HFpEF Patients
16 Nov, 2024 | 16:42h | UTCBackground: Obesity significantly increases the risk of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) due to visceral adiposity-induced systemic inflammation affecting the myocardium. Tirzepatide, a dual agonist of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptors, induces substantial weight loss. However, its effects on cardiovascular outcomes in obese HFpEF patients were previously unknown.
Objective: To assess the impact of tirzepatide on cardiovascular events and health status in patients with HFpEF and obesity.
Methods: In this international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 731 patients with HFpEF (ejection fraction ≥50%), a body-mass index (BMI) of at least 30, and New York Heart Association class II–IV symptoms were assigned to receive tirzepatide (up to 15 mg subcutaneously once weekly) or placebo for at least 52 weeks. The two primary endpoints were the composite of adjudicated death from cardiovascular causes or worsening heart-failure events, and the change from baseline to 52 weeks in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS).
Results: Over a median follow-up of 104 weeks, death from cardiovascular causes or worsening heart-failure events occurred in 9.9% of patients in the tirzepatide group versus 15.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.95; P=0.026). Worsening heart-failure events occurred in 8.0% with tirzepatide versus 14.2% with placebo (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.85). At 52 weeks, the mean increase in KCCQ-CSS was 19.5 points in the tirzepatide group compared to 12.7 points in the placebo group (between-group difference, 6.9; 95% CI, 3.3 to 10.6; P<0.001). Adverse events leading to discontinuation occurred in 6.3% of tirzepatide patients versus 1.4% of placebo patients, mainly due to gastrointestinal symptoms.
Conclusions: Tirzepatide significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure and improved health status in patients with HFpEF and obesity.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest that tirzepatide may be an effective therapeutic option for reducing heart failure events and enhancing quality of life in obese patients with HFpEF. Its benefits may be attributed to significant weight loss and anti-inflammatory effects, offering a potential new approach in managing this patient population.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the randomized, double-blind design and a long median follow-up of 104 weeks. Limitations involve the exclusion of patients with BMI less than 30, which may limit applicability to non-obese HFpEF patients with increased visceral adiposity. Additionally, the higher rate of gastrointestinal adverse events leading to discontinuation in the tirzepatide group warrants cautious consideration.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to evaluate tirzepatide’s effects in HFpEF patients with lower BMI but increased visceral adiposity and to elucidate the mechanisms underlying its cardiovascular benefits.
Phase 3 RCT: Resmetirom Significantly Improves NASH Resolution and Liver Fibrosis
16 Nov, 2024 | 13:56h | UTCBackground: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a progressive liver disease with no approved treatments. It significantly increases the risk of liver-related complications, especially in patients with type 2 diabetes. Resmetirom, a thyroid hormone receptor beta-selective agonist, is being investigated for its potential to treat NASH and liver fibrosis.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of resmetirom in resolving NASH and improving fibrosis in adults with biopsy-confirmed NASH and fibrosis stages F1B to F3.
Methods: This double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial randomized 966 adults with NASH to receive once-daily resmetirom (80 mg or 100 mg) or placebo for 52 weeks. Primary endpoints included (1) NASH resolution with no fibrosis worsening and (2) fibrosis improvement by at least one stage without NAFLD activity score worsening. Secondary outcomes included changes in lipid profiles and liver biomarkers.
Results: At 52 weeks, NASH resolution occurred in 25.9% of patients receiving 80 mg and 29.9% receiving 100 mg of resmetirom, compared with 9.7% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both doses vs. placebo). Fibrosis improved by at least one stage in 24.2% (80 mg) and 25.9% (100 mg) of resmetirom-treated patients versus 14.2% for placebo (P<0.001). LDL cholesterol reductions were −13.6% (80 mg) and −16.3% (100 mg) at 24 weeks versus 0.1% for placebo (P<0.001). Improvements were also noted in triglycerides, liver enzymes, and imaging biomarkers. Adverse events, primarily mild gastrointestinal symptoms, were more frequent with resmetirom. Serious adverse events were similar across groups (10.9%–12.7%).
Conclusions: Resmetirom significantly improved NASH resolution and fibrosis compared to placebo, demonstrating its potential as a treatment for NASH with liver fibrosis.
Implications for Practice: Resmetirom offers a promising treatment option for NASH, potentially altering the disease course and improving outcomes. Clinicians should monitor for regulatory approval and long-term safety data.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include robust biopsy-confirmed endpoints and a large sample size. Limitations include short follow-up and lack of clinical-outcome data.
Future Research: Long-term studies are needed to assess durability, safety, and effects on clinical outcomes like cirrhosis and liver-related mortality.
RCT: Once-Weekly Semaglutide Reduces Weight and Knee Osteoarthritis Pain in Obese Patients
16 Nov, 2024 | 13:41h | UTCBackground: Obesity is a major risk factor for the development and progression of knee osteoarthritis, leading to chronic pain and reduced mobility. Weight reduction has been shown to alleviate symptoms, but sustained, non-surgical interventions are limited. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, such as semaglutide, have demonstrated efficacy in weight management; however, their impact on knee osteoarthritis pain is not well established.
Objective: To assess the efficacy of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (2.4 mg) versus placebo, alongside lifestyle interventions, on body weight reduction and pain related to knee osteoarthritis in adults with obesity.
Methods: In this 68-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 61 sites across 11 countries, 407 adults with obesity (BMI ≥30) and moderate knee osteoarthritis with at least moderate pain were enrolled. Participants were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive semaglutide or placebo, in addition to counseling on a reduced-calorie diet and increased physical activity. The primary endpoints were the percentage change in body weight and the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score from baseline to week 68.
Results: Semaglutide treatment resulted in a mean weight reduction of −13.7% compared to −3.2% with placebo (P<0.001). The mean change in WOMAC pain score was −41.7 points with semaglutide versus −27.5 points with placebo (P<0.001), indicating a significant reduction in pain. Additionally, semaglutide led to greater improvements in physical function scores and a decrease in the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Serious adverse events were similar between groups; however, gastrointestinal disorders led to more discontinuations in the semaglutide group (6.7% vs. 3.0%).
Conclusions: Once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide significantly reduces body weight and alleviates pain related to knee osteoarthritis in obese adults, compared to placebo, when combined with lifestyle modifications. These findings support semaglutide as an effective non-surgical intervention for weight management and symptom relief in this population.
Implications for Practice: Semaglutide may be considered as part of a comprehensive treatment strategy for obese patients with knee osteoarthritis, potentially improving pain, physical function, and reducing reliance on analgesics. Clinicians should weigh the benefits against potential gastrointestinal side effects.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the randomized, double-blind design and a sizable, diverse cohort. Limitations involve the absence of imaging follow-up, lack of metabolic and inflammatory marker assessments, and no post-treatment outcome data to evaluate the sustainability of benefits after discontinuation.
Future Research: Further studies are warranted to explore the long-term effects of semaglutide on knee osteoarthritis progression, its mechanisms of action on joint pathology, and its effectiveness in broader patient populations.
RCT: Tirzepatide Significantly Reduces Weight and Diabetes Risk in Obese Adults with Prediabetes
15 Nov, 2024 | 13:29h | UTCBackground: Obesity is a chronic disease that significantly increases the risk of type 2 diabetes, particularly in individuals with prediabetes. Weight reduction has been shown to improve insulin sensitivity and beta-cell function, potentially delaying or preventing the onset of type 2 diabetes. Tirzepatide, a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, has demonstrated significant weight loss and glycemic control in short-term studies.
Objective: To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of tirzepatide in reducing body weight and delaying progression to type 2 diabetes in obese adults with prediabetes over a period of three years.
Methods: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial (SURMOUNT-1), 1032 obese adults with prediabetes were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive once-weekly subcutaneous tirzepatide (5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg) or placebo, alongside lifestyle intervention, for 176 weeks, followed by a 17-week off-treatment period. The primary endpoints included percent change in body weight and onset of type 2 diabetes during the treatment and follow-up periods.
Results: At week 176, participants receiving tirzepatide achieved significant mean weight reductions of –12.3% (5 mg), –18.7% (10 mg), and –19.7% (15 mg), compared to –1.3% with placebo (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Progression to type 2 diabetes was significantly lower in the tirzepatide groups (1.3%) compared to placebo (13.3%), with a hazard ratio of 0.07 (95% CI, 0.0 to 0.1; P<0.001). After the 17-week off-treatment period, 2.4% of tirzepatide-treated participants and 13.7% of placebo-treated participants had developed type 2 diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.2; P<0.001). Common adverse events were gastrointestinal and generally mild to moderate.
Conclusions: Three years of tirzepatide treatment in obese adults with prediabetes resulted in substantial and sustained weight loss and significantly reduced the risk of progression to type 2 diabetes compared to placebo, with an acceptable safety profile.
Implications for Practice: Tirzepatide may be an effective long-term therapeutic option for weight management and diabetes prevention in obese patients with prediabetes, potentially altering clinical approaches to obesity and metabolic disease management.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the long duration of the trial and large sample size, providing robust data on long-term efficacy and safety. Limitations involve participant attrition and higher withdrawal rates, especially in the placebo group, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to explore the mechanisms of tirzepatide’s effects on beta-cell function and insulin sensitivity, as well as its impact on cardiovascular outcomes and quality of life in diverse populations.
Target Trial Emulation: SGLT-2 Inhibitors May Reduce Recurrent Nephrolithiasis in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Pre-existing Nephrolithiasis
10 Nov, 2024 | 18:17h | UTCBackground: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, initially approved for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes, have demonstrated multiple cardiometabolic and renal benefits, including reducing serum urate levels and lowering gout flare-ups. However, data on the effectiveness of SGLT-2 inhibitors in preventing recurrent nephrolithiasis, especially among patients with concomitant gout, are limited.
Objective: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of SGLT-2 inhibitors versus glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists in reducing the recurrence of nephrolithiasis among patients with type 2 diabetes and pre-existing nephrolithiasis, including those with concomitant gout.
Methods: A target trial emulation study was conducted using a population-based cohort from British Columbia, Canada, between January 2014 and June 2022. Adults with type 2 diabetes and pre-existing nephrolithiasis who initiated an SGLT-2 inhibitor or a GLP-1 receptor agonist were included. The primary outcome was recurrent nephrolithiasis events identified from emergency department visits, hospital admissions, or outpatient diagnoses. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was applied to adjust for baseline differences.
Results: After weighting, 14,456 patients initiating SGLT-2 inhibitors and 5,877 initiating GLP-1 receptor agonists were analyzed. The incidence of recurrent nephrolithiasis was significantly lower among SGLT-2 inhibitor users (105.3 per 1000 person-years) compared to GLP-1 receptor agonist users (156.4 per 1000 person-years), with an adjusted rate ratio of 0.67 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.79) and a rate difference of –51 per 1000 person-years (number needed to treat [NNT] = 20).
Conclusions: SGLT-2 inhibitor use is associated with a significant reduction in recurrent nephrolithiasis among patients with type 2 diabetes and pre-existing nephrolithiasis, including those with concomitant gout. These findings suggest that SGLT-2 inhibitors may offer dual benefits in managing nephrolithiasis recurrence and gout comorbidities.
Implications for Practice: In patients with type 2 diabetes and a history of nephrolithiasis, particularly those with concomitant gout, SGLT-2 inhibitors may be a valuable addition to current treatment strategies to reduce the recurrence of kidney stones and manage comorbid conditions.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the use of a large, population-based cohort and rigorous statistical methods to emulate a target trial, enhancing causal inference. Limitations involve potential residual confounding due to unmeasured factors such as body mass index and laboratory measures, and the inability to capture nephrolithiasis events not requiring medical attention.
Future Research: Further studies are warranted to explore the mechanisms underlying the nephrolithiasis protective effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors, assess their impact in patients without diabetes, and investigate the effects on different types of kidney stones.
RCT: Lipoprotein(a) and LDL-C as Independent Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Statin Trials
5 Nov, 2024 | 17:50h | UTCBackground: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are both known risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, the interaction between Lp(a) and LDL-C levels in relation to ASCVD risk, especially in the context of LDL-C-lowering treatments like statins, remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify if LDL-C reduction impacts Lp(a)-associated ASCVD risk.
Objective: This meta-analysis examined whether LDL-C reduction with statins affects ASCVD risk mediated by elevated Lp(a) levels.
Methods: Data from 27,658 participants across six statin trials were analyzed, including both placebo and statin groups. ASCVD risk was assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models with adjustments for various cardiovascular risk factors. The study evaluated continuous associations between Lp(a) levels, LDL-C levels, and ASCVD risk.
Results: Elevated Lp(a) levels were associated with higher ASCVD risk across all LDL-C levels, even among patients with the lowest LDL-C achieved through statin therapy. Statin-treated patients with Lp(a) >50 mg/dL exhibited a significantly higher ASCVD risk, even in the lowest quartile of achieved LDL-C (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.06–1.79). The highest risk was observed in individuals with both elevated Lp(a) and LDL-C levels (HR 1.90, 95% CI 1.46–2.48).
Conclusions: Lp(a) and LDL-C are independent risk factors for ASCVD, with LDL-C lowering alone insufficient to mitigate the risk associated with elevated Lp(a).
Implications for Practice: These findings underscore the need for distinct strategies to manage patients with elevated Lp(a), particularly as LDL-C reduction alone does not fully address the associated ASCVD risk.
Study Strengths and Limitations: This study’s strength lies in its large participant pool and robust statistical analysis; however, variability in Lp(a) measurement methods across trials may limit precision.
Future Research: Investigations into therapies specifically targeting Lp(a) may offer additional ASCVD risk reduction beyond LDL-C lowering alone.
Multisociety Guidelines for Perioperative Management of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists
3 Nov, 2024 | 14:27h | UTCIntroduction: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have transformed the management of metabolic diseases such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, and heart failure by enhancing glycemic control and promoting satiety. However, their effect of delaying gastric emptying has raised perioperative safety concerns due to the risk of residual gastric contents leading to pulmonary aspiration during anesthesia. Reports of aspiration incidents and gastrointestinal side effects like nausea and vomiting have prompted the need for unified clinical guidance. This multisociety clinical practice guideline aims to provide recommendations for safely managing patients on GLP-1RAs during the perioperative period, balancing metabolic benefits with procedural risks.
Key Recommendations:
- Shared Decision-Making:
- Collaborative Approach: The continuation or discontinuation of GLP-1RAs should involve shared decision-making among the patient, surgical team, anesthesia providers, and prescribing clinicians.
- Risk Assessment: Evaluate factors that elevate the risk of delayed gastric emptying and aspiration, including:
- Dose Escalation Phase: Higher risk during dose escalation compared to maintenance.
- Higher Dosage: Increased gastrointestinal side effects with higher doses.
- Weekly Formulations: Greater side effects with weekly dosing compared to daily formulations.
- Gastrointestinal Symptoms: Presence of nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, dyspepsia, or constipation.
- Comorbid Conditions: Conditions like gastroparesis, bowel dysmotility, or neurological disorders affecting gastric motility.
- Timing: Conduct risk assessments well in advance of surgery to allow for appropriate preoperative planning.
- Management of GLP-1RA Therapy:
- Continuation in Low-Risk Patients: GLP-1RAs may be continued preoperatively in patients without elevated risk factors.
- Balancing Risks in High-Risk Patients:
- Metabolic vs. Procedural Risks: Weigh the risks of aspiration against potential metabolic complications like hyperglycemia if GLP-1RAs are withheld.
- Avoiding Bias: Decisions should not be based solely on obesity status to prevent bias.
- Discontinuation Guidelines:
- Daily Formulations: Hold on the day of surgery.
- Weekly Formulations: Discontinue one week prior to surgery.
- Day-of-Surgery Assessment: All patients should be evaluated for symptoms of delayed gastric emptying on the day of the procedure, regardless of GLP-1RA usage.
- Minimizing Aspiration Risk:
- Preoperative Dietary Modifications:
- Liquid Diet: Implement a liquid diet for at least 24 hours before surgery, similar to protocols for colonoscopy and bariatric procedures.
- Gastric Content Assessment:
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound: Use gastric ultrasound to assess residual gastric contents when there is concern for delayed emptying, acknowledging potential limitations in resources and expertise.
- Anesthesia Plan Adjustments:
- Rapid Sequence Induction: Consider rapid sequence induction with tracheal intubation to minimize aspiration risk in patients with confirmed or suspected delayed gastric emptying.
- Procedure Continuation vs. Cancellation: Engage in shared decision-making to weigh the benefits of proceeding with the procedure against the risks, aiming to avoid unnecessary cancellations.
- Preoperative Dietary Modifications:
Conclusion: By adopting these recommendations, healthcare providers can enhance patient safety during the perioperative period for those receiving GLP-1RA therapy. The guidelines emphasize individualized care through shared decision-making, considering both metabolic benefits and procedural risks. Implementing these practices is expected to reduce aspiration incidents, optimize surgical outcomes, and ensure equitable care without bias against patients with obesity or metabolic disorders. As new evidence and medications emerge, these guidelines may be updated to reflect best practices.
Reference: Kindel TL, Wang AY, Wadhwa A, et al. Multisociety clinical practice guidance for the safe use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in the perioperative period. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases. 2024; In Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2024.08.033
Clinical Trial Follow-up: Empagliflozin Continues to Reduce Cardiorenal Risks Post-Discontinuation in CKD Patients
3 Nov, 2024 | 13:08h | UTCBackground: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression leads to end-stage kidney disease, adversely affecting quality of life, increasing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and imposing high economic costs. Previous trials, including the EMPA-KIDNEY trial, demonstrated that empagliflozin, a sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, provides cardiorenal benefits in CKD patients at risk of progression. The persistence of these benefits after discontinuation of the drug remains uncertain.
Objective: To assess how the effects of empagliflozin on kidney disease progression and cardiovascular outcomes evolve after discontinuation in patients with CKD.
Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 6,609 patients with CKD were assigned to receive empagliflozin 10 mg daily or placebo and followed for a median of 2 years during the active trial period. Eligible patients had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 20 and less than 45 ml/min/1.73 m², or between 45 and less than 90 ml/min/1.73 m² with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio of at least 200 mg/g. After the active trial, 4,891 surviving patients consented to a 2-year post-trial follow-up without the trial drug, during which local practitioners could prescribe open-label SGLT2 inhibitors. The primary composite outcome was kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death from the start of the active trial to the end of the post-trial period.
Results: During the combined active and post-trial periods, a primary outcome event occurred in 26.2% of patients in the empagliflozin group and 30.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72–0.87). During the post-trial period alone, the HR was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.76–0.99), indicating continued benefit after drug discontinuation. The risk of kidney disease progression was 23.5% in the empagliflozin group versus 27.1% in the placebo group (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72–0.87). Cardiovascular death occurred in 3.8% and 4.9% of patients, respectively (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59–0.95). No significant effect was observed on death from noncardiovascular causes (5.3% in both groups).
Conclusions: In patients with CKD at risk for progression, empagliflozin continued to confer cardiorenal benefits for up to 12 months after discontinuation. These findings suggest that short-term treatment with empagliflozin has lasting effects on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes.
Implications for Practice: Empagliflozin should be considered for a broad range of CKD patients to slow disease progression and reduce cardiovascular risk, with benefits extending beyond active treatment. Clinicians should initiate empagliflozin therapy in eligible CKD patients to maximize long-term cardiorenal protection.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the large sample size, broad eligibility criteria, and high follow-up rates. Limitations involve the exclusion of certain regions during post-trial follow-up and reliance on local eGFR measurements during this period.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to understand the mechanisms behind the sustained benefits of empagliflozin after discontinuation and to explore the long-term effects of extended treatment durations.
RCT: Vitamin K2 Reduces Nocturnal Leg Cramps in Older Adults
28 Oct, 2024 | 18:59h | UTCPost-trial Follow-up: Empagliflozin Shows Sustained Benefits Post-Discontinuation in Chronic Kidney Disease
25 Oct, 2024 | 20:29h | UTCBackground: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression leads to end-stage kidney disease, affecting quality of life and increasing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Empagliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, has shown renal and cardiovascular benefits during active treatment. The persistence of these effects post-discontinuation is uncertain.
Objective: To evaluate how the cardiorenal benefits of empagliflozin evolve after stopping the medication, by assessing the composite outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death during both the active trial and a subsequent post-trial follow-up.
Methods: In the EMPA-KIDNEY trial, 6609 patients with CKD were randomized to receive empagliflozin 10 mg daily or placebo and were followed for a median of 2 years during the active trial. Eligible patients had an eGFR of 20–45 ml/min/1.73 m² or an eGFR of 45–90 ml/min/1.73 m² with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥200 mg/g. After the active trial, 4891 surviving patients (74%) consented to a 2-year post-trial follow-up without the trial medication, although open-label SGLT2 inhibitors could be prescribed by local practitioners. The primary outcome was a composite of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death assessed from the start of the active trial to the end of the post-trial period.
Results: During the combined active and post-trial periods, a primary outcome event occurred in 26.2% of patients in the empagliflozin group and 30.3% in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72–0.87). During the post-trial period alone, the HR was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.76–0.99), indicating sustained benefits after discontinuation. The risk of kidney disease progression was 23.5% with empagliflozin versus 27.1% with placebo. Cardiovascular death occurred in 3.8% of the empagliflozin group and 4.9% of the placebo group (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59–0.95). There was no significant difference in noncardiovascular mortality.
Conclusions: Empagliflozin continued to confer cardiorenal benefits for up to 12 months after discontinuation in patients with CKD at risk for progression. The sustained reduction in kidney disease progression and cardiovascular death suggests long-term advantages of empagliflozin beyond active treatment, supporting its role in CKD management.
Implications for Practice: These findings support the early initiation and continued use of empagliflozin in patients with CKD to maximize long-term cardiorenal benefits. Clinicians should consider empagliflozin as part of standard care for a broad range of CKD patients, regardless of diabetes status, to slow disease progression and reduce cardiovascular risk.
Study Strengths and Limitations: While the study’s large, diverse CKD population and extended follow-up enhance its generalizability, reliance on local creatinine measurements and lack of hospitalization data during post-trial follow-up are limitations.
Future Research: Further studies should explore the mechanisms underlying the sustained benefits of empagliflozin after discontinuation and assess long-term effects on hospitalization and quality of life in CKD patients.
Cohort Study: GIP/GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Prescriptions Linked to Reduced Opioid Overdose and Alcohol Intoxication
20 Oct, 2024 | 18:36h | UTCBackground: Opioid use disorder (OUD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD) are prevalent conditions leading to significant morbidity and mortality, including overdose and intoxication. Current pharmacotherapies for OUD and AUD are underutilized due to barriers like access and stigma. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), used for type 2 diabetes and obesity, have shown potential in modulating reward pathways associated with substance use, suggesting a possible role in reducing substance-related harms.
Objective: To estimate the association between prescriptions of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and/or GLP-1 receptor agonists and the incidence of opioid overdose and alcohol intoxication in patients with OUD and AUD, respectively, and to assess this association among patients with comorbid type 2 diabetes and obesity.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed de-identified electronic health record data from 136 U.S. health systems in the Oracle Cerner Real-World Data, covering over 100 million patients from January 2014 to September 2022. Adults aged 18 years or older with a history of OUD (n = 503,747) or AUD (n = 817,309) were included. The exposure was defined as having one or more prescriptions of GIP/GLP-1 RAs after the first OUD or AUD diagnosis. The primary outcomes were the incidence rates of opioid overdose in the OUD cohort and alcohol intoxication in the AUD cohort.
Results: Patients with GIP/GLP-1 RA prescriptions had significantly lower rates of opioid overdose (aIRR in OUD patients: 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43–0.83) and alcohol intoxication (aIRR in AUD patients: 0.50; 95% CI, 0.40–0.63) compared to those without such prescriptions. The protective association remained significant among patients with comorbid type 2 diabetes and obesity.
Conclusions: Prescriptions of GIP and/or GLP-1 receptor agonists are associated with lower rates of opioid overdose and alcohol intoxication in patients with OUD and AUD. These protective effects persist across various subgroups, including those with comorbid type 2 diabetes and obesity.
Implications for Practice: GLP-1 RAs show promise for reducing substance-related harms in patients with OUD and AUD. Clinicians may consider the potential benefits of GIP/GLP-1 RA prescriptions in this population, while recognizing the need for further research to establish causality and understand underlying mechanisms.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large, diverse patient population and adjustment for multiple confounders. Limitations involve the retrospective observational design limiting causal inference and reliance on data from Cerner-affiliated health systems, which may affect generalizability.
Future Research: Prospective clinical trials are needed to validate these findings, elucidate underlying mechanisms, and assess the efficacy and safety of GIP/GLP-1 RAs as treatments for substance use disorders.
Cohort Study: Levonorgestrel IUD Use Linked to Increased Breast Cancer Risk in Premenopausal Women
20 Oct, 2024 | 18:13h | UTCBackground: Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems (LNG-IUSs) are increasingly used, especially among Danish premenopausal women over 30 years old, as a preferred method of hormonal contraception. Previous studies have suggested an increased risk of breast cancer with LNG-IUS use but did not adequately address the duration of continuous use or account for other hormonal contraceptive exposures.
Objective: To assess the risk of breast cancer associated with continuous use of LNG-IUSs, accounting for other hormonal exposures.
Methods: In this nationwide Danish cohort study, 78,595 first-time LNG-IUS users aged 15–49 years from 2000 to 2019 were identified and matched 1:1 by birth year to nonusers of hormonal contraceptives. Exclusion criteria included prior hormonal contraceptive use within 5 years, previous cancer, postmenopausal hormone therapy, and pregnancy at baseline. Participants were followed from initiation until breast cancer diagnosis, other cancer, pregnancy, hormone therapy initiation, emigration, death, or December 31, 2022. Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for confounders estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for breast cancer associated with continuous LNG-IUS use.
Results: During a mean follow-up of 6.8 years, 1,617 breast cancer cases occurred: 720 among LNG-IUS users and 897 among nonusers. The mean age was 38 years. Continuous LNG-IUS use was associated with a higher breast cancer risk compared to nonuse (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2–1.5). HRs by duration were 1.3 (95% CI, 1.1–1.5) for 0–5 years, 1.4 (95% CI, 1.1–1.7) for >5–10 years, and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.2–2.6) for >10–15 years. Excess breast cancer cases per 10,000 users were 14 (95% CI, 6–23), 29 (95% CI, 9–50), and 71 (95% CI, 15–127), respectively. The trend test for duration was not statistically significant (P = .15).
Conclusions: Continuous use of LNG-IUSs was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer among women aged 15–49 years compared to nonuse of hormonal contraceptives. The absolute increase in risk was low.
Implications for Practice: Healthcare providers should inform women about the potential increased breast cancer risk associated with LNG-IUS use, especially considering its widespread and long-term use among premenopausal women. While the absolute risk increase is small, this information is essential for making informed contraceptive choices.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the large, nationwide cohort and adjustment for multiple confounders. Limitations include potential underestimation of risk due to unrecorded LNG-IUS removals before the recommended duration, lack of a statistically significant trend with duration suggesting possible low statistical precision or non-causal association, and the possibility of unmeasured confounding.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to confirm these findings, clarify the causal relationship, and understand the mechanisms underlying the potential increased breast cancer risk with LNG-IUS use.
Meta-analysis: Colchicine Reduces Ischemic Stroke and MACE in Patients with Prior Stroke or Coronary Disease
13 Oct, 2024 | 12:10h | UTCBackground: Colchicine is recommended for secondary prevention in cardiovascular disease, but its efficacy in preventing ischemic stroke and benefits in key patient subgroups remain uncertain. Inflammation plays a significant role in stroke and cardiovascular events, and colchicine’s anti-inflammatory properties may confer additional protective effects.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of colchicine for secondary prevention of ischemic stroke and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with prior stroke or coronary disease, and to assess its safety profile across key clinical subgroups.
Methods: A trial-level meta-analysis was conducted, including six randomized controlled trials with a total of 14,934 patients with prior stroke or coronary disease. Trials comparing colchicine with placebo or no colchicine for at least three months were included. The primary efficacy outcomes were ischemic stroke and MACE, defined as a composite of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or cardiovascular death. Secondary outcomes included serious safety events and mortality.
Results: Colchicine reduced the risk of ischemic stroke by 27% (1.8%] vs. 186 events [2.5%]; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58–0.90; P = .004) and MACE by 27% (505 events [6.8%] vs. 693 events [9.4%]; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65–0.81; P < .001). The efficacy was consistent across key subgroups, including sex, age (<70 vs. ≥70 years), diabetes status, and statin use at baseline. Colchicine was not associated with an increase in serious safety outcomes, all-cause mortality (201 deaths [2.7%] vs. 181 deaths [2.4%]; RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.89–1.33; P = .39), cardiovascular death, or non-cardiovascular death.
Conclusions: In patients with prior stroke or coronary disease, colchicine significantly reduces the risk of ischemic stroke and MACE without increasing serious adverse events or mortality. These findings support the use of low-dose colchicine as an effective secondary prevention therapy in a broad cardiovascular patient population.
Implications for Practice: Clinicians should consider incorporating low-dose colchicine into secondary prevention regimens for patients with prior stroke or coronary disease, given its demonstrated efficacy and acceptable safety profile. Its affordability and widespread availability make it a practical option for diverse healthcare settings, including low- and middle-income countries.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large pooled sample size and inclusion of multiple trials across various patient populations, enhancing generalizability. Limitations involve potential performance bias in non-placebo-controlled trials, differences in stroke outcome definitions among studies, and the inability to perform individual patient data analyses.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effects of colchicine on vascular events and cognitive decline in stroke patients, assess safety in patients with renal impairment, and explore its impact on non-cardiovascular mortality.
RCT: Nonstandard Arm Positions Overestimate Blood Pressure Readings in Adults
12 Oct, 2024 | 22:55h | UTCBackground: Accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement is crucial for the diagnosis and management of hypertension, a leading cause of cardiovascular disease and mortality worldwide. Guidelines recommend measuring BP with the arm supported on a desk at heart level. However, in clinical practice, nonstandard arm positions—such as resting the arm on the lap or having it unsupported at the side—are commonly used, potentially leading to inaccurate readings.
Objective: To determine the effect of commonly used nonstandard arm positions on BP measurements compared to the standard, recommended position.
Methods: In a crossover randomized clinical trial from August 2022 to June 2023, 133 adults aged 18 to 80 years were recruited. Participants were randomly assigned to receive sets of triplicate BP measurements with the arm in three positions: (1) supported on a desk with the midcuff at heart level (desk 1; reference), (2) hand supported on the lap (lap), and (3) arm unsupported at the side (side). To account for intrinsic BP variability, all participants underwent a fourth set of BP measurements with the arm supported on a desk (desk 2). The primary outcomes were the difference in differences in mean systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) between the reference BP (desk 1) and the two nonstandard arm positions (lap and side).
Results: Among 133 participants (mean age 57 years; 53% female), 36% had SBP ≥130 mm Hg, and 41% had a body mass index ≥30 kg/m². Compared to the reference position, the lap and side positions resulted in significantly higher BP readings. The difference in differences for the lap position was an increase in SBP of 3.9 mm Hg (95% CI, 2.5-5.2) and DBP of 4.0 mm Hg (95% CI, 3.1-5.0). For the side position, the increases were SBP 6.5 mm Hg (95% CI, 5.1-7.9) and DBP 4.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 3.4-5.4). These patterns were consistent across subgroups.
Conclusions: Commonly used nonstandard arm positions during BP measurements, such as resting the arm on the lap or having it unsupported at the side, significantly overestimate BP readings compared to the standard recommended position. This overestimation may lead to misdiagnosis and overestimation of hypertension.
Implications for Practice: Clinicians should adhere to guideline-recommended arm positioning during BP measurements to ensure accurate readings. Proper arm support with the midcuff at heart level is necessary to avoid overestimation of BP, which can result in unnecessary follow-up and overtreatment due to hypertension overdiagnosis.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the randomized crossover design ideal for studying BP differences, a larger sample size than previous studies, and focus on arm positions commonly used in clinical practice with an automated BP device. Limitations include unequal randomization due to the randomization function used, small sample sizes in some subgroups, and uncertain generalizability to other settings or devices.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to investigate strategies to improve adherence to guideline-recommended arm positions in clinical practice, assess the impact of educational interventions on BP measurement accuracy, and explore the effects of arm position on BP readings using different devices or in diverse populations.
Guideline Summary: Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) Inhibitors for Adults with Chronic Kidney Disease
4 Oct, 2024 | 11:14h | UTCIntroduction
A recent clinical practice guideline published in The BMJ titled “Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors for adults with chronic kidney disease” provides evidence-based recommendations on the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors in adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD), regardless of diabetes status. The guideline aims to assist clinicians in making informed decisions to improve patient outcomes in CKD management.
Key Recommendations and Patient Care Implications
- Risk Stratification
- Assessment: Patients with CKD should be stratified based on their risk of disease progression and complications using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria levels, following the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) classification.
- Clinical Implication: Proper risk stratification guides the intensity of treatment and monitoring.
- Use of SGLT-2 Inhibitors
- Low to Moderate Risk Patients: For adults at low or moderate risk, the guideline suggests administering SGLT-2 inhibitors (weak recommendation in favor).
- Patient Care Impact: Clinicians should discuss potential benefits and risks with patients, considering individual preferences.
- High to Very High Risk Patients: For adults at high or very high risk, a strong recommendation is made to administer SGLT-2 inhibitors.
- Patient Care Impact: Clinicians should prioritize initiating SGLT-2 inhibitors in these patients to reduce risks of mortality and progression to kidney failure.
- Low to Moderate Risk Patients: For adults at low or moderate risk, the guideline suggests administering SGLT-2 inhibitors (weak recommendation in favor).
- Benefits of SGLT-2 Inhibitors
- Outcomes: Reduction in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, hospitalization for heart failure, kidney failure, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke.
- Clinical Implication: SGLT-2 inhibitors provide significant protective effects on cardiovascular and kidney health in CKD patients.
- Potential Harms and Monitoring
- Adverse Effects: Minimal increase in risks of acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, bone fractures, lower limb amputations, ketoacidosis, genital infections, or symptomatic hypovolemia.
- Patient Counseling: Patients should be informed about possible side effects and advised on when to seek medical attention.
- Monitoring: Routine laboratory monitoring is not generally necessary, except in high-risk individuals.
- Practical Considerations for Prescribing
- Initiation: Start SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients with eGFR ≥20 mL/min/1.73 m².
- Continuation: Medications can be continued even if eGFR falls below 20 mL/min/1.73 m² until dialysis is initiated.
- Dosage: Initiate at the highest possible dose without the need for titration.
- Drug Selection: Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, and empagliflozin are suitable options.
- Concurrent Medications: Review and adjust diuretics to prevent volume depletion.
- Patient Education and Self-Management
- Sick Day Rules: Advise patients to temporarily discontinue SGLT-2 inhibitors during acute illnesses causing dehydration.
- Lifestyle Modifications: Encourage adherence to medication and healthy lifestyle changes to enhance treatment efficacy.
- Applicability and Exceptions
- Applicable Populations: Recommendations apply broadly to adults with CKD, with or without type 2 diabetes.
- Exceptions: Caution or alternative approaches may be necessary for patients:
- Receiving kidney replacement therapy.
- With kidney transplants, polycystic kidney disease, rare kidney diseases.
- With eGFR <20 mL/min/1.73 m² not on replacement therapy.
Conclusion
The guideline underscores the importance of incorporating SGLT-2 inhibitors into the management plan for adults with CKD to improve survival and reduce cardiovascular and kidney-related complications. Clinicians should evaluate each patient’s risk profile and engage in shared decision-making to optimize treatment outcomes.
Summary of the review “Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease”
23 Sep, 2024 | 21:22h | UTCSummary of the review “Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease“
By Prof Børge G Nordestgaard and Anne Langsted
Key Takeaways for Practicing Physicians:
- Significance of Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]:
- Causal Risk Factor: Elevated Lp(a) is a genetically determined causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis.
- Prevalence: Approximately 1 in 5 individuals globally have high Lp(a) levels, increasing their cardiovascular risk.
- Genetic Determinants and Ethnic Variations:
- Genetic Influence: Over 90% genetically determined with minimal lifestyle impact.
- Ethnic Differences:
- Lowest levels: East Asians, Europeans, Southeast Asians.
- Intermediate levels: South Asians, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans.
- Highest levels: Individuals of African descent.
- Sex Differences: Postmenopausal women have about 17% higher Lp(a) levels than men.
- Clinical Measurement and Interpretation:
- When to Measure:
- Once in a Lifetime: Recommended for all individuals to measure Lp(a) at least once.
- High-Risk Patients: Especially important in those with premature ASCVD, familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH), family history of elevated Lp(a) or early ASCVD.
- Stability of Levels: Lp(a) levels are stable after age two and are unaffected by most lifestyle factors.
- Interpreting Levels:
- Elevated Risk Thresholds:
- >30 mg/dL (≥62 nmol/L): Increased risk begins.
- >50 mg/dL (≥105 nmol/L): Clinically significant high risk.
- >90 mg/dL (≥190 nmol/L): Severe risk, comparable to FH.
- Elevated Risk Thresholds:
- Laboratory Considerations:
- Assay Selection: Use isoform-independent assays with standardized calibration.
- Reporting Units: Preferably in nmol/L; however, mg/dL is acceptable with appropriate conversion.
- When to Measure:
- Impact on Patient Care:
- Risk Stratification:
- Independent Risk Factor: High Lp(a) increases ASCVD risk independent of other lipids.
- Reclassification: Can reclassify patients into higher risk categories, influencing management decisions.
- Management Strategies:
- Current Limitations: No approved therapies specifically targeting Lp(a) reduction.
- Aggressive Risk Factor Control:
- LDL Cholesterol: Intensive lowering with high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors.
- PCSK9 Inhibitors: Lower Lp(a) by ~25% and reduce cardiovascular events.
- Lifestyle Modifications: Emphasize smoking cessation, healthy diet, physical activity, and weight management.
- Blood Pressure and Diabetes Management: Optimize control per guidelines.
- LDL Cholesterol: Intensive lowering with high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors.
- Avoid Unproven Therapies: Niacin is not recommended due to side effects and lack of cardiovascular benefit.
- Risk Stratification:
- Familial Hypercholesterolaemia (FH):
- Dual Risk: Elevated Lp(a) often coexists with FH, compounding cardiovascular risk.
- Screening: Measure Lp(a) in all patients with FH and consider cascade screening in families.
- Emerging Therapies:
- Gene-Silencing Drugs:
- Pelacarsen, Olpasiran, Lepodisiran: Lower Lp(a) levels by 80–98%.
- Administration: Subcutaneous injections, varying from monthly to quarterly.
- Small Molecule Inhibitors:
- Muvalaplin: Oral agent reducing Lp(a) by ~65%.
- Clinical Trials:
- Phase 3 Trials Ongoing: Evaluating cardiovascular outcomes with significant Lp(a) reduction.
- Potential Change in Practice: These therapies may soon provide effective options for patients with high Lp(a).
- Gene-Silencing Drugs:
- Practical Recommendations:
- Include Lp(a) in Lipid Panels: Encourage laboratories to add Lp(a) measurements to standard profiles.
- Patient Communication:
- Educate on Risks: Explain the significance of high Lp(a) and its genetic nature.
- Lifestyle Advice: Reinforce the importance of modifiable risk factor control.
- Family Screening: Consider evaluating first-degree relatives due to genetic inheritance patterns.
- Monitoring and Follow-Up:
- Re-measurement: Generally, one measurement suffices unless a significant event (e.g., menopause) occurs.
- Acute Phase Reactant Consideration: Be cautious interpreting levels during acute illness; recheck once stabilized.
Conclusion:
Elevated Lp(a) is a significant and prevalent cardiovascular risk factor that is largely genetic and stable throughout life. While direct treatments are on the horizon, current management focuses on aggressive modification of other cardiovascular risk factors. Measurement of Lp(a) should become a routine part of cardiovascular risk assessment, guiding more personalized and effective patient care.
RCT: Liraglutide for Children Aged 6 to <12 Years with Obesity
14 Sep, 2024 | 19:40h | UTCSummary:
A recent phase 3a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine examined the efficacy and safety of liraglutide in children aged 6 to less than 12 years with obesity. Currently, no medications are approved for treating nonmonogenic, nonsyndromic obesity in this age group, making this study particularly noteworthy.
Methods:
- Participants: 82 children with obesity (BMI ≥95th percentile for age and sex).
- Design: Participants were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide (up to 3.0 mg) or placebo, alongside lifestyle interventions, over a 56-week treatment period, followed by a 26-week follow-up.
- Primary Endpoint: Percentage change in BMI from baseline to week 56.
- Secondary Endpoints: Percentage change in body weight and the proportion achieving a ≥5% reduction in BMI.
Results:
- BMI Reduction: At week 56, the liraglutide group experienced a mean BMI reduction of –5.8%, compared to a +1.6% increase in the placebo group. The estimated difference was –7.4 percentage points (95% CI, –11.6 to –3.2; P<0.001).
- Body Weight: Mean body weight increased by 1.6% in the liraglutide group versus 10.0% in the placebo group, a difference of –8.4 percentage points (95% CI, –13.4 to –3.3; P=0.001).
- BMI Reduction ≥5%: Achieved by 46% of participants in the liraglutide group versus 9% in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio, 6.3; 95% CI, 1.4 to 28.8; P=0.02).
- Adverse Events: Reported in 89% of the liraglutide group and 88% of the placebo group. Gastrointestinal events were more common with liraglutide (80% vs. 54%).
Discussion:
While the study suggests that liraglutide can lead to a statistically significant reduction in BMI among children aged 6 to less than 12 years with obesity, several considerations should temper our enthusiasm:
- Sample Size and Diversity: The trial included only 82 participants, with a predominantly White population (72%), which may limit the generalizability of the findings to broader, more diverse populations.
- Duration and Long-Term Effects: The study spanned 56 weeks, with a 26-week follow-up. The long-term efficacy and safety of liraglutide in this age group remain uncertain, particularly concerning growth, development, and potential rebound weight gain after discontinuation.
- Clinical Significance: Although the reduction in BMI was statistically significant, the clinical significance—especially regarding long-term health outcomes and obesity-related comorbidities—is less clear. Obesity is a chronic and relapsing condition, and a modest reduction in BMI may not translate into substantial health benefits without sustained intervention.
- Adverse Events: The high incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events raises questions about the tolerability of liraglutide in young children. Managing these side effects in a pediatric population can be challenging and may affect adherence.
- Lack of Consensus on BMI Reduction: There’s no international consensus on what constitutes a clinically meaningful BMI reduction in children, complicating the interpretation of the results.
Conclusion:
This trial provides preliminary evidence that liraglutide, combined with lifestyle interventions, may help reduce BMI in children under 12 with obesity. However, given the limitations—including small sample size, short duration, and safety concerns—it’s prudent to approach these findings with cautious optimism. More extensive studies with longer follow-up periods and more diverse populations are necessary to fully assess the long-term efficacy and safety of liraglutide in this vulnerable age group.
Takeaway:
While liraglutide shows promise as an adjunct therapy for pediatric obesity, it’s essential to weigh the benefits against the potential risks and uncertainties. Clinicians should continue to prioritize established lifestyle interventions and consider pharmacotherapy on a case-by-case basis, pending further evidence.
Polled Analysis: Semaglutide Reduces Heart Failure Events in Obese Patients with HFpEF
12 Sep, 2024 | 13:39h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This post-hoc pooled analysis combined data from four randomized, placebo-controlled trials (SELECT, FLOW, STEP-HFpEF, and STEP-HFpEF DM) involving 3,743 participants with heart failure and preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF). The participants had various comorbidities including obesity, diabetes, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. They were randomized to receive either semaglutide or placebo.
Main Findings: Semaglutide significantly reduced the risk of the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure events compared to placebo (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53–0.89, p=0.0045). It also reduced worsening heart failure events alone (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41–0.82, p=0.0019). However, no significant reduction in cardiovascular death alone was observed (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57–1.16, p=0.25). Semaglutide was generally well tolerated, with fewer serious adverse events compared to placebo.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest semaglutide may be an effective therapy to reduce heart failure-related events in obese patients with HFpEF. Although semaglutide did not reduce cardiovascular death, its ability to lower the risk of heart failure hospitalizations makes it a potential therapeutic option for managing HFpEF in this population, a condition with limited treatment choices.
RCT: Once-Weekly Insulin Efsitora Non-Inferior to Insulin Degludec for HbA1c Control but Increases Hypoglycemia in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes
12 Sep, 2024 | 13:06h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This 52-week, randomized, open-label non-inferiority trial included 692 adults with type 1 diabetes from 82 global sites. Participants were randomly assigned to receive once-weekly insulin efsitora (n=343) or once-daily insulin degludec (n=349), both in combination with insulin lispro. The primary objective was to assess the change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26, with a non-inferiority margin of 0.4%.
Main Findings: HbA1c reduction was similar between the groups at 26 weeks (–0.51% for efsitora vs. –0.56% for degludec; p=0.43). However, participants on efsitora experienced higher rates of level 2 or 3 hypoglycemia (14.03 vs. 11.59 events per patient year, p=0.016) and a greater incidence of severe hypoglycemia (10% for efsitora vs. 3% for degludec). Overall, the safety profile was similar, with no treatment-related deaths.
Implications for Practice: Once-weekly insulin efsitora offers comparable glycemic control to daily degludec, but its association with increased hypoglycemia, especially during dose titration, indicates that closer monitoring and optimization are necessary. This treatment could reduce the burden of daily injections, but its hypoglycemia risks must be managed carefully.
Updated ESC Hypertension Guidelines 2024: Intensified Blood Pressure Targets and New Categories – Eur Heart J
31 Aug, 2024 | 19:54h | UTCIntroduction:
The 2024 ESC Guidelines for managing elevated blood pressure (BP) and hypertension were developed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and endorsed by the European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) and the European Stroke Organisation (ESO). These guidelines introduce significant updates to BP management, including more intensive treatment targets and the introduction of a new category for “Elevated BP.”
Key Points:
1 – New Intensive BP Target: For most patients receiving BP-lowering medication, the guidelines now recommend a systolic BP treatment target range of 120-129 mmHg. This marks a significant shift from previous guidelines, which suggested a less aggressive initial target.
2 – New ‘Elevated BP’ Category: The guidelines introduce a new category, “Elevated BP,” defined as a systolic BP of 120-139 mmHg and/or diastolic BP of 70-89 mmHg. This aims to identify more patients at risk of cardiovascular events, such as heart attacks and strokes, before they meet the traditional threshold for hypertension.
3 – Pragmatic BP Management: For patients who cannot tolerate the intensive BP target, the guidelines recommend aiming for a BP that is “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA), particularly in frail or older individuals.
4 – Lifestyle Modifications: The guidelines emphasize lifestyle interventions, including dietary changes like potassium supplementation and new exercise recommendations, as first-line strategies for managing BP.
5 – Renal Denervation: For the first time, the guidelines include recommendations on the use of renal denervation—a procedure for patients with resistant hypertension that has not responded to standard treatments. This is not recommended as a first-line treatment but may be considered in specific high-risk cases.
Conclusion:
These new guidelines represent a major update in the management of hypertension, particularly in promoting more aggressive BP targets to reduce cardiovascular risks. The inclusion of a new BP category and recommendations for renal denervation highlight the guidelines’ focus on early intervention and advanced treatment options.
RCT: Chelation Fails to Reduce Cardiovascular Events in Post-MI Patients with Diabetes – JAMA
18 Aug, 2024 | 19:11h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This double-masked, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial (RCT) included 959 participants aged 50 or older with diabetes and a history of myocardial infarction (MI) from 88 sites in the US and Canada. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 40 weekly infusions of an EDTA-based chelation solution or a placebo infusion. The median follow-up period was 48 months.
Main Findings: The trial found no significant reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with EDTA-based chelation compared to placebo. The primary endpoint, a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina, occurred in 35.6% of the chelation group and 35.7% of the placebo group (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.16; P = .53). However, chelation did reduce median blood lead levels by 61%, from 9.0 μg/L at baseline to 3.5 μg/L by the 40th infusion (P < .001).
Implications for Practice: Despite the significant reduction in blood lead levels, EDTA-based chelation did not reduce cardiovascular events in this high-risk population. These findings suggest that while chelation therapy may lower lead levels, it does not translate into cardiovascular benefits for patients with diabetes and a history of MI, challenging its use in this context.
Cohort Study: Long-Term Multivitamin Use Not Linked to Reduced Mortality in Over 390,000 US Adults
18 Aug, 2024 | 15:07h | UTCtudy Design and Population: This cohort study examined the association between daily multivitamin (MV) use and mortality risk using data from three large prospective cohorts in the United States. The study included 390,124 generally healthy adults with no prior history of cancer or major chronic diseases. Participants were followed for up to 27 years, with baseline MV use assessed between 1993 and 2001 and follow-up assessments from 1998 to 2004.
Main Findings: Daily MV use was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality. In fact, the study found a 4% higher risk of mortality among daily MV users compared to nonusers during the first half of the follow-up period (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07), although this risk was not significant in the second half. The findings were consistent across major causes of death, including heart disease, cancer, and cerebrovascular diseases.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest that long-term MV use does not confer a mortality benefit among generally healthy adults. Healthcare providers may need to reconsider recommending MVs for longevity purposes, as the evidence does not support their efficacy in reducing mortality risk.
CDC Updates Contraceptive Guidelines for 2024 – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
18 Aug, 2024 | 13:51h | UTCIntroduction: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released updated recommendations in the “U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024” and “U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2024.” These guidelines provide healthcare providers with the latest evidence-based recommendations to support patient-centered contraceptive care, aiming to remove unnecessary barriers and ensure equitable access to contraception.
Key Points:
1 – Intrauterine Device (IUD) Placement:
– Routine use of misoprostol is not recommended for IUD placement, except in selected cases. Lidocaine (topical or paracervical block) is newly recommended to reduce patient pain during IUD placement.
2 – Bleeding Irregularities with Implants:
– Hormonal treatments and antifibrinolytic agents may improve bleeding irregularities associated with implant use, although bleeding often recurs after stopping treatment. NSAIDs and selective estrogen-receptor modulators may also be effective, with benefits persisting post-treatment.
3 – Testosterone Use and Pregnancy Risk:
– Testosterone therapy may not prevent pregnancy in transgender, gender-diverse, and nonbinary individuals with a uterus. Contraceptive counseling and services should be offered to those at risk of pregnancy who do not desire it.
4 – Self-Administration of Injectable Contraceptives:
– Subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SC) should be available for self-administration, providing an additional option for those seeking injectable contraception.
5 – Updates in Medical Eligibility Criteria:
– The 2024 guidelines include revised recommendations for patients with chronic kidney disease, updates for those who are breastfeeding, postpartum, or post-abortion, and considerations for individuals with obesity, cardiovascular conditions, and other comorbidities.
6 – Patient-Centered Counseling:
– The guidelines emphasize the importance of providing contraceptive care in a noncoercive manner, supporting the individual’s values, goals, and reproductive autonomy. Healthcare providers are encouraged to recognize and address structural inequities and avoid discrimination in contraceptive counseling.
Conclusion: These updated guidelines from the CDC are designed to support healthcare providers in delivering equitable, patient-centered contraceptive care. By removing unnecessary barriers and providing clear guidance on managing complex contraceptive issues, the recommendations aim to improve access to contraception and support informed, autonomous decision-making among patients.
Guideline Reference: Curtis, K. M., Nguyen, A. T., Tepper, N. K., et al. (2024). U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024. MMWR Recommendations and Reports, 73(3).