4.6 Article

PCSK9 inhibitors in clinical practice: Delivering on the promise?

期刊

ATHEROSCLEROSIS
卷 270, 期 -, 页码 205-210

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2017.11.027

关键词

PCSK9 inhibitors; Familial hypercholesterolemia; Statin intolerance; Hypercholesterolemia; Lipid-lowering drugs

资金

  1. Amgen
  2. Sanofi
  3. Chiesi
  4. Regeneron
  5. Merck
  6. Uniqure
  7. Akcea
  8. Pfizer
  9. Amgen Inc.
  10. Eli Lilly

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and aims: In clinical trials, protein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors robustly lowered LDL-cholesterol (LDL-c) and had a favorable tolerability and safety profile. Based on these findings, PCSK9 inhibitors are incorporated in updates of clinical treatment guidelines. However, trial results do not necessarily predict the effectiveness under real-world conditions. The aim of the current study is to determine the efficacy and tolerability of PCSK9 inhibitors in routine outpatient care. Methods: The cohort comprised all patients who were prescribed evolocumab or alirocumab at the outpatient clinic of a large university hospital in the Netherlands. Eligible patients required additional lipid-lowering despite maximally tolerated statin therapy and ezetimibe, or were statin intolerant. Data were systematically collected during routine outpatient visits. Results: The study included 238 patients of whom 67.2% had familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and 42.9% were statin intolerant. The mean LDL-c reduction was 55.0% from a baseline of 4.4 mmol/L. LDL-c goals were attained by 62.3% of patients. Side effects were reported by 15.5% of patients and 2.5% discontinued treatment. No meaningful differences in efficacy or tolerability were observed between patients with FH or statin intolerance, or across treatment regimens. Conclusions: The observed lipid reductions and side effects profile of PCSK9 inhibitors in a routine care setting were comparable to observations in clinical trials. (c) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据