scholarly journals Do All Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors Have the Same Lipid Profile? Review of Randomised Controlled Trials in Naïve and Switch Scenarios in HIV-Infected Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (16) ◽  
pp. 3456
Author(s):  
Maria Saumoy ◽  
Jose Luís Sanchez-Quesada ◽  
Jordi Ordoñez-Llanos ◽  
Daniel Podzamczer
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Transcriptase ◽  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Strand Transfer ◽  
Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors ◽  
Integrase Strand Transfer Inhibitors ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Randomised Controlled

In this study, we aim to explore the effects on lipids of integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) in naïve and switch randomised controlled trials, and compare them with protease inhibitors (PIs) and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs). We reviewed phase 3/4 randomised clinical trials in the Cochrane and PubMed databases that compare an INSTI with a boosted PI, an NNRTI, or another INSTI plus one or two nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NtRTIs) in naïve patients and switching strategies in HIV-infected patients. We reported the baseline plasma concentration of total cholesterol (TC), low and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c, HDL-c), triglycerides (TG), and the TC/HDL-c ratio, as well as the change at weeks 48 and 96, when available. In naïve HIV-infected patients, raltegravir (RAL) and dolutegravir (DTG) have a more favourable lipid profile compared with NNRTI and boosted PI. Elvitegravir (EVG/c) has a superior lipid profile compared with efavirenz and is similar to that observed with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir except in TG, which increases less with EVG/c. In naïve patients, RAL, DTG, and bictegravir (BIC) produce a similar, slight increase in lipids. In switching trials, the regimen change based on a boosted PI or efavirenz to RAL, DTG, or BIC is associated with clinically significant decreases in lipids that are minor when the change is executed on EVG/c. No changes were observed in lipids by switching trials between INSTIs. In summary, RAL, DTG, and BIC have superior lipid profiles compared with boosted-PI, efavirenz, and EVG/c, in studies conducted in naïve participants, and they are associated with a clinically significant decrease in lipoproteins by switching studies.

scholarly journals Effect of low glycaemic index or load dietary patterns on glycaemic control and cardiometabolic risk factors in diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n1651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Chiavaroli ◽  
Danielle Lee ◽  
Amna Ahmed ◽  
Annette Cheung ◽  
Tauseef A Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Dietary Patterns ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Glycaemic Index ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Apo B ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Objective To inform the update of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes clinical practice guidelines for nutrition therapy. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library searched up to 13 May 2021. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials of three or more weeks investigating the effect of diets with low glycaemic index (GI)/glycaemic load (GL) in diabetes. Outcome and measures The primary outcome was glycated haemoglobin (HbA 1c ). Secondary outcomes included other markers of glycaemic control (fasting glucose, fasting insulin); blood lipids (low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), non-HDL-C, apo B, triglycerides); adiposity (body weight, BMI, waist circumference), blood pressure (systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)), and inflammation (C reactive protein (CRP)). Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled by random effects models. GRADE (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Results 29 trial comparisons were identified in 1617 participants with type 1 and 2 diabetes who were predominantly middle aged, overweight, or obese with moderately controlled type 2 diabetes treated by hyperglycaemia drugs or insulin. Low GI/GL dietary patterns reduced HbA 1c in comparison with higher GI/GL control diets (mean difference −0.31% (95% confidence interval −0.42 to −0.19%), P<0.001; substantial heterogeneity, I 2 =75%, P<0.001). Reductions occurred also in fasting glucose, LDL-C, non-HDL-C, apo B, triglycerides, body weight, BMI, and CRP (P<0.05), but not blood insulin, HDL-C, waist circumference, or blood pressure. A positive dose-response gradient was seen for the difference in GL and HbA 1c and for absolute dietary GI and SBP (P<0.05). The certainty of evidence was high for the reduction in HbA 1c and moderate for most secondary outcomes, with downgrades due mainly to imprecision. Conclusions This synthesis suggests that low GI/GL dietary patterns result in small important improvements in established targets of glycaemic control, blood lipids, adiposity, and inflammation beyond concurrent treatment with hyperglycaemia drugs or insulin, predominantly in adults with moderately controlled type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The available evidence provides a good indication of the likely benefit in this population. Study registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04045938 .

scholarly journals The effect of l-arginine supplementation on lipid profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 122 (9) ◽  
pp. 1021-1032
Author(s):  
Amir Hadi ◽  
Arman Arab ◽  
Sajjad Moradi ◽  
Ana Pantovic ◽  
Cain C. T. Clark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Inconsistency Index ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Arginine Supplementation

AbstractA number of clinical trials have examined the effect of l-arginine on lipid profile in recent years; however, the results remain equivocal. Therefore, the present study aims to summarise and quantitatively examine the available evidence on the effectiveness l-arginine supplementation on lipid parameters using a systematic review and meta-analytic approach. Online databases including PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched up to April 2019 for randomised controlled trials that examined the effect of l-arginine supplementation on lipid profile in adults. Treatment effects were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and the corresponding standard error in concentrations of serum lipids. To estimate the overall effect of l-arginine supplementation, we used the random-effects model. In total, twelve studies were included in the systematic review. The meta-analysis revealed that l-arginine supplementation did not significantly change the concentrations of total cholesterol (WMD: –5·03 mg/dl; 95 % CI –10·78, 0·73; P = 0·08; inconsistency index (I2) = 39·0 %), LDL (WMD: –0·47 mg/dl; 95 % CI –3·61, 2·66; P = 0·76; I2 = 0·0 %), or HDL (WMD: 0·57 mg/dl; 95 % CI –1·28, 2·43; P = 0·54; I2 = 68·4 %). A significant reduction was observed only in serum TAG levels (WMD: –7·04 mg/dl; 95 % CI –11·42, –2·67; P < 0·001; I2 = 0·0 %). This meta-analysis concludes that l-arginine supplementation can significantly reduce blood TAG levels; however, there is insufficient evidence to support its hypocholesterolaemic effects. To draw straightforward conclusions regarding generalised recommendations for l-arginine supplementation for improving lipid profile, there is a need for more well-controlled trials targeting exclusively patients with dyslipidaemia.

Hit or miss: the new cholesterol targets

2020 ◽  
pp. bmjebm-2020-111413
Author(s):  
Robert DuBroff ◽  
Aseem Malhotra ◽  
Michel de Lorgeril
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Drug treatment to reduce cholesterol to new target levels is now recommended in four moderate- to high-risk patient populations: patients who have already sustained a cardiovascular event, adult diabetic patients, individuals with low density lipoprotein cholesterol levels ≥190 mg/dL and individuals with an estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk ≥7.5%. Achieving these cholesterol target levels did not confer any additional benefit in a systematic review of 35 randomised controlled trials. Recommending cholesterol lowering treatment based on estimated cardiovascular risk fails to identify many high-risk patients and may lead to unnecessary treatment of low-risk individuals. The negative results of numerous cholesterol lowering randomised controlled trials call into question the validity of using low density lipoprotein cholesterol as a surrogate target for the prevention of cardiovascular disease.

scholarly journals Soya products and serum lipids: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2015 ◽  
Vol 114 (6) ◽  
pp. 831-843 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oluwabunmi A. Tokede ◽  
Temilola A. Onabanjo ◽  
Alfa Yansane ◽  
J. Michael Gaziano ◽  
Luc Djoussé
Keyword(s):  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hdl Cholesterol ◽  
Cholesterol Concentration ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
Soya Proteins ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractSoya proteins and isoflavones have been reported to exert beneficial effects on the serum lipid profile. More recently, this claim is being challenged. The objective of this study was to comprehensively examine the effects of soya consumption on the lipid profile using published trials. A detailed literature search was conducted via MEDLINE (from 2004 through February 2014), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register) andClinicalTrials.govfor randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of soya on the lipid profile. The primary effect measure was the difference in means of the final measurements between the intervention and control groups. In all, thirty-five studies (fifty comparisons) were included in our analyses. Treatment duration ranged from 4 weeks to 1 year. Intake of soya products resulted in a significant reduction in serum LDL-cholesterol concentration, –4·83 (95 % CI –7·34, –2·31) mg/dl, TAG, –4·92 (95 % CI –7·79, –2·04) mg/dl, and total cholesterol (TC) concentrations, –5·33 (95 % CI –8·35, –2·30) mg/dl. There was also a significant increase in serum HDL-cholesterol concentration, 1·40 (95 % CI 0·58, 2·23) mg/dl. TheI2statistic ranged from 92 to 99 %, indicating significant heterogeneity. LDL reductions were more marked in hypercholesterolaemic patients, –7·47 (95 % CI –11·79, –3·16) mg/dl, than in healthy subjects, –2·96 (95 % CI –5·28, –0·65) mg/dl. LDL reduction was stronger when whole soya products (soya milk, soyabeans and nuts) were used as the test regimen, –11·06 (95 % CI –15·74, –6·37) mg/dl, as opposed to when ‘processed’ soya extracts, –3·17 (95 % CI –5·75, –0·58) mg/dl, were used. These data are consistent with the beneficial effects of soya proteins on serum LDL, HDL, TAG and TC concentrations. The effect was stronger in hypercholesterolaemic subjects. Whole soya foods appeared to be more beneficial than soya supplementation, whereas isoflavone supplementation had no effects on the lipid profile.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document