Evidence mapPaperPMID 35508320Full record

GuidelineBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2022

PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe for the reduction of cardiovascular events: a clinical practice guideline with risk-stratified recommendations.

Qiukui Hao, Bert Aertgeerts, Gordon Guyatt, Geertruida E Bekkering, Per Olav Vandvik, Safi U Khan, Nicolas Rodondi, Rod Jackson, Jean-Luc Reny, Lubna Al Ansary and 17 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readPractice Guideline
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Guideline in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05976893 (Study on the Composite Endpoint Event of PCSK9 Inhibitor in Patients With Very High Risk of ASCVD and Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

Recommendations it makes

8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE: Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event.
When choosing to add another lipid-lowering drug, the panel suggests ezetimibe in preference to PCSK9 inhibitors.
8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE: Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event.
The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms.
8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE: Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event.
8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE: Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event.
When choosing to add another lipid-lowering drug, the panel suggests ezetimibe in preference to PCSK9 inhibitors.
8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE: Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event.
The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms.
8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE: Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event.
For adults who are intolerant to statins, the panel recommends using a lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but against adding it in those at low cardiovascular risk.
For adults already using statins, the panel suggests adding a second lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but recommends against adding it in people at low cardiovascular risk.
The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms.
The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms.
2 · 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.

NCT05976893 phase4unknown statusstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Study on the Composite Endpoint Event of PCSK9 Inhibitor in Patients With Very High Risk of ASCVD and Cancer

Ran2023Enrolled620Registered outcomes5Posted comparisons0ConditionsASCVD, Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer, Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 InhibitorArmsEvolocumab, Statin
Open the trial in the graph
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Global, regional and national burden of ischemic stroke attributed to high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, 1990-2019:A decomposition analysis and age-period-cohort analysis.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

27 authors at 18 institutions in 11 countries.

Qiukui HaoThe Center of Gerontology and Geriatrics/National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Bert AertgeertsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care and MAGIC Primary Care, Academisch Centrum voor Huisartsgeneeskunde, KU Leuven, Belgium.
Gordon GuyattDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Geertruida E BekkeringDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care and MAGIC Primary Care, Academisch Centrum voor Huisartsgeneeskunde, KU Leuven, Belgium.
Per Olav VandvikClinical Effectiveness Research Group, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Safi U KhanDepartment of Cardiology, Houston Methodist DeBakey Heart & Vascular Center, Houston TX, USA.
Nicolas RodondiInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Rod JacksonSchool of Population Health, Faculty of Medical & Health Sciences, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Jean-Luc RenyGeneral Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Lubna Al AnsaryDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mieke Van DrielPrimary Care Clinical Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Willem J J AssendelftDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Netherlands.
Thomas AgoritsasDivision General Internal Medicine & Division of Clinical Epidemiology, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Frederick SpencerDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Reed A C SiemieniukDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Lyubov LytvynDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Anja Fog HeenDepartment of Medicine, Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Qian ZhaoInternational Medical Center / Ward of General Practice, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Irbaz Bin RiazDepartment of Medicine, Hematology Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Arziona, USA.
Dirk RamaekersKU Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, University of Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Patrick Mba OkwenEffective Basic Services (eBase), Africa, Nkwen Bamenda, Cameroon.
Ye ZhuDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Annabel DawsonUnited Kingdom.
Mersa Caius OvidiuRomania.
Willy VanbrabantUZ Leuven GHB, Belgium.
Sheyu LiDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China nicolas.delvaux@kuleuven.be.
Nicolas DelvauxDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care and MAGIC Primary Care, Academisch Centrum voor Huisartsgeneeskunde, KU Leuven, Belgium nicolas.delvaux@kuleuven.be.
KU Leuven · BEMcMaster University · CAImpact · CAWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CNHouston Methodist · USKing Saud University · SALovisenberg Diakonale Høgskole · NOMayo Clinic in Arizona · USRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BEUniversity Hospital of Bern · CHUniversity Hospital of Geneva · CHUniversity of Auckland · NZUniversity of Bamenda · CMUniversity of Geneva · CHUniversity of Oslo · NOUniversity of Queensland · AUWest China Medical Center of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical questionIn adults with low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels >1.8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE: Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event. However, to achieve these goals in very high risk patients with statins alone is almost impossible, so physicians are increasingly considering other lipid-lowering drugs solely for achieving LDL cholesterol treatment goals rather than for achieving important absolute cardiovascular risk reduction. Most guidelines do not systematically assess the cardiovascular benefits of adding PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe for all risk groups across primary and secondary prevention, nor do they report, in accordance with explicit judgments of assumed patients' values and preferences, absolute benefits and harms and potential treatment burdens. RECOMMENDATIONS: The guideline panel provided mostly weak recommendations, which means we rely on shared decision making when applying these recommendations. For adults already using statins, the panel suggests adding a second lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but recommends against adding it in people at low cardiovascular risk. For adults who are intolerant to statins, the panel recommends using a lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but against adding it in those at low cardiovascular risk. When choosing to add another lipid-lowering drug, the panel suggests ezetimibe in preference to PCSK9 inhibitors. The panel suggests further adding a PCSK9 inhibitor to ezetimibe for adults already taking statins at very high risk and those at very high and high risk who are intolerant to statins. HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED: An international panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists produced these recommendations following standards for trustworthy guidelines and using the GRADE approach. The panel identified four risk groups of patients (low, moderate, high, and very high cardiovascular risk) and primarily applied an individual patient perspective in moving from evidence to recommendations, though societal issues were a secondary consideration. The panel considered the balance of benefits and harms and burdens of starting a PCSK9 inhibitor and/or ezetimibe, making assumptions of adults' average values and preferences. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids accompany multi-layered recommendations, developed in an online authoring and publication platform (www.magicapp.org) that also allows re-use and adaptation. THE EVIDENCE: A linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (14 trials including 83 660 participants) of benefits found that PCSK9 inhibitors or ezetimibe probably reduce myocardial infarctions and stroke in patients with very high and high cardiovascular risk, with no impact on mortality (moderate to high certainty evidence), but not in those with moderate and low cardiovascular risk. PCSK9 inhibitors may have similar effects to ezetimibe on reducing non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke (low certainty evidence). These relative benefits were consistent, but their absolute magnitude varied based on cardiovascular risk in individual patients (for example, for 1000 people treated with PCSK9 inhibitors in addition to statins over five years, benefits ranged from 2 fewer strokes in the lowest risk to 21 fewer in the highest risk). Two systematic reviews on harms found no important adverse events for these drugs (moderate to high certainty evidence). PCSK9 inhibitors require injections that sometimes result in injection site reactions (best estimate 15 more per 1000 in a 5 year timeframe), representing a burden and harm that may matter to patients. The MATCH-IT decision support tool allows you to interact with the evidence and your patients across the alternative options: https://magicevidence.org/match-it/220504dist-lipid-lowering-drugs/. UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS: The stratification into four cardiovascular risk groups means that, to use the recommendations, physicians need to identify their patient's risk first. We therefore suggest, specific to various geographical regions, using some reliable risk calculators that estimate patients' cardiovascular risk based on a mix of known risk factors. The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms.Because of the anticipated large variability of patients' values and preferences, well informed choices warrant shared decision making. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids linked to the recommendations can facilitate such shared decisions. The strong recommendations against adding another drug in people at low cardiovascular risk reflect what the panel considered to be a burden without important benefits. The strong recommendation for adding either ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors in people at high and very high cardiovascular risk reflect a clear benefit.The panel recognised the key uncertainty in the evidence concerning patient values and preferences, namely that what most people consider important reductions in cardiovascular risks, weighed against burdens and harms, remains unclear. Finally, availability and costs will influence decisions when healthcare systems, clinicians, or people consider adding ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors.

Indexed as

Anticholesteremic AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMyocardial InfarctionStrokeAdultCholesterol, LDLEzetimibeHumansNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicPCSK9 InhibitorsProprotein Convertase 9Systematic Reviews as TopicAnticholesteremic AgentsCholesterol, LDLEzetimibeHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsPCSK9 InhibitorsPCSK9 protein, humanProprotein Convertase 9

Identifiers

PMID35508320
OpenAlexW4229027239

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.