SynthesisAdvances in therapy2020

Efficacy and Safety of PCSK9 Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients at High Cardiovascular Risk: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 32 Randomized Controlled Trials.

Guangyan Mu, Qian Xiang, Shuang Zhou, Zhiyan Liu, Litong Qi, Jie Jiang, Yanjun Gong, Qiufen Xie, Zining Wang, Hanxu Zhang and 2 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in therapy, 2020. The graph read 8 numbers from its abstract, feeding 4 cells of the map: it supports the treatment in 2, finds no clear difference in 1. It also reports 3 associations that do not count as treatment evidence, such as RR 0.86 (0.80 to 0.92) for cardiovascular events. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

8numbers the graph read from it
3cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect
Major cardiovascular events (MACEs)alirocumab vs placebo or active drugsfavours the treatment · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
RR 0.890.83 to 0.95P < 0.001
Both alirocumab (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.95; P < 0.001) and evolocumab (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs), especially in secondary preventive patients (alirocumab group: RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95; P < 0.001; evolocumab group: RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001).
Major cardiovascular events (MACEs)alirocumab vs placebo or active drugs, in secondary preventive patientsfavours the treatment · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
RR 0.880.82 to 0.95P < 0.001
Both alirocumab (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.95; P < 0.001) and evolocumab (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs), especially in secondary preventive patients (alirocumab group: RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95; P < 0.001; evolocumab group: RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001).
All-cause mortalityPCSK9 monoclonal antibodies vs placebo or active drugsno clear difference · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
RR 0.880.72 to 1.07P = 0.182
No significant reduction of all-cause mortality was found (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.72-1.07; P = 0.182).

The authors add: No significant reduction of all-cause mortality was found

Injection site reactionsPCSK9 monoclonal antibodies vs placebo or active drugsfavours the comparator · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
RR 1.541.38 to 1.71P < 0.001
Overall, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies were safe, except for the significantly increased risk of injection site reactions (relative risks (RR) 1.54; 95% CI 1.38-1.71; P < 0.001).
Major cardiovascular events (MACEs)evolocumab vs placebo or active drugsfavours the treatment · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
RR 0.860.80 to 0.92P < 0.001
Both alirocumab (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.95; P < 0.001) and evolocumab (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs), especially in secondary preventive patients (alirocumab group: RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95; P < 0.001; evolocumab group: RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001).

Read, but not usablea number the graph found but could not read as for or against

Cardiovascular eventsan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
RR 0.860.80 to 0.92P < 0.001
Both alirocumab (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.95; P < 0.001) and evolocumab (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs), especially in secondary preventive patients (alirocumab group: RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95; P < 0.001; evolocumab group: RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001).
Absolute change in LDL-C levelsevolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks vs alirocumab 150 mg every 2 weeksan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
Δ -0.36-0.71 to -0.01
A recommended dose of 140 mg of evolocumab every 2 weeks was likely to produce a relatively stronger effect than 150 mg of alirocumab every 2 weeks in terms of the absolute change (weighted mean differences (WMD) - 0.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.71 to - 0.01; P = 0.041) and percent change (WMD - 19.53; 95% CI - 32.02 to - 7.04; P = 0.002) in LDL-C levels.
Percent change in LDL-C levelsevolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks vs alirocumab 150 mg every 2 weeksan association or prognostic statement, not a treatment comparison · ascvd, dyslipidemiafeeds one cell of the map
Δ -19.5-32.0 to -7.04
A recommended dose of 140 mg of evolocumab every 2 weeks was likely to produce a relatively stronger effect than 150 mg of alirocumab every 2 weeks in terms of the absolute change (weighted mean differences (WMD) - 0.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.71 to - 0.01; P = 0.041) and percent change (WMD - 19.53; 95% CI - 32.02 to - 7.04; P = 0.002) in LDL-C levels.

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

PCSK9 inhibitors×cardiovascular events

SupportsOpen on the map →What to test next →

10 readable studies in this cell: 7 favour the treatment, 3 find no difference, 0 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
1.00established · 6 families support, 0 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect
NCT0176463327,564 enrolled · 2013
HR 0.850.79 to 0.92
NCT0166340218,924 enrolled · 2012
HR 0.850.78 to 0.93
NCT0387240112,301 enrolled · 2019
HR 0.750.65 to 0.86

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

PCSK9 inhibitors×all-cause mortality

InconclusiveOpen on the map →What to test next →

3 readable studies in this cell: 3 favour the treatment, 0 find no difference, 0 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
1.00replicated · 2 families support, 0 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect
NCT0176463327,564 enrolled · 2013
HR 0.850.79 to 0.92
NCT0166340218,924 enrolled · 2012
HR 0.860.79 to 0.93
NCT0387240112,301 enrolled · 2019
HR 0.750.65 to 0.86

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

PCSK9 inhibitors×adverse events & safety

SupportsOpen on the map →What to test next →

5 readable studies in this cell: 3 favour the treatment, 2 find no difference, 0 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.00contested · 0 families support, 4 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect
NCT0176463327,564 enrolled · 2013
HR 0.850.79 to 0.92
NCT0166340218,924 enrolled · 2012
HR 0.850.78 to 0.93
NCT04873934400 enrolled · 2021
OR 0.760.43 to 1.35

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

PCSK9 inhibitors×lipids

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

34 readable studies in this cell: 29 favour the treatment, 2 find no difference, 3 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.93established · 26 families support, 2 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
NCT017638662,067 enrolled · 2013
Δ -71.4-77.5 to -65.3
NCT034008001,617 enrolled · 2017
Δ -53.5-56.7 to -50.4
NCT02662569986 enrolled · 2016
Δ -70.3-75.4 to -65.2
NCT04807400892 enrolled · 2021
Least Squares Mean -31.8-37.9 to -25.8
NCT01380730631 enrolled · 2011
Δ -66.1-71.5 to -60.7
NCT01763827615 enrolled · 2013
Δ -57.1-61.1 to -53.1
NCT01984424511 enrolled · 2013
Δ -37.8-42.3 to -33.3
NCT02833844467 enrolled · 2017
Δ -56.9-61.5 to -52.3
NCT04929249450 enrolled · 2021
Δ -53.0-60.0 to -46.0
NCT02739984424 enrolled · 2016
Δ -64.1-68.2 to -60.1
NCT02642159413 enrolled · 2016
Δ -32.5-38.1 to -27.0
NCT01375777411 enrolled · 2011
Δ -47.2-54.5 to -39.9

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

4 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Observational
  17. Inclisiran: How Widely and When Should We Use It?Current atherosclerosis reports · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Guangyan MuDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Qian XiangDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Shuang ZhouDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Zhiyan LiuDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Litong QiDepartment of Cardiology, Peking University First Hospital, 8# Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Jie JiangDepartment of Cardiology, Peking University First Hospital, 8# Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Yanjun GongDepartment of Cardiology, Peking University First Hospital, 8# Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Qiufen XieDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Zining WangDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Hanxu ZhangDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Yong HuoDepartment of Cardiology, Peking University First Hospital, 8# Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
Yimin CuiDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University First Hospital, 6# Dahongluochang Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China. cui.pharm@pkufh.com.
Peking University First Hospital · CNPeking University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

introductionProprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibodies are powerful lipid-lowering drugs which have been shown to improve clinical endpoints in patients with hypercholesterolemia. However, it is not clear how effective PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies are for patients at high cardiovascular risk. Also, whether the effectiveness of PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies varies between different drug types, dosages, race, and indications for PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies remains unclear. Therefore, we used recently published studies to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies by analyzing the lipid profiles, adverse events, and clinical endpoints in patients at high cardiovascular risk.

methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies with placebos or active drugs in patients at high cardiovascular risk were retrieved from electronic databases from their inception until November 2019. Efficacy and safety outcomes included low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and other lipid profiles, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and adverse events of interests, and clinical endpoints. Subgroup analyses based on drug types, dosing, and race were conducted. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 15.1 and RevMan 5.0.

resultsThirty-two RCTs were included in the systematic review, and 25 of them (57,090 individuals) were included in the meta-analysis. PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies significantly improved LDL-C and other lipid profiles (P < 0.05), and no racial differences were found. A recommended dose of 140 mg of evolocumab every 2 weeks was likely to produce a relatively stronger effect than 150 mg of alirocumab every 2 weeks in terms of the absolute change (weighted mean differences (WMD) - 0.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.71 to - 0.01; P = 0.041) and percent change (WMD - 19.53; 95% CI - 32.02 to - 7.04; P = 0.002) in LDL-C levels. Overall, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies were safe, except for the significantly increased risk of injection site reactions (relative risks (RR) 1.54; 95% CI 1.38-1.71; P < 0.001). Both alirocumab (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.95; P < 0.001) and evolocumab (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001) were associated with a lower risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs), especially in secondary preventive patients (alirocumab group: RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.95; P < 0.001; evolocumab group: RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.92; P < 0.001). The reduction in MACEs was observed in White but not in Asian subjects. No significant reduction of all-cause mortality was found (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.72-1.07; P = 0.182).

conclusionBoth alirocumab and evolocumab are well tolerated and can greatly improve lipid profiles for patients at high cardiovascular risk. Both PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies significantly reduce the risk of nonfatal MACEs in patients with previous cardiovascular events, but the effect on all-cause mortality remains uncertain.

Indexed as

Antibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalCardiovascular DiseasesCholesterol, HDLCholesterol, LDLHumansHypercholesterolemiaHypolipidemic AgentsProprotein Convertase 9Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicalirocumabAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalCholesterol, HDLCholesterol, LDLevolocumabHypolipidemic AgentsPCSK9 protein, humanProprotein Convertase 9Adverse eventsCardiologyCardiovascular riskEfficacyMajor cardiovascular eventsPCSK9 monoclonal antibody

Identifiers

PMID32108309
OpenAlexW3006730350

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.