The results of the SHARP trial

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The results of the SHARP trial. SHARP: Rationale Risk of vascular events is high among patients with chronic kidney disease Lack of clear association.
Advertisements

The results of the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP)
SHARP trial Study of Heart and Renal Protection : a randomised placebo-controlled trial The e ff ects of lowering LDL cholesterol with simvastatin plus.
Protecting the heart and the kidney: Implications from the SHARP trial Dr. Christina Reith University of Oxford United Kingdom.
LDL and cardiovascular disease: Latest insights
The results of the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP) Colin Baigent, Martin Landray on behalf of the SHARP Investigators Disclosure: SHARP was.
HPS2-THRIVE: Randomized placebo-controlled trial of ER niacin and laropiprant in 25,673 patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Jane Armitage.
HPS2-THRIVE: Randomized placebo-controlled trial of ER niacin and laropiprant in 25,673 patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Jane Armitage.
The efFects of Pharmacological management of lipids in patients with CKD Andrew Monson FY1 18/9/14.
The Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) The LIPID Study Group N Engl J Med 1998;339:
Economic evaluation of MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group University of Oxford UK.
Lancet : doi: /S (08)60104-X Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials Ungroup once.
Diabetes Trials Unit University of Oxford WebSite: Lipids in Diabetes Study.
Who should have statins 18 th March Nonfatal MI CHD death Any major coronary event CABG PTCA Unspecified Any coronary revascularisation.
Management of Elevated Cholesterol in the Primary Prevention Group of Adult Japanese (MEGA) Trial MEGA Trial Presented at The American Heart Association.
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study Increased risk of CHD death due to prior disease: Myocardial infarction or other coronary heart disease; Occlusive.
HPS: Heart Protection Study Purpose To determine whether simvastatin reduces mortality and vascular events in patients with and without coronary disease,
Laura Mucci, Pharm.D. Candidate Mercer University 2012 Preceptor: Dr. Rahimi February 2012.
WOSCOPS: West Of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Purpose To determine whether pravastatin reduces combined incidence of nonfatal MI and death due to.
OVERALL SURVIVAL Adapted from Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group Lancet 1994;344: % of patients alive Simvastatin (n=2221)
SPARCL Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels trial.
SPARCL – Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL) Jim McMorran Coventry GP GP with Specialist Interest in Diabetes and.
Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study CARDS Dr Sachin Kadoo.
4S: Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study Increased risk of CHD death due to prior disease: Myocardial infarction or other coronary heart disease; Occlusive.
Baseline characteristics of HPS participants by prior cerebrovascular disease.
Statins The AURORA Trial Reference Fellstrom BC. Rosuvastatin and cardiovascular events in patients undergoing hemodialysis. N Engl J Med. 2009;360. A.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck.
Summary of “A randomized trial of standard versus intensive blood-pressure control” The SPRINT Research Group, NEJM, DOI: /NEJMoa Downloaded.
Effects of Combination Lipid Therapy on Cardiovascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD)
The ALERT Trial.
US cost-effectiveness of simvastatin in 20,536 people at different levels of vascular disease risk: randomised placebo-controlled trial UK Medical Research.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials Ungroup once.
Title slide.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck
Reducing Adverse Outcomes after ACS in Patients with Diabetes Goals
Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies  The Emerging.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials  Cholesterol.
Economic evaluation of MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study
The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised.
Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration Slide deck
REVEAL: Randomized placebo-controlled trial of anacetrapib in 30,449 patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease Louise Bowman on behalf of the HPS.
Pravastatin in Elderly Individuals at Risk of Vascular Disease
Effects of Anacetrapib on the Incidence of New-Onset Diabetes Mellitus and on Vascular Events in People With Diabetes Louise Bowman & Martin Landray on.
The Anglo Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study
AIM HIGH Niacin plus Statin to prevent vascular events
HDL cholesterol and cardiovascular risk Epidemiological evidence
First time a CETP inhibitor shows reduction of serious CV events
HDL cholesterol and cardiovascular risk
FATS- Familial Atherosclerosis Treatment Study
The ASSERT Study.
Jane Armitage on behalf of the HPS2-THRIVE Collaborative Group
Baseline characteristics of HPS participants by prior diabetes
The Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET)
Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies  The Emerging.
Insights from the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT)
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials  Cholesterol.
The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised.
ELIGIBILITY: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study
Lipid-Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): Results in the Subgroup of Patients with Diabetes Peter S. Sever, Bjorn Dahlöf, Neil Poulter, Hans Wedel, for the.
Volume 375, Issue 9725, Pages (May 2010)
These slides highlight a presentation from a Special Session of the Late-Breaking Clinical Trials sessions during the American College of Cardiology 2005.
Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170 000 participants in 26 randomised trials  Cholesterol.
Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies  The Emerging.
Characteristics of included studies
The results of the SHARP trial
PROSPER: trial design                                                                                                                                                                 
Presentation transcript:

The results of the SHARP trial

SHARP: Rationale Risk of vascular events is high among patients with chronic kidney disease Lack of clear association between cholesterol level and vascular disease risk Pattern of vascular disease is atypical, with a large proportion being non-atherosclerotic Previous trials of LDL-lowering therapy in chronic kidney disease are inconclusive

SHARP: Eligibility History of chronic kidney disease Age ≥40 years not on dialysis: elevated creatinine on 2 occasions Men: ≥1.7 mg/dL (150 µmol/L) Women: ≥1.5 mg/dL (130 µmol/L) on dialysis: haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis Age ≥40 years No history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularisation Uncertainty: LDL-lowering treatment not definitely indicated or contraindicated

SHARP: Main outcomes Key outcome Major atherosclerotic events (coronary death, MI, non-haemorrhagic stroke, or any revascularisation) Subsidiary outcomes Major vascular events (cardiac death, MI, any stroke, or any revascularisation) Components of major atherosclerotic events Main renal outcome End stage renal disease (dialysis or transplant)

SHARP: Randomisation structure Randomised (9438) Simva/Eze (4193) Simvastatin (1054) Placebo (4191) Not re-randomised (168) Randomised (886) Simv/Eze (4650) Placebo (4620) Median follow-up 4.9 years Lost to mortality follow-up 1.5%

SHARP: Baseline characteristics Mean (SD) or % Age 62 (12) Men 63% Systolic BP (mm Hg) 139 (22) Diastolic BP (mm Hg) 79 (13) Body mass index 27 (6) Current smoker 13% Vascular disease 15% Diabetes mellitus 23% Non-dialysis patients only (n=6247) eGFR (mL/min/1.73m2) 27 (13) Albuminuria 80%

Renal Status at randomisation to Simv/Eze vs Placebo Number Percentage eGFR (mL/min/1.73m2) ≥60 88 1% 30-59 2155 36% 15-29 2565 43% <15 1221 20% Mean 27 (SD 13) Dialysis Haemodialysis 2527 27% Peritoneal dialysis 496 5% Subtotal 3023 33%

Lipid Profile at initial randomisation Lipid fractions Not on dialysis On dialysis All patients Number analysed 6149 (96%) 2895 (95%) 9044 (96%) Total cholesterol (mmol/L) 5.0 4.6 4.9 LDL cholesterol (mmol/L) 2.9 2.6 2.8 HDL cholesterol (mmol/L) 1.1 Triglycerides (mmol/L) 2.3 Apolipoprotein B (mg/dL) 99 92 96 Apolipoprotein AI (mg/dL) 136 129 134 Am Heart J 2010; 160:785-794.e10 doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2010.08.012

Simv/Eze produces additional reductions in LDL (mmol/L) and apo B (mg/dL) at 1 year Biochemical parameter Simv vs Placebo Simv/Eze vs Simv Simv/Eze vs Placebo Total cholesterol -0.97 -0.43 -1.39 LDL cholesterol -0.75 -0.34 -1.09 HDL cholesterol 0.05 -0.03 0.02 Non-HDL cholesterol -1.01 -0.40 -1.41 Triglycerides -0.64 0.07 -0.57 Apolipoprotein B -21 -7 -28 Apolipoprotein A1 4.1 -1.0 3.2

Percentage difference Effect of Simv/Eze on lipids (mmol/L) and apolipoproteins (mg/dL) at 2.5 years Biochemical parameter Simv/Eze Placebo Absolute difference Percentage difference p Total cholesterol 3.66 4.73 -1.07 -23% <0.0001 LDL cholesterol 1.80 2.65 -0.85 -32% HDL cholesterol 1.14 1.13 0.02 2% 0.03 Non-HDL cholesterol 2.52 3.60 -1.08 -30% Triglycerides 1.84 2.12 -0.28 -13% Apolipoprotein B 70 93 -23 -24% Apolipoprotein A1 145 143 2 1% 0.003

SHARP: Compliance and LDL reduction at study midpoint Simv/Eze Placebo Compliant 66% 64% Non-study statin 6% 9% Any lipid-lowering 71% ~2/3 compliance LDL reduction of 0.85 mmol/L with 2/3 compliance, equivalent to 1.3 mmol/L with full compliance

SHARP: Major Atherosclerotic Events 25 20 Risk ratio 0.83 (0.74-0.94) Logrank 2P=0.0021 Placebo 15 Proportion suffering event (%) Simv/Eze 10 5 1 2 3 4 5 Years of follow-up

SHARP: Major Atherosclerotic Events Simv/Eze Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI (n=4650) (n=4620) Major coronary event 213 (4.6%) 230 (5.0%) Non-haemorrhagic stroke 131 (2.8%) 174 (3.8%) Any revascularisation procedure 284 (6.1%) 352 (7.6%) Major Atherosclerotic Event 526 (11.3%) 619 (13.4%) 16.6% SE 5.4 reduction (p=0.0021) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better

SHARP: Major Vascular Events Simv/Eze Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI (n=4650) (n=4620) Major coronary event 213 (4.6%) 230 (5.0%) Non-haemorrhagic stroke 131 (2.8%) 174 (3.8%) Any revascularisation procedure 284 (6.1%) 352 (7.6%) 16.6% SE 5.4 Major Atherosclerotic Event 526 (11.3%) 619 (13.4%) reduction (p=0.0021) Other cardiac death 162 (3.5%) 182 (3.9%) Haemorrhagic stroke 45 (1.0%) 37 (0.8%) Other Major Vascular Events 207 (4.5%) 218 (4.7%) 5.5% SE 9.4 reduction (p=0.56) Major Vascular Event 701 (15.1%) 814 (17.6%) 15.4% SE 4.7 reduction (p=0.0012) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better

SHARP: Major Coronary Events Simv/Eze Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI (n=4650) (n=4620) Coronary death 91 (2.0%) 90 (1.9%) Non-fatal myocardial infarction 134 (2.9%) 159 (3.4%) Major Coronary Event 213 (4.6%) 230 (5.0%) 8.1% SE 9.1 reduction (p=0.37) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better

SHARP: Total stroke Risk ratio & 95% CI Event Placebo Simv/Eze Simv/Eze better Placebo better (n=4620) (n=4650) Ischaemic stroke 114 (2.5%) 157 (3.4%) Haemorrhagic stroke 45 (1.0%) 37 (0.8%) Unknown stroke 18 (0.4%) 19 Stroke (any type) 171 (3.7%) 210 (4.5%) 19.2% SE 9.2 reduction (p=0.04) 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.8 0.6

SHARP: Revascularisation Event Eze/simv Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI (n=4650) (n=4620) Coronary artery bypass graft 50 (1.1%) 66 (1.4%) Percutaneous coronary intervention 106 (2.3%) 148 (3.2%) 27.4% SE 9.1 Coronary revascularisation 149 (3.2%) 203 (4.4%) reduction (p=0.0027) Non-coronary intervention/surgery 109 (2.3%) 130 (2.8%) Amputation 75 (1.6%) 76 (1.6%) 9.8% SE 10.6 Non-coronary revascularisation 154 (3.3%) 169 (3.7%) reduction (p=0.36) Any revascularisation 284 (6.1%) 352 (7.6%) 20.6% SE 7.1 reduction (p=0.0036) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better

SHARP: Cause-specific mortality Event Simv/Eze Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI (n=4650) (n=4620) Coronary 91 (2.0%) 90 (1.9%) Other cardiac 162 (3.5%) 182 (3.9%) 7.3% SE 8.4 Subtotal: Any cardiac 253 (5.4%) 272 (5.9%) reduction (p=0.38) Stroke 68 (1.5%) 78 (1.7%) Other vascular 40 (0.9%) 38 (0.8%) 7.3% SE 7.0 Subtotal: any vascular 361 (7.8%) 388 (8.4%) reduction (p=0.30) Cancer 150 (3.2%) 128 (2.8%) Renal 164 (3.5%) 173 (3.7%) Other non-vascular 354 (7.6%) 311 (6.7%) 8.8% SE 5.8 Subtotal: any non-vascular 668 (14.4%) 612 (13.2%) increase (p=0.13) Unknown 113 (2.4%) 115 (2.5%) 2.1% SE 4.2 Total: Any death 1142 (24.6%) 1115 (24.1%) increase (p=0.63) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better

SHARP: Major Atherosclerotic Events by age and sex Simv/Eze Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI (n=4650) (n=4620) Sex Male 376 (12.9%) 445 (15.4%) Female 150 (8.6%) 174 (10.0%) Age at randomisation (years) 40-49 56 (5.8%) 50 (5.5%) 50-59 85 (7.3%) 119 (10.4%) 60-69 163 (13.3%) 171 (13.7%) 70+ 222 (17.1%) 279 (21.2%) Major Atherosclerotic Event 526 (11.3%) 619 (13.4%) 16.6% SE 5.4 reduction (p=0.0021) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better

SHARP: Major Atherosclerotic Events by renal status Simv/Eze Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI (n=4650) (n=4620) Non-dialysis (n=6247) 296 (9.5%) 373 (11.9%) Dialysis (n=3023) 230 (15.0%) 246 (16.5%) 16.6% SE 5.4 Major Atherosclerotic Event 526 (11.3%) 619 (13.4%) reduction (p=0.0021) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better No significant heterogeneity between non-dialysis and dialysis patients (p=0.25)

Comparison of SHARP with other trials: Non-Fatal Myocardial Infarction Events (% pa) Allocated Allocated Risk ratio (RR) per Trial p LDL-C reduction control mmol/L LDL-C reduction LDL-C reduction Control better better 4D 33 (1.91) 35 (2.02) AURORA 91 (1.97) 107 (2.33) ALERT 54 (1.03) 65 (1.24) SHARP 134 (0.71) 159 (0.85) c 3 2 = 0.3 (p = 0.96) Subtotal: 4 renal trials 312 (1.02) 366 (1.21) 0.83 (0.70 - 0.98) 0.03 23 other trials 3307 (0.97) 4386 (1.29) 0.73 (0.70 - 0.76) <0.0001 All trials 3619 (0.97) 4752 (1.29) 0.74 (0.70 - 0.77) Difference between renal and non-renal trials: 1 2.2 (p = 0.14) 99% or 95% CI 0.5 0.75 1 1.5 2

Comparison of SHARP with other trials: Non-Fatal Non-Haemorrhagic Stroke Events (% pa) Allocated Allocated Risk ratio (RR) per Trial p LDL-C reduction control mmol/L LDL-C reduction LDL-C reduction Control better better 4D 31 (1.80) 29 (1.67) AURORA 46 (0.99) 39 (0.84) ALERT 51 (0.97) 40 (0.76) SHARP 97 (0.51) 128 (0.68) c 3 2 = 6.4 (p = 0.09) Subtotal: 4 renal trials 225 (0.73) 236 (0.77) 0.95 (0.77- 1.17) 0.65 23 other trials 1624 (0.48) 2052 (0.61) 0.78 (0.73 - 0.83) <0.0001 All trials 1849 (0.50) 2288 (0.62) 0.79 (0.74 - 0.84) Difference between renal and non-renal trials: 1 3.4 (p = 0.07) 99% or 95% CI 0.5 0.75 1 1.5 2

Comparison of SHARP with other trials: Coronary Revascularisation Events (% pa) Allocated Allocated Risk ratio (RR) per Trial p LDL-C reduction control mmol/L LDL-C reduction LDL-C reduction Control better better 4D 55 (3.31) 72 (4.29) AURORA 55 (1.20) 70 (1.53) ALERT 52 (1.00) 60 (1.15) SHARP 149 (0.79) 203 (1.09) c 3 2 = 0.8 (p = 0.85) Subtotal: 4 renal trials 311 (1.02) 405 (1.34) 0.74 (0.63 - 0.87) 0.0004 23 other trials 5191 (1.54) 6605 (1.99) 0.75 (0.72 - 0.78) <0.0001 All trials 5502 (1.50) 7010 (1.94) 0.75 (0.72 - 0.77) Difference between renal and non-renal trials: 1 0.0 (p = 0.90) 99% or 95% CI 0.5 0.75 1 1.5 2

Comparison of SHARP with other trials: Vascular Death Events (% pa) Allocated Allocated Risk ratio (RR) per Trial p LDL-C reduction control mmol/L LDL-C reduction LDL-C reduction Control better better 4D 151 (8.52) 167 (9.36) AURORA 324 (6.87) 324 (6.86) ALERT 66 (1.23) 73 (1.36) SHARP 361 (1.82) 388 (1.97) c 3 2 = 0.9 (p = 0.82) Subtotal: 4 renal trials 902 (2.85) 952 (3.01) 0.94 (0.85 - 1.04) 0.27 23 other trials 3679 (1.05) 4230 (1.21) 0.85 (0.81 - 0.89) <0.0001 All trials 4581 (1.20) 5182 (1.36) 0.86 (0.83 - 0.90) Difference between renal and non-renal trials: 1 3.8 (p = 0.05) 99% or 95% CI 0.5 0.75 1 1.5 2

SHARP: Renal outcomes Event Simv/Eze Placebo Risk ratio & 95% CI Main renal outcome End-stage renal disease 1057 (33.9%) 1084 (34.6%) 0.97 (0.89-1.05) Tertiary renal outcomes ESRD or death 1477 (47.4%) 1513 (48.3%) 0.97 (0.90-1.04) ESRD or 2 x creatinine 1190 (38.2%) 1257 (40.2%) 0.93 (0.86-1.01) 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 Simv/Eze better Placebo better

SHARP: Cancer incidence 25 20 Risk ratio 0.99 (0.87-1.13) Logrank 2P=0.89 15 Proportion suffering event (%) Simv/Eze 10 Placebo 5 1 2 3 4 5 Years of follow-up

SHARP: Safety Simv/Eze (n=4650) Placebo (n=4620) Myopathy CK >10 x but ≤40 x ULN 17 (0.4%) 16 (0.3%) CK >40 x ULN 4 (0.1%) 5 (0.1%) Hepatitis 21 (0.5%) 18 (0.4%) Persistently elevated ALT/AST >3x ULN 30 (0.6%) 26 (0.6%) Complications of gallstones 85 (1.8%) 76 (1.6%) Other hospitalization for gallstones Pancreatitis without gallstones 12 (0.3%) 27 (0.6%)

SHARP: Major Atherosclerotic Events 5-year benefit per 1000 patients

SHARP: Conclusions No increase in risk of myopathy, liver and biliary disorders, cancer, or nonvascular mortality No substantial effect on kidney disease progression Two-thirds compliance with Simv/Eze reduced the risk of major atherosclerotic events by 17% (consistent with meta-analysis of previous statin trials) Similar proportional reductions in all subgroups (including among dialysis and non-dialysis patients) Full compliance would reduce the risk of major atherosclerotic events by one quarter, avoiding 30–40 events per 1000 treated for 5 years