Alirocumab vs usual lipid‐lowering care as add‐on to statin therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes and mixed dyslipidaemia: The ODYSSEY DM‐DYSLIPIDEMIA randomized trial

Aim To compare alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin‐kexin type 9 inhibitor, with usual care (UC) in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and mixed dyslipidaemia not optimally managed by maximally tolerated statins in the ODYSSEY DM‐DYSLIPIDEMIA trial (NCT02642159). Materials and Methods...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diabetes, obesity & metabolism obesity & metabolism, 2018-06, Vol.20 (6), p.1479-1489
Hauptverfasser: Ray, Kausik K., Leiter, Lawrence A., Müller‐Wieland, Dirk, Cariou, Bertrand, Colhoun, Helen M., Henry, Robert R., Tinahones, Francisco J., Bujas‐Bobanovic, Maja, Domenger, Catherine, Letierce, Alexia, Samuel, Rita, Del Prato, Stefano
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aim To compare alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin‐kexin type 9 inhibitor, with usual care (UC) in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and mixed dyslipidaemia not optimally managed by maximally tolerated statins in the ODYSSEY DM‐DYSLIPIDEMIA trial (NCT02642159). Materials and Methods The UC options (no additional lipid‐lowering therapy; fenofibrate; ezetimibe; omega‐3 fatty acid; nicotinic acid) were selected prior to stratified randomization to open‐label alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks (with increase to 150 mg every 2 weeks at week 12 if week 8 non‐HDL cholesterol concentration was ≥2.59 mmol/L [100 mg/dL]) or UC for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change in non‐HDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24. Results The randomized population comprised 413 individuals (intention‐to‐treat population, n = 409; safety population, n = 412). At week 24, the mean non‐HDL cholesterol reductions were superior with alirocumab (−32.5% difference vs UC, 97.5% confidence interval −38.1 to −27.0; P 
ISSN:1462-8902
1463-1326
DOI:10.1111/dom.13257