Key result
Alirocumab lowers LDL-C by ~30% more than ezetimibe in high-risk patients on statins.
Why the study?
The efficacy and safety of alirocumab compared with ezetimibe as add-on therapy to maximally tolerated statins in high cardiovascular risk patients with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolaemia was uncertain.
Does alirocumab reduce LDL-C more than ezetimibe in high cardiovascular risk patients with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolaemia on maximally tolerated statins?
RCT (n=720)
double-blind, double-dummy
randomized
Does alirocumab reduce LDL-C more than ezetimibe in high cardiovascular risk patients with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolaemia on maximally tolerated statins?
Alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks provides significantly greater LDL-C reduction than ezetimibe in high-risk patients on maximal statin therapy, with a similar safety profile.
AIMS: To compare the efficacy [low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering] and safety of alirocumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9, compared with ezetimibe, as add-on therapy to maximally tolerated statin therapy in high cardiovascular risk patients with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolaemia. METHODS AND RESULTS: COMBO II is a double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-group, 104-week study of alirocumab vs. ezetimibe. Patients (n = 720) with high cardiovascular risk and elevated LDL-C despite maximal doses of statins were enrolled (August 2012-May 2013). This pre-specified analysis was conducted after the last patient completed 52 weeks. Patients were randomized to subcutaneous alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks (plus oral placebo) or oral ezetimibe 10 mg daily (plus subcutaneous placebo) on a background of statin therapy. At Week 24, mean ± SE reductions in LDL-C from baseline were 50.6 ± 1.4% for alirocumab vs. 20.7 ± 1.9% for ezetimibe (difference 29.8 ± 2.3%; P < 0.0001); 77.0% of alirocumab and 45.6% of ezetimibe patients achieved LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L (P < 0.0001). Mean achieved LDL-C at Week 24 was 1.3 ± 0.04 mmol/L with alirocumab and 2.1 ± 0.05 mmol/L with ezetimibe, and were maintained to Week 52. Alirocumab was generally well tolerated, with no evidence of an excess of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION: In patients at high cardiovascular risk with inadequately controlled LDL-C, alirocumab achieved significantly greater reductions in LDL-C compared with ezetimibe, with a similar safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01644188.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cannon et al. (2015) conducted an RCT in high cardiovascular risk with inadequately controlled hypercholesterolaemia on maximally tolerated doses of statins (n=720). alirocumab vs. ezetimibe 10 mg daily orally was evaluated on reduction in LDL-C from baseline at Week 24 (MD 29.8, p=< 0.0001). Alirocumab significantly reduced LDL-C from baseline at 24 weeks compared with ezetimibe in high cardiovascular risk patients on maximal statins (50.6% vs 20.7% reduction; P < 0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: