scholarly journals THE PROBLEM OF STATINS DIABETOGENIC POTENTIAL AND WAYS OF ITS SOLUTION (review)

2020 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 147-154
Author(s):  
V. Buheruk ◽  
O. Voloshyna ◽  
O. Dukova ◽  
I. Lysij ◽  
E. Naydionova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Insulin Resistance ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Secondary Prevention ◽  
Statin Therapy ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Cardiovascular Complications ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Primary And Secondary Prevention

Aim. Current review summarized and analysed existing evidence of diabetogenic effect of statins and potential ways to overcome this problem in non-diabetic and diabetic patients. Materials and methods. Systematic literature review included results of experimental and clinical studies, multi-center placebo-controlled trials (JUPITER, ТNТ, IDEAL, SPARCL, METSIM, WOSCOPS, ALLHAT-LLT, PROSPER, etc.), systematic reviews and meta-analyses, current guidelines on statin prescription in high-risk patients and non-diabetic patients.Results of the reviewed clinical trials assessing the effects of long-term statin administration, data from randomized clinical trials and genetic studies provide convincing evidence of small, yet significant increase in absolute risk of new-onset diabetes (1 case of diabetes per 1000 patients per 1 year of treatment), concurrently preventing 5 new cases of cardiovascular disease. Diabetogenic properties are identified as probable class-effect of statins, with risk increased in high-intensity statin therapy. Diabetogenic effects are mediated through reduction in pancreatic β-cell function and impaired insulin resistance. Based on current international guidelines (ESC 2019, ADA 2020), the article highlights that despite modest diabetogenic potential, statins are recommended for primary and secondary prevention in patients with high risk of cardiovascular complications, including patients with diabetes. Conclusions. Statin therapy, especially high-intensity dosing can promote new cases of diabetes, particularly in patients with pre-existing metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance. Despite moderate diabetogenic effect statins are routinely recommended (ESC 2019, ADA 2020) for primary and secondary prevention in patients at high risk of cardiovascular complications, including diabetic patients. Statin therapy should be tailored to patient’s age, sex, concomitant diseases, parameters of lipid and glucose metabolism and presence of additional diabetogenic risk factors. Patients require lifestyle modification to reduce the risk of diabetes.

Dexamethasone in Patients with Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: An Updated Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 495-502
Author(s):  
Stephanie Wintzer ◽  
Josef Georg Heckmann ◽  
Hagen B. Huttner ◽  
Stefan Schwab
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Intracerebral Hemorrhage ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Language Data ◽  
Negative Effect

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a frequent cerebrovascular disorder and still associated with high mortality and poor clinical outcomes. The purpose of this review was to update a 15-year-old former meta-analysis on randomized clinical trials (RCTs) addressing the question of whether ICH patients treated with dexamethasone have better outcomes than controls. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The electronic databases PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane as well as web platforms on current clinical trials were searched for the years 1970–2020 without constriction on language. Data were extracted and outcomes were pooled for conventional and cumulative meta-analysis using a commercial software program (www.Meta-Analysis.com). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Finally, 7 RCTs were identified and analyzed including 248 participants in the dexamethasone groups and 242 in the control groups. Five studies showed a high risk of bias. The overall relative risk (RR) for death was 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99–1.76; <i>p</i> = 0.06) and did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. After exclusion of studies with high risk of bias, the RR for death was 1.37 (95% CI 0.54–3.42; <i>p</i> = 0.51). The RR for poor outcome did not differ significantly between the 2 groups analyzed for all included studies (RR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.47–1; <i>p</i> = 0.05) and after exclusion of studies with high risk of bias (RR = 0.7; 95% CI 0.45–1.08; <i>p</i> = 0.11). The RR for complications did not differ significantly including all studies (RR = 1.29; 95% CI 0.77–2.17; <i>p</i> = 0.34) and after exclusion of studies with high risk of bias (RR = 1.27; 95% CI 0.18–8.89; <i>p</i> = 0.81). The cumulative statistics delivered no other results; however, it pointed out fewer complications over time in the dexamethasone group. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Clear evidence of a beneficial or negative effect of dexamethasone is still lacking. Modern RCTs or observational studies with propensity design are necessary to evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with dexamethasone in patients with ICH.

Abstract 184: Quality Improvement of Statin Therapy Appropriateness in Type 2 Diabetic Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan L Li ◽  
Erika Diaz Narvaez ◽  
Chioma Onyekwelu ◽  
Eleanor M Weinstein ◽  
Robert T Faillace
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Statin Therapy ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Quality Improvement Project ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Medicine Clinic ◽  
Ascvd Risk ◽  
Statin Dose

Objectives: The 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines recommend statin therapy for all diabetic patients between the ages of 40 to 75. The intensity of statin therapy is guided by the 10-year atherosclerosis cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk for a given patient. A quality-improvement project was carried out in the Jacobi Medical Center (JMC) Primary Care Medicine clinic to help clinicians improve statin therapy appropriateness. Interventions included: Intense education to house staff and clinic faculty members beginning in November 2015; Establishment of a pre-visit planning system beginning in August 2016 whereby nursing staff would preview the lipid panel of diabetic patients and alert providers when the LDL was above 100 mg/dl. A retrospective study was carried out to evaluate statin therapy appropriateness before and after this quality improvement project. Methods: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients (age between 40-75) were selected from the JMC Medicine Clinic visits in September 2015 (baseline), May 2016 (after intense education), and September 2016 (after launching the pre-visit planning system). Exclusion criteria included: heart failure, ESRD on hemodialysis, active malignancy, and missing information for ASCVD risk calculation. In patients with LDL > 70 and with no history of CVD, the 10-year ASCVD risk was calculated and statin appropriateness was determined by comparing the actual statin prescription with the statin intensity suggested by the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines. For patients who had an established diagnosis of CVD, statin therapy appropriateness was evaluated by whether the patients were on high-intensity statin therapy. Comparisons among groups were performed using chi-square analysis. Results: The numbers of patients in each of the three months after the exclusions were 371, 346 and 358; among which, 68, 70 and 77 patients had existing CVD respectively. Overall, 38.8% of the patients seen in September 2015 were prescribed an appropriate statin dose; the number rose to 42.2% in May 2016, and further to 50.0% in September 2016 ( p = 0.0086). For primary prevention of CVD, 35.3% of patients received an appropriate statin dose in September 2015; this number improved to 38.5% in May 2016, after intense education; and to 44.2% in September 2016. ( p = 0.089) For secondary prevention of CVD events in patients with clinical CVD, 54.4% of the patients in September 2015 were given high-intensity statins. The high-intensity statin prescription rate was 57.1% in May 2016, and subsequently increased to 70.1% in September 2016. ( p = 0.11) Conclusions: Significant improvement in compliance with the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline-based statin dose for lipid management in the JMC Primary Care Medicine Clinic was found to be associated with the implementation of a quality-improvement project consisting of intense physician education and a pre-visit planning system.

scholarly journals A new approach to the treatment of dyslipidemia

Medicina ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigita Kėvelaitienė ◽  
Rimvydas Šlapikas
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Cardiovascular Diseases ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Statin Therapy ◽  
Cholesterol Absorption ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Intestinal Cholesterol Absorption ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
European Society Of Cardiology

During the last decade, the evidence of beneficial effects of cholesterol lowering in patients with coronary heart disease has been proven in many clinical trials. The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) released 2004 update to the Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines. The new guidelines of European Society of Cardiology announced in 2007 support more intensive LDL-C lowering in patients at high risk of cardiovascular diseases. For patients at the highest risk of cardiovascular diseases (diabetic patients with coronary heart disease), the recommended LDL-C goal is <1.8 mmol/L. In very high-, high-, and moderately high-risk patients, statin therapy should be considered with a treatment targeting an LDL-C reduction of 30– 40%. Clinical studies have shown that statin therapy alone is not always effective, especially in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Furthermore, high doses of statins can increase the possibility of adverse events. The combination of statins with intestinal cholesterol absorption inhibitors is more effective than statin monotherapy in LDL-C lowering and is well tolerated.

Statin dose titration patterns and subsequent major cardiovascular events in very high-risk patients: estimates from Swedish population-based registry data

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 323-331
Author(s):  
Jonas Banefelt ◽  
Maria Lindh ◽  
Maria K Svensson ◽  
Björn Eliasson ◽  
Ming-Hui Tai
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Statin Therapy ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Moderate Intensity ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Population Based Registry ◽  
Very High

Abstract Aims Clinical studies have demonstrated the efficacy of intensive statin therapy in lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and cardiovascular (CV) events. Our objective was to examine statin titration patterns and the association between titration patterns and subsequent CV events in very high-risk patients. Methods and results Using Swedish national population-based registry data, we identified 192 435 patients with very high risk of atherosclerotic CV disease initiated on moderate-intensity statin therapy between 2006 and 2013. Outcomes of interest were titration to high-intensity therapy and the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) composite (myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and CV death) outcome. Cumulative incidence of MACE was assessed by titration status 1-year post-treatment initiation in patients adherent to treatment during the first year, using a 12-week cut-off from initiation to define early, delayed and no up-titration to high-intensity statins. Cox regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). In 144 498 eligible patients, early titration was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE in the subsequent 2 years compared to no up-titration (HR 0.76, P &lt; 0.01]. Delayed up-titration was associated with a smaller reduction (HR 0.88, P = 0.08). The majority of patients did not up-titrate. Conclusion Early up-titration to high-intensity statins was independently associated with lower risk of subsequent CV events compared to no up-titration. Delayed up-titration was not associated with the same benefit. Despite the higher risk associated with no up-titration, few patients at very high CV risk who started treatment on moderate-intensity up-titrated to high intensity, indicating a potential need for more aggressive lipid management of these patients in clinical practice.

scholarly journals How should the ticagrelor be used? The point after the TWILIGHT and THEMIS-PCI studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_L) ◽  
pp. L72-L76
Author(s):  
Laura Gatto ◽  
Francesco Prati
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Heart Attack ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Stable Coronary Artery Disease ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Face ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
History Of ◽  
Artery Disease

Abstract The ticagrelor represents a cornerstone of antiplatelet therapy and its use has been supported, over the years, by several clinical trials that have enrolled thousands of patients; while the PLATO study initially demonstrated its effectiveness in the immediate treatment of acute coronary syndromes, the PEGASUS study documented the benefit of prolonging this treatment beyond 12 months from the heart attack. Over the past few months, two new randomized clinical trials have been published that have seen the use of ticagrelor in different clinical settings. The TWILIGHT study showed that in high-risk patients who completed 3 months of double antiplatelet drugs after coronary angioplasty, ticagrelor monotherapy is associated with a 44% reduction in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding in the absence of an increase in the ischaemic risk. The THEMIS study instead concluded that in the population of diabetics with stable coronary artery disease, but without a history of heart attack or stroke, a strategy that involves the addition of ticagrelor to the acetylsalicylic acid is not advisable as in the face of a benefit in the prevention of events ischaemic an increased risk of bleeding has been observed. Only in the subgroup of diabetic patients with a history of previous angioplasty would a more powerful antithrombotic therapy seem to be advantageous.

scholarly journals Probiotics supplementation and insulin resistance: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bárbara Izabel Moraes Salles ◽  
Débora Cioffi ◽  
Sandra Roberta G. Ferreira
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Insulin Resistance ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Metabolic Diseases ◽  
Healthy Lifestyle ◽  
Intestinal Barrier ◽  
Short Chain Fatty Acids ◽  
Intestinal Barrier Function ◽  
Medical Subject Headings

Abstract Background Research on intestinal microbiota has grown considerably, as well as the interest on probiotics’ supplementation effects on metabolism. Considering high prevalence rates of metabolic diseases linked by insulin resistance, we performed a systematic review of existing literature which addressed the role of probiotics in modulating insulin sensitivity in animals and humans. Methods This systematic review was based on PRISMA guidelines. Searches for original articles published in English from 1990 to January 2020 were made in the electronic database of PubMed from the National Library of Medicine, using Medical Subject Headings to identify longitudinal studies conducted in animals and humans which reported effects of probiotics in a variety of insulin resistance parameters. Results Overall, results from 27 probiotic interventions (Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Clostridium and Akkermansia) indicated significant beneficial changes in insulin resistance measures in animal studies. Additionally, they improved lipid profile, inflammatory and oxidative markers, short-chain fatty acids production and microbiota composition. In seven clinical trials, samples and designs were heterogeneous. Five showed benefits in insulin resistance parameters and in two others no effect was detected. Conclusion Available data regarding the effects of certain probiotics do not guarantee sustained amelioration of insulin resistance in humans. Consistent beneficial results for intestinal barrier function, immune system and metabolism were reported in animals may encourage long-term randomized clinical trials in people with obesity and cardiometabolic risk. Whether supplementation with probiotics in combination with medications and/or prebiotics, associated with a healthy lifestyle, will prove useful to attenuate insulin resistance requires further investigation.

scholarly journals Obesity and Insulin Resistance: An Abridged Molecular Correlation

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. LPI.S10805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Biswajit Mukherjee ◽  
Chowdhury M. Hossain ◽  
Laboni Mondal ◽  
Paramita Paul ◽  
Miltu K. Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Insulin Resistance ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Molecular Mechanisms ◽  
Physiological Role ◽  
Cardiovascular Complications ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Predisposing Factor ◽  
Main Culprit

A relationship between obesity and type 2 diabetes is now generally well accepted. This relationship represents several major health hazards including morbid obesity and cardiovascular complications worldwide. Diabetes mellitus is a complex metabolic disorder characterized by impaired insulin release and insulin resistance. Lipids play an important physiological role in skeletal muscle, heart, liver and pancreas. Deregulation of fatty acid metabolism is the main culprit for developing insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. A predominant predisposing factor to developing obesity, insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes is the permanent elevation of free fatty acids in plasma followed by impaired utilization of lipids by muscle. Diabetes-induced inflammation and oxidative stress have also vital role for development of insulin resistance in diabetic patients. The present review is intended to describe the correlation between lipids, obesity and insulin resistance based on current literature, in order to elucidate involved molecular mechanisms in depth.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document