2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines For The Management of Dyslipidaemias

European Heart Journal (2016) 37, 2999–3058 ESC/EAS GUIDELINES
doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehw272
2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management

of Dyslipidaemias
The Task Force for the Management of Dyslipidaemias of the
European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Atherosclerosis
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Society (EAS)
Developed with the special contribution of the European Assocciation

for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR)
Authors/Task Force Members: Alberico L. Catapano* (Chairperson) (Italy),
Ian Graham* (Chairperson) (Ireland), Guy De Backer (Belgium), Olov Wiklund
(Sweden), M. John Chapman (France), Heinz Drexel (Austria), Arno W. Hoes
(The Netherlands), Catriona S. Jennings (UK), Ulf Landmesser (Germany),
Terje R. Pedersen (Norway), Željko Reiner (Croatia), Gabriele Riccardi (Italy),
Marja-Riita Taskinen (Finland), Lale Tokgozoglu (Turkey), W. M. Monique
Verschuren (The Netherlands), Charalambos Vlachopoulos (Greece), David A. Wood
(UK), Jose Luis Zamorano (Spain)
Additional Contributor: Marie-Therese Cooney (Ireland)
Document Reviewers: Lina Badimon (CPG Review Coordinator) (Spain), Christian Funck-Brentano (CPG Review
Coordinator) (France), Stefan Agewall (Norway), Gonzalo Barón-Esquivias (Spain), Jan Borén (Sweden),
Eric Bruckert (France), Alberto Cordero (Spain), Alberto Corsini (Italy), Pantaleo Giannuzzi (Italy),
* Corresponding authors: Alberico L. Catapano, Department of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Milan, Via Balzaretti 9, 20133 Milan, and Multimedica IRCCS
(MI) Italy. Tel: +39 02 5031 8401, Fax: +39 02 5031 8386, E-mail: alberico.catapano@unimi.it; Ian Graham, Cardiology Department, Hermitage Medical Clinic, Old Lucan Road, Dublin
20, Dublin, Ireland. Tel: +353 1 6459715, Fax: +353 1 6459714, E-mail: ian@grahams.net
ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG) and National Cardiac Society Reviewers can be found in the Appendix.
ESC entities having participated in the development of this document:
Associations: Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA), European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR), European Association of Cardiovas-
cular Imaging (EACVI), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), Heart Failure Association (HFA)
Councils: Council on Cardiovascular Nursing and Allied Professions, Council for Cardiology Practice, Council on Cardiovascular Primary Care, Council on Hypertension
Working Groups: Atherosclerosis & Vascular Biology, Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, Coronary Pathophysiology & Microcirculation, E-cardiology, Myocardial and Pericardial
Diseases, Peripheral Circulation, Thrombosis.
The content of these European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Atherosclerosis Society Guidelines has been published for personal and educational use only. No commercial
use is authorized. No part of the ESC Guidelines may be translated or reproduced in any form without written permission from the ESC. Permission can be obtained upon submission of
a written request to Oxford University Press, the publisher of the European Heart Journal and the party authorized to handle such permissions on behalf of the ESC
(journals.permissions@oup.com).
Disclaimer. The ESC Guidelines represent the views of the ESC and were produced after careful consideration of the scientific and medical knowledge and the evidence available at
the time of their publication. The ESC is not responsible in the event of any contradiction, discrepancy and/or ambiguity between the ESC Guidelines and any other official recom-
mendations or guidelines issued by the relevant public health authorities, in particular in relation to good use of healthcare or therapeutic strategies. Health professionals are encour-
aged to take the ESC Guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgment, as well as in the determination and the implementation of preventive, diagnostic or
therapeutic medical strategies; however, the ESC Guidelines do not override, in any way whatsoever, the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and
accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health condition and in consultation with that patient and, where appropriate and/or necessary, the patient’s caregiver. Nor
do the ESC Guidelines exempt health professionals from taking into full and careful consideration the relevant official updated recommendations or guidelines issued by the competent
public health authorities in order to manage each patient’s case in light of the scientifically accepted data pursuant to their respective ethical and professional obligations. It is also the
health professional’s responsibility to verify the applicable rules and regulations relating to drugs and medical devices at the time of prescription.
& 2016 European Society of Cardiology and European Atherosclerosis Association. All rights reserved. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.
3000 ESC/EAS Guidelines
François Gueyffier (France), Goran Krstačić (Croatia), Maddalena Lettino (Italy), Christos Lionis (Greece),
Gregory Y. H. Lip (UK), Pedro Marques-Vidal (Switzerland), Davor Milicic (Croatia), Juan Pedro-Botet (Spain),
Massimo F. Piepoli (Italy), Angelos G. Rigopoulos (Germany), Frank Ruschitzka (Switzerland), José Tuñón (Spain),
Arnold von Eckardstein (Switzerland), Michal Vrablik (Czech Republic), Thomas W. Weiss (Austria), Bryan Williams
(UK), Stephan Windecker (Switzerland), and Reuven Zimlichman (Israel)
The disclosure forms of the authors and reviewers are available on the ESC website www.escardio.org/guidelines.
Online publish-ahead-of-print 28 August 2016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Keywords dyslipidaemias † cholesterol † triglycerides † low-density lipoproteins † high-density lipoproteins †
apolipoprotein B † lipoprotein remnants † total cardiovascular risk † treatment, lifestyle † treatment,

drugs † treatment, adherence
Table of Contents
List of abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5.4.5 Smoking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Preamble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.5 Dietary supplements and functional foods for the
1. What is cardiovascular disease prevention? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 treatment of dyslipidaemias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
1.1 Definition and rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.5.1 Phytosterols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1.2 Development of the Joint Task Force guidelines . . . . . . 6 5.5.2 Monacolin and red yeast rice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1.3 Cost-effectiveness of prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.5.3 Dietary fibre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2. Total cardiovascular risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.5.4 Soy protein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.1 Total cardiovascular risk estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.5.5 Policosanol and berberine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.1.1 Rationale for assessing total cardiovascular disease 5.5.6 n-3 unsaturated fatty acids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.6 Other features of a healthy diet contributing to
2.1.2 How to use the risk estimation charts . . . . . . . . . . 12 cardiovascular disease prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.2 Risk levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6. Drugs for treatment of hypercholesterolaemia . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.2.1 Risk- based intervention strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1 Statins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3. Evaluation of laboratory lipid and apolipoprotein parameters . 14 6.1.1 Mechanism of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.1 Fasting or non-fasting? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.1.2 Efficacy of cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical
3.2 Intra-individual variation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.3 Lipid and lipoprotein analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.1.3 Adverse effects of statins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.3.1 Total cholesterol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.1.4 Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.2 Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.2 Bile acid sequestrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.3 Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol . . . . . . . . 17 6.2.1 Mechanism of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.4 High-density lipoprotein cholesterol . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.2.2 Efficacy in clinical studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.5 Triglycerides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.2.3 Adverse effects and interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.6 Apolipoproteins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6.3 Cholesterol absorption inhibitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.7 Lipoprotein(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6.3.1 Mechanism of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.3.8 Lipoprotein particle size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6.3.2 Efficacy in clinical studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.3.9 Genotyping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6.3.3 Adverse effects and interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4. Treatment targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 6.4 PCSK9 inhibitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5. Lifestyle modifications to improve the plasma lipid profile . . . 21 6.4.1 Mechanism of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.1 The influence of lifestyle on total cholesterol and low- 6.4.2 Efficacy in clinical studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
density lipoprotein cholesterol levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 6.4.3 Adverse effects and interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.2 The influence of lifestyle on triglyceride levels . . . . . . . 24 6.5 Nicotinic acid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.3 The influence of lifestyle on high-density lipoprotein 6.6 Drug combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
cholesterol levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 6.6.1 Statins and cholesterol absorption inhibitors . . . . . 32
5.4 Lifestyle recommendations to improve the plasma lipid 6.6.2 Statins and bile acid sequestrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 6.6.3 Other combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.4.1 Body weight and physical activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 7. Drugs for treatment of hypertriglyceridaemia . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.4.2 Dietary fat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 7.1 Triglycerides and cardiovascular disease risk . . . . . . . . . 32
5.4.3 Dietary carbohydrate and fibre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 7.2 Definition of hypertriglyceridaemia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.4.4 Alcohol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 7.3 Strategies to control plasma triglycerides . . . . . . . . . . . 33
ESC/EAS Guidelines 3001
7.4 Statins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 9.7 Heart failure and valvular diseases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

7.5 Fibrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 9.7.1 Prevention of incident heart failure in coronary artery
7.5.1 Mechanism of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 disease patients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.5.2 Efficacy in clinical trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 9.7.2 Chronic heart failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.5.3 Adverse effects and interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 9.7.3 Valvular disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.6 Nicotinic acid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 9.8 Autoimmune diseases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.6.1 Mechanism of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 9.9 Chronic kidney disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
7.6.2 Efficacy in clinical trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 9.9.1 Lipoprotein profile in chronic kidney disease . . . . . 45
7.7 n-3 fatty acids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 9.9.2 Evidence for lipid management in patients with
7.7.1 Mechanism of action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 chronic kidney disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.7.2 Efficacy in clinical trials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 9.9.3 Safety of lipid management in patients with chronic
7.7.3 Safety and interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 kidney disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

8. Drugs affecting high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (Table 20) 35 9.9.4 Recommendations of lipid management for patients
8.1 Statins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 with chronic kidney disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
8.2 Fibrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 9.10 Transplantation (Table 31) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
8.3 Nicotinic acid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 9.11 Peripheral arterial disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
8.4 Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors . . . . . . . . . 36 9.11.1 Lower extremities arterial disease . . . . . . . . . . . 47
8.5 Future perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 9.11.2 Carotid artery disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
9. Management of dyslipidaemia in different clinical settings . . . . 36 9.11.3 Retinal vascular disease . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
9.1 Familial dyslipidaemias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 9.11.4 Secondary prevention in patients with aortic
9.1.1 Familial combined hyperlipidaemia . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 abdominal aneurysm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
9.1.2 Familial hypercholesterolaemia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 9.11.5 Renovascular atherosclerosis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
9.1.2.1 Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia . . 36 9.12 Stroke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
9.1.2.2 Homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia . . . 38 9.12.1 Primary prevention of stroke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
9.1.2.3 Familial hypercholesterolaemia in children . . . . 38 9.12.2 Secondary prevention of stroke . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
9.1.3 Familial dysbetalipoproteinaemia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 9.13 Human immunodeficiency virus patients . . . . . . . . . . 49
9.1.4 Genetic causes of hypertriglyceridaemia . . . . . . . . 38 9.14 Mental disorders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
9.1.4.1 Action to prevent acute pancreatitis in severe 10. Monitoring of lipids and enzymes in patients on lipid-lowering
hypertriglyceridaemia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 therapy (Table 36) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
9.1.5 Other genetic disorders of lipoprotein metabolism 11. Strategies to encourage adoption of healthy lifestyle changes
(Table 23) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 and adherence to lipid-modifying therapies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
9.2 Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 11.1 Achieving and adhering to healthy lifestyle changes . . . 51
9.3 Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 11.2 Adhering to medications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
9.3.1 Primary prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 12. To do and not to do messages from the Guidelines . . . . . . 57
9.3.2 Secondary prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 13. Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
9.3.3 Non-statin lipid-lowering drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
9.3.4 Hormone therapy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
9.4 Older persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
9.4.1 Primary prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
9.4.2 Secondary prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
List of abbreviations
9.4.3 Adverse effects, interactions and adherence . . . . . . 41
9.5 Diabetes and metabolic syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 ABI ankle-brachial index
9.5.1 Specific features of dyslipidaemia in insulin resistance ACC American College of Cardiology
and type 2 diabetes (Table 25) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 ACCELERATE Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Es-
9.5.2 Evidence for lipid-lowering therapy . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 ter Transfer Protein Inhibition with Evacetrapib
9.5.2.1 Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol . . . . . . . . 42 in Patients at a High-Risk for Vascular Outcomes
9.5.2.2 Triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein ACCORD Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in
cholesterol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Diabetes
9.5.3 Treatment strategies for subjects with type 2 diabetes ACS acute coronary syndrome
and metabolic syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 AFCAPS/ Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Pre-
9.5.4 Type 1 diabetes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 TEXCAPS vention Study
9.6 Patients with acute coronary syndrome and patients AHA American Heart Association
undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention . . . . . . . . . 43 AIM-HIGH Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic
9.6.1 Specific lipid management issues in acute coronary Syndrome with Low HDL/High Triglycerides:
syndrome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Impact on Global Health Outcomes
9.6.2 Lipid management issues in patients undergoing ALT alanine aminotransferase
percutaneous coronary intervention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Apo apolipoprotein
ART antiretroviral treatment HF heart failure

ASSIGN CV risk estimation model from the Scottish HHS Helsinki Heart Study
Intercollegiate Guidelines Network HIV human immunodeficiency virus
ASTRONOMER Aortic Stenosis Progression Observation: Meas- HMG-CoA hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A
uring Effects of Rosuvastatin HPS Heart Protection Study
AURORA A study to evaluate the Use of Rosuvastatin in HPS2-THRIVE Heart Protection Study 2 – Treatment of HDL
subjects On Regular haemodialysis: an Assess- to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events
ment of survival and cardiovascular events HoFH homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia
BIP Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention study HTG hypertriglyceridaemia
BMI body mass index HR hazard ratio
CABG coronary artery bypass graft surgery hs-CRP high-sensitivity C-reactive protein
CAC coronary artery calcium ICD International Classification of Diseases

CAD coronary artery disease IDEAL Incremental Decrease In End-points Through
CARE Cholesterol and Recurrent Events Aggressive Lipid-lowering Trial
CETP cholesteryl ester transfer protein IDL intermediate-density lipoproteins
CHD coronary heart disease ILLUMINATE Investigation of Lipid Level Management to
CIMT carotid intima-media thickness Understand its Impact in Atherosclerotic Events
CK creatine kinase IMPROVE-IT Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Effi-
CKD chronic kidney disease cacy International Trial
CTT Cholesterol Treatment Trialists JUPITER Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention:
CV cardiovascular an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin
CVD cardiovascular disease KDIGO Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes
CYP cytochrome P450 LAL lysosomal acid lipase
4D Die Deutsche Diabetes Dialyse LCAT lecithin cholesterol acyltransferase
DASH Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension LDL-C low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
DGAT-2 diacylglycerol acyltransferase-2 LDLR low-density lipoprotein receptor
DHA docosahexaenoic acid LEAD lower extremities arterial disease
DLCN Dutch Lipid Clinic Network LIPID Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Is-
EAS European Atherosclerosis Society chemic Disease
EMA European Medicines Agency LPL lipoprotein lipase
EPA eicosapentaenoic acid Lp lipoprotein
ER extended release MetS metabolic syndrome
ESC European Society of Cardiology MI myocardial infarction
ESRD end-stage renal disease MTP microsomal triglyceride transfer protein
EU European Union MUFA monounsaturated fatty acid
FACE-BD Fondamental Academic Centers of Expertise in NICE National Institute for Health and Care
Bipolar Disorders Excellence
FATS Familial Atherosclerosis Treatment Study NNRTI non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor
FCH familial combined hyperlipidaemia NNT number needed to treat
FDA US Food and Drug Administration NPC1L1 Niemann-Pick C1-like protein 1
FDC fixed-dose combination NSTE-ACS non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome
FH familial hypercholesterolaemia NYHA New York Heart Association
FIELD Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in PAD peripheral arterial disease
Diabetes PCI percutaneous coronary intervention
FOCUS Fixed-Dose Combination Drug for Secondary PCSK9 proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9
Cardiovascular Prevention PPAR-a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-a
GFR glomerular filtration rate PROCAM Prospective Cardiovascular Munster Study
GISSI Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravviven- PROSPER Prospective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at
za nell’Infarto Miocardico Risk
GP general practitioner PUFA polyunsaturated fatty acid
GWAS genome-wide association studies RAAS renin–angiotensin –aldosterone system
HAART highly active antiretroviral treatment RCT randomized controlled trial
HATS HDL-Atherosclerosis Treatment Study REACH Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued
HbA1C glycated haemoglobin Health
HeFH heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia REDUCE-IT Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with
HDL-C high-density lipoprotein cholesterol EPA-Intervention Trial
REVEAL Randomized Evaluation of the Effects of Anace- Guidelines represent the official position of the ESC on a given topic
trapib Through Lipid modification and are regularly updated.
RR relative risk Members of this Task Force were selected by the ESC, in-
RYR red yeast rice cluding representation from the European Association for Car-
4S Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study diovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR), and EAS to
SALTIRE Scottish Aortic Stenosis and Lipid Lowering represent professionals involved with the medical care of pa-
Trial, Impact on Regression tients with this pathology. Selected experts in the field undertook
SAGE Studies Assessing Goals in the Elderly a comprehensive review of the published evidence for manage-
SCORE Systemic Coronary Risk Estimation ment (including diagnosis, treatment, prevention and rehabilita-
SEAS Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis tion) of a given condition according to ESC Committee for
SFA saturated fatty acid Practice Guidelines (CPG) policy and approved by the EAS. A
SHARP Study of Heart and Renal Protection critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures was

SLE systemic lupus erythematosus performed, including assessment of the risk – benefit ratio. Esti-
SPARCL Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in mates of expected health outcomes for larger populations
Cholesterol Levels were included, where data exist. The level of evidence and the
STEMI ST elevation myocardial infarction strength of the recommendation of particular management op-
STRENGTH Outcomes Study to Assess STatin Residual Risk tions were weighed and graded according to predefined scales,
Reduction with EpaNova in HiGh CV Risk as outlined in Tables 1 and 2
PatienTs with Hypertriglyceridemia The experts of the writing and reviewing panels provided declar-
TIA transient ischaemic attack ation of interest forms for all relationships that might be perceived as
TC total cholesterol real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. These forms were
T2DM type 2 diabetes mellitus compiled into one file and can be found on the ESC website (http://
TG triglyceride www.escardio.org/guidelines). Any changes in declarations of inter-
TNT Treatment to new targets est that arise during the writing period must be notified to the ESC
TRL triglyceride-rich lipoprotein and EAS and updated. The Task Force received its entire financial
ULN upper limit of normal support from the ESC and EAS without any involvement from the
UMPIRE Use of a Multidrug Pill In Reducing cardiovascu- healthcare industry.
lar Events The ESC CPG supervises and coordinates the preparation of
VA-HIT Veterans Affairs High-density lipoprotein Inter- new Guidelines produced by task forces, expert groups or consen-
vention Trial sus panels. The Committee is also responsible for the endorse-
VLDL very low-density lipoprotein ment process of these Guidelines. The ESC Guidelines undergo
WHO World Health Organization extensive review by the CPG and external experts, and in this
case by EAS-appointed experts. After appropriate revisions the
Guidelines are approved by all the experts involved in the Task
Force. The finalized document is approved by the CPG and EAS
Preamble for publication in the European Heart Journal and in Atheroscler-
Guidelines summarize and evaluate all available evidence on a par- osis. The Guidelines were developed after careful consideration of
ticular issue at the time of the writing process, with the aim of as- the scientific and medical knowledge and the evidence available at
sisting health professionals in selecting the best management the time of their dating.
strategies for an individual patient with a given condition, taking The task of developing ESC and EAS Guidelines covers not
into account the impact on outcome as well as the risk – benefit ra- only integration of the most recent research, but also the cre-
tio of particular diagnostic or therapeutic means. Guidelines and ation of educational tools and implementation programmes for
recommendations should help health professionals to make deci- the recommendations. To implement the guidelines, condensed
sions in their daily practice. However, the final decisions concern- pocket guideline versions, summary slides, booklets with essen-
ing an individual patient must be made by the responsible health tial messages, summary cards for non-specialists and an electron-
professional(s) in consultation with the patient and caregiver as ic version for digital applications (smartphones, etc.) are
appropriate. produced. These versions are abridged and thus, if needed,
A great number of guidelines have been issued in recent years by one should always refer to the full text version, which is freely
the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and by the European Ath- available on the ESC website. The National Societies of the
erosclerosis Society (EAS), as well as by other societies and organisa- ESC are encouraged to endorse, translate and implement all
tions. Because of the impact on clinical practice, quality criteria for the ESC Guidelines. Implementation programmes are needed be-
development of guidelines have been established in order to make all cause it has been shown that the outcome of disease may be fa-
decisions transparent to the user. The recommendations for formu- vourably influenced by the thorough application of clinical
lating and issuing ESC Guidelines can be found on the ESC website recommendations.
(http://www.escardio.org/Guidelines-&-Education/Clinical-Practice- Surveys and registries are needed to verify that real-life daily prac-
Guidelines/Guidelines-development/Writing-ESC-Guidelines). ESC tice is in keeping with what is recommended in the guidelines, thus
Table 1 Classes of recommendations
Classes of Definition Suggested wording to

recommendations use
Class I Evidence and/or general agreement Is recommended/is

that a given treatment or indicated
procedure is beneficial, useful,
effective.
Class II Conflicting evidence and/or a

divergence of opinion about the
usefulness/efficacy of the given
treatment or procedure.

Class IIa Weight of evidence/opinion is in Should be considered
favour of usefulness/efficacy.
Class IIb Usefulness/efficacy is less well May be considered

established by evidence/opinion.
Class III Evidence or general agreement that Is not recommended

the given treatment or procedure
is not useful/effective, and in some
cases may be harmful.
completing the loop between clinical research, writing of guidelines,

disseminating them and implementing them into clinical practice. Table 2 Levels of evidence
Health professionals are encouraged to take the ESC and EAS
Guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgment, Level of Data derived from multiple randomized
evidence A clinical trials or meta-analyses.
as well as in the determination and the implementation of prevent-
ive, diagnostic or therapeutic medical strategies. However, the ESC Level of
Data derived from a single randomized
and EAS Guidelines do not override in any way whatsoever the in- clinical trial or large non-randomized
evidence B
studies.
dividual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate
and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health con- Level of
Consensus of opinion of the experts and/
dition and in consultation with that patient or the patient’s caregiver or small studies, retrospective studies,
evidence C
registries.
where appropriate and/or necessary. It is also the health profes-
sional’s responsibility to verify the rules and regulations applicable
to drugs and devices at the time of prescription.
individual level, in those at moderate to high risk of CVD or patients

1. What is cardiovascular disease with established CVD, by tackling an unhealthy lifestyle (e.g. poor-
prevention? quality diet, physical inactivity, smoking) and by reducing increased
levels of CV risk factors such as increased lipid or blood pressure
1.1 Definition and rationale levels. Prevention is effective in reducing the impact of CVD; the
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) kills .4 million people in Europe elimination of health risk behaviours would make it possible to pre-
each year. It kills more women [2.2 million (55%)] than men [1.8 mil- vent at least 80% of CVD and even 40% of cancers, thus providing
lion (45%)], although cardiovascular (CV) deaths before the age of added value for other chronic diseases.3,4
65 years are more common in men (490 000 vs. 193 000).1 Preven-
tion is defined as a coordinated set of actions, at the population level 1.2 Development of the Joint Task Force
or targeted at an individual, aimed at eradicating, eliminating or min- guidelines
imizing the impact of CV diseases and their related disability. CVD The present guidelines represent an evidence-based consensus of
remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, despite improve- the European Task Force including the European Society of Cardi-
ments in outcomes for CVD. More patients are surviving their first ology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS).
CVD event and are at high risk of recurrences. In addition, the By appraising the current evidence and identifying remaining
prevalence of some risk factors, notably diabetes and obesity, is in- knowledge gaps in managing the prevention of dyslipidaemias, the
creasing. The importance of CVD prevention remains undisputed Task Force formulated recommendations to guide actions to pre-
and should be delivered at different levels: (i) in the general popula- vent CVD in clinical practice by controlling elevated lipid plasma le-
tion by promoting healthy lifestyle behaviour2 and (ii) at the vels. The Task Force followed the quality criteria for development of
guidelines, which can be found at http://www.escardio.org/

Guidelines-&-Education/Clinical-Practice-Guidelines/Guidelines- Table 3 Suggestions for implementing healthy
development/Writing-ESC-Guidelines. Recommendations are lifestyles
graded in classes (Table 1) and in levels of evidence (Table 2).
This document has been developed for healthcare professionals Recommendation Class a Level b Ref c
to facilitate informed communication with individuals about their Measures aimed at implementing
CV risk and the benefits of adopting and sustaining a healthy lifestyle healthy lifestyles are more cost-
IIa B 7
effective than drug interventions at
and of early modification of their CV risk. In addition, the guidelines
the population level.
provide tools for healthcare professionals to promote up-to-date
intervention strategies and integrate these strategies into national a
Class of recommendation.
or regional prevention frameworks and to translate them into local- b
Level of evidence.
ly delivered healthcare services, in line with the recommendations c
Reference(s) supporting recommendations.

of the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Status Report on
Noncommunicable Diseases 2010.5
A lifetime approach to CV risk is considered.6 This implies that
apart from improving lifestyle habits and reducing risk factor levels More than half of the reduction in CV mortality in the last three
in patients with established CVD and in those at increased risk of decades has been attributed to population-level changes in CV risk
developing CVD, healthy people of all ages should be encouraged factors, primarily reductions in cholesterol and blood pressure le-
to adopt or sustain a healthy lifestyle. Healthcare professionals vels and smoking.13 – 16 This favourable trend is partly offset by in-
play an important role in achieving this in their clinical practice. creases in other major risk factors, such as obesity and type 2
diabetes.13 – 16 Ageing of the population also contributes to increas-
ing the absolute number of CVD events.17
1.3 Cost-effectiveness of prevention Several population-level interventions have proven to efficiently
affect lifestyle in individuals, leading to this success: awareness and
Box 1 Key messages knowledge of how lifestyle risk factors lead to CVD increased in re-
cent decades and undoubtedly contributed to the decline in smok-
• Prevention of CVD, either by lifestyle changes or medication, is cost- ing and cholesterol levels. Moreover, legislation promoting a healthy
effective in many scenarios, including population-based approaches
lifestyle, such as reduced salt intake and smoking bans, are cost
and actions directed at high-risk individuals.
effective in preventing CVD.18 – 22
• Cost-effectiveness depends on several factors, including baseline CV
Lowering blood cholesterol levels using statins10,11,23 – 25 and im-
risk, cost of drugs or other interventions, reimbursement procedures,
and uptake of preventive strategies. proving blood pressure control are also cost effective.26,27 Import-
antly, a sizable portion of patients on hypolipidaemic or
CV ¼ cardiovascular; CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease. antihypertensive drug treatment fail to take their treatment ad-
equately or to reach their therapeutic goals,28,29 with clinical and
economic consequences.30 Reinforcing measures aimed at improv-
ing adherence to treatment is cost effective.31,32
In 2009, healthcare costs related to CVD in Europe amounted to It has been suggested that the prescription to the whole popula-
E106 billion, representing 9% of the total healthcare expenditure tion older than 55 years of age of a single pill containing a combin-
across the European Union (EU).8 In the USA, direct annual costs of ation of CV drugs (the polypill) could prevent as much as 80% of
CVD are projected to triple between 2010 and 2030.9 Thus, CVD CVD events33 and be cost effective.34 Part of the cost-effectiveness
represents a considerable economic burden to society, and this ne- of the polypill is due to improvement in adherence to treatment, but
cessitates an effective approach to CVD prevention. There is con- which combination of drugs is most cost effective in which target
sensus in favour of an approach combining strategies to improve population remains to be assessed.35
CV health across the population at large from childhood onwards, Considerable evidence has quantified the relative efforts and
with actions to improve CV health in individuals at increased risk of costs in relation to health impact. The efforts may be depicted in
CVD or with established CVD. the health impact pyramid (Figure 1), where interventions with the
Most studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of prevention of broadest impact on populations represent the base and interven-
CVD combine evidence from clinical research with simulation ap- tions with considerable individual effort are at the top.36
proaches, while data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) The cost-effectiveness of CVD prevention has been calculated in
are relatively scarce.7,10,11 Cost-effectiveness results strongly de- various contexts. According to the WHO, policy and environmental
pend on parameters such as the target population’s age, the overall changes could reduce CVD in all countries for ,US$1 per person
population risk of CVD and the cost of interventions. Hence, results per year, while interventions at the individual level are considerably
obtained in one country might not be valid in another. Furthermore, more expensive.37. A report from the National Institute for Health
changes such as the introduction of generic drugs can considerably and Care Excellence (NICE) estimated that a UK national pro-
change cost-effectiveness.12 In general, lifestyle changes may be gramme reducing population CV risk by 1% would prevent 25 000
more cost effective at the population level than drug treatments CVD cases and generate savings of E40 million per year.38 Coron-
(Table 3). ary artery disease (CAD) mortality rates could be halved by only
his/her total CV risk: the higher the risk, the more intense the action
should be.
Increasing Increasing Many risk assessment systems are available and have been com-
population individual prehensively reviewed, including different Framingham models,41
impact effort needed
Systemic Coronary Risk Estimation (SCORE),42 ASSIGN (CV risk
estimation model from the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Net-
Counseling
and education work),43 Q-Risk,44 Prospective Cardiovascular Munster Study
(PROCAM),45 Reynolds,46,47 CUORE,48 the Pooled Cohort equa-
Clinical tions49 and Globorisk.50 Most guidelines use one of these risk esti-
interventions mation systems.50 – 52
One of the advantages of the SCORE system is that it can be re-
Long-lasting protective calibrated for use in different populations by adjustment for secular

interventions changes in CVD mortality and risk factor prevalences. Calibrated
country-specific versions exist for Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Changing the context to make Germany, Greece, Poland, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland and Sweden,
individuals'default decisions healthy and country-specific electronic versions for Bosnia and Herzegov-
ina, Croatia, Estonia, France, Romania, Russian Federation and Tur-
Socioeconomic factors key can be found at http://www.heartscore.org. Other risk
estimation systems can also be recalibrated, but the process is easier
for mortality than for total events. The European Guidelines on
CVD prevention in clinical practice (version 2012)6 recommend
Figure 1 Health impact pyramid. use of the SCORE system because it is based on large, representa-
tive European cohort datasets.
Risk charts such as SCORE are intended to facilitate risk estima-
modest risk factor reduction,39 and it has been suggested that eight tion in apparently healthy persons with no documented CVD. Pa-
dietary priorities alone could halve CVD death.40 tients who have had a clinical event such as acute coronary
There is consensus that all the levels of the pyramid should be tar- syndrome (ACS) or a stroke are at very high risk of a further event
geted but that emphasis should be put on the second level. Target- and automatically qualify for risk factor evaluation and management
ing lower levels in the health impact pyramid will also address the (Table 6).
socio-economic divide in CV health, which has not diminished des- Simple principles of risk assessment, developed in these guide-
pite major improvements in the treatment of CVD in recent lines, can be defined as follows:
decades.9,10
(1) Persons with
† documented CVD
Box 2 Gaps in evidence † type 1 or type 2 diabetes
† very high levels of individual risk factors
• Most cost-effectiveness studies rely on simulation. More data are † chronic kidney disease (CKD) (refer to section 9.9)
needed, particularly from randomized controlled trials.
are automatically at very high or high total CV risk. No risk estima-
• The effectiveness of the polypill in primary prevention awaits further tion models are needed for them; they all need active management
investigation.
of all risk factors.
(2) For all other people, the use of a risk estimation system such as
SCORE is recommended to estimate total CV risk since many
people have several risk factors that, in combination, may result
in unexpectedly high levels of total CV risk.
2. Total cardiovascular risk
The SCORE system estimates the 10-year cumulative risk of a first
2.1 Total cardiovascular risk estimation fatal atherosclerotic event, whether heart attack, stroke or other
CV risk in the context of these guidelines means the likelihood of a occlusive arterial disease, including sudden cardiac death. Risk esti-
person developing a fatal or non-fatal atherosclerotic CV event over mates have been produced as charts for high- and low-risk regions in
a defined period of time. Europe (Figures 2 and 3). All International Classification of Diseases
(ICD) codes that are related to deaths from vascular origin caused
2.1.1 Rationale for assessing total cardiovascular disease by atherosclerosis are included. Some other systems estimate CAD
risk risk only.
All current guidelines on the prevention of CVD in clinical practice The reasons for retaining a system that estimates fatal as opposed
recommend the assessment of total CAD or CV risk, because ath- to total fatal + non-fatal events are that non-fatal events are de-
erosclerotic CVD is usually the product of a number of risk factors, pendent on definition, developments in diagnostic tests and meth-
and prevention of CVD in a given person should be adapted to ods of ascertainment, all of which can vary, resulting in very
Figure 2 SCORE chart: 10-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) in populations at high CVD risk based on the following risk factors:
age, gender, smoking, systolic blood pressure, and total cholesterol. To convert the risk of fatal CVD to risk of total (fatal + nonfatal) hard CVD,
multiply by 3 in men and 4 in women, and slightly less in old people. Note: the SCORE chart is for use in people without overt CVD, diabetes,
chronic kidney disease, familial hypercholesterolaemia or very high levels of individual risk factors because such people are already at high-risk and
need intensive risk factor advice.
variable multipliers to convert fatal to total events. In addition, total Naturally, the risk of total fatal and non-fatal events is higher, and
event charts, in contrast to those based on mortality, cannot easily clinicians frequently ask for this to be quantified. The SCORE data
be recalibrated to suit different populations. indicate that the total CVD event risk is about three times higher
Figure 3 SCORE chart: 10-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease (CVD) in populations at low CVD risk based on the following risk factors:
age, gender, smoking, systolic blood pressure, and total cholesterol. To convert the risk of fatal CVD to risk of total (fatal + non-fatal) hard CVD,
multiply by 3 in men and 4 in women, and slightly less in old people. Note: the SCORE chart is for use in people without overt CVD, diabetes,
chronic kidney disease, familial hypercholesterolaemia, or very high levels of individual risk factors because such people are already at high-risk and
need intensive risk factor advice.
than the risk of fatal CVD for men, so that a SCORE risk of 5% trans- Clinicians often ask for thresholds to trigger certain interventions.
lates into a CVD risk of 15% of total (fatal + non-fatal) hard CVD This is problematic since risk is a continuum and there is no thres-
endpoints; the multiplier is 4 in women and lower in older hold at which, for example, a drug is automatically indicated. This is
persons. true for all continuous risk factors such as plasma cholesterol or

Figure 4 Relative risk chart for 10-year cardiovascular mortality. Please note that this chart shows RELATIVE not absolute risk. The
risks are RELATIVE to 1 in the bottom left. Thus, a person in the top right hand box has a relative risk that is 12 times higher than a person in the
bottom left.
systolic blood pressure. Therefore, the goals that are proposed in burden of risk factors, the higher the lifetime risk. This approach
this document reflect this concept. produces higher risk figures for younger people because of their
A particular problem relates to young people with high levels of longer exposure times. It is therefore more useful as a way of illus-
risk factors; a low absolute risk may conceal a very high relative risk trating risk than as a guide to treatment because therapeutic trials
requiring intensive lifestyle advice. To motivate young people not to have been based on a fixed follow-up period and not on lifetime
delay changing their unhealthy lifestyle, an estimate of their relative risk and such an approach would likely lead to excessive use of drugs
risk, illustrating that lifestyle changes can reduce relative risk sub- in young people.
stantially, may be helpful (Figure 4). Another problem relates to old people. In some age categories
Another approach to this problem in young people is to use CV the majority, especially of men, will have estimated CV death risks
risk age. The risk age of a person with several CV risk factors is the exceeding the 5 – 10% level, based on age (and gender) only,
age of a person with the same level of risk but with ideal levels of even when other CV risk factor levels are relatively low. This could
risk factors. Thus a high-risk 40-year-old may have a risk age ≥60 lead to excessive use of drugs in the elderly and should be evalu-
years. Risk age is an intuitive and easily understood way of illustrat- ated carefully by the clinician. Recent work has shown that
ing the likely reduction in life expectancy that a young person with b-coefficients are not constant with ageing and that SCORE over-
a low absolute but high relative risk of CVD will be exposed to if estimates risk in older people.54 This article includes illustrative
preventive measures are not adopted. Risk age can be estimated charts in subjects older than 65 years of age. While such subjects
visually by looking at the SCORE chart (as illustrated in Figure 5). benefit from smoking cessation and control of hypertension and
In this chart, the risk age is calculated compared with someone hyperlipidaemia, clinical judgement is required to avoid side effects
with ideal risk factor levels, which have been taken as non- from overmedication.
smoking, total cholesterol of 4 mmol/L (155 mg/dL) and systolic SCORE charts are available for both total cholesterol (TC) and
blood pressure of 120 mmHg. Risk age is also automatically calcu- the TC:high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio. How-
lated as part of the latest revision of HeartScore (http://www ever, subsequent work on the SCORE database has shown that
.HeartScore.org). HDL-C can contribute more to risk estimation if entered as a sep-
Risk age has been shown to be independent of the CV endpoint arate variable as opposed to the ratio. For example, HDL-C modi-
used,51,52 which bypasses the dilemma of whether to use a risk es- fies risk at all levels of risk as estimated from the SCORE
timation system based on CVD mortality or on the more attractive cholesterol charts.55 Furthermore, this effect is seen in both gen-
but less reliable endpoint of total CVD events. Risk age can be used ders and in all age groups, including older women. This is particu-
in any population regardless of baseline risk or secular changes in larly important at levels of risk just below the 5% threshold for
mortality, and therefore avoids the need for recalibration. At pre- intensive risk modification; many of these subjects will qualify for
sent, risk age is recommended for helping to communicate about intensive advice if their HDL-C is low. Charts including HDL-C
risk, especially to younger people with a low absolute risk but a are available on the ESC website (http://www.escardio.org/
high relative risk. It is not currently recommended to base treatment guidelines). The additional impact of HDL-C on risk estimation
decisions on risk age. is illustrated in Figures 6 and 7. In these charts, HDL-C is used
Lifetime risk is another approach to illustrating the impact of risk categorically. The electronic version of SCORE, HeartScore
factors that may be useful in younger people.53 The greater the (http://www.heartscore.org), has been modified to take HDL-C

Figure 5 Illustration of the risk age concept.
into account on a continuous basis, which is even better; we rec- (,225/100 000 in men and ,175/100 000 in women) (http://
ommend its use in order to increase the accuracy of the risk evalu- apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.A865CARDIOVASCULAR?
ation. Overall, HDL-C has a modest but useful effect in refining risk lang=en).
estimation,56 but this may not be universal, as its effect may not be The high-risk charts should be considered in all other countries.
seen in some low-risk populations, particularly with a relatively Of these, some are at very high risk, and the high-risk chart may
high mean HDL-C level.57 underestimate risk in these countries. These are countries with a
CVD mortality rate more than double the cut-off of low-risk coun-
2.1.2 How to use the risk estimation charts tries according to 2012 WHO statistics (http://apps.who.int/
When it comes to European countries and to countries with car- gho/data/node.main.A865CARDIOVASCULAR?lang=en): ≥450/
diology societies that belong to the ESC, the low-risk charts should 100 000 for men or ≥350/100 000 for women (Albania, Algeria,
be considered for use in Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Egypt, Georgia, Kazakhstan,
Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Is- Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, FYR Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Russian
rael, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Norway, Portu- Federation, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine
gal, San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the and Uzbekistan). The remaining high-risk countries are Bosnia and
United Kingdom. While any cut-off point is arbitrary and open Herzegovina, Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Montenegro,
to debate, in these guidelines the cut-off points for calling a country Morocco, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Tunisia and Turkey.
‘low risk’ are based on age-adjusted 2012 CVD mortality rates Note that several countries have undertaken national recalibrations

Figure 6 Risk function without high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) for women in populations at high cardiovascular disease risk, with
examples of the corresponding estimated risk when different levels of HDL-C are included.
Box 3 How to use the risk estimation charts Box 4 Qualifiers
To estimate a person’s 10-year risk of CVD death, find the table for his/ The charts can assist in risk assessment and management but must be
her gender, smoking status, and age. Within the table find the cell nearest interpreted in light of the clinician’s knowledge and experience and of
to the person’s blood pressure and TC. Risk estimates will need to be the patient’s pre-test likelihood of CVD.
adjusted upwards as the person approaches the next age category. Risk will be overestimated in countries with a decreasing CVD mortality,
Risk is initially assessed on the level of TC and systolic blood pressure and underestimated in countries in which mortality is increasing. This is
before treatment, if known. The longer the treatment and the more dealt with by recalibration (www.heartscore.org).
effective it is, the greater the reduction in risk, but in general it will not Risk estimates appear lower in women than in men. However, risk is only
be more than about one-third of the baseline risk. For example, for a deferred in women; the risk of a 60-year-old woman is similar to that of
person on antihypertensive drug treatment in whom the pre-treatment a 50-year-old man. Ultimately more women die from CVD than men.
blood pressure is not known, if the total CV SCORE risk is 6%, then the
pre-treatment total CV risk may have been 9%. Relative risks may be unexpectedly high in young persons, even if absolute
risk levels are low. The relative risk chart (Figure 4 ) and the estimated
Low-risk persons should be offered advice to maintain their low-risk risk age (Figure 5 ) may be helpful in identifying and counselling such
status.While no threshold is universally applicable, the intensity of advice persons.
should increase with increasing risk.
The charts may be used to give some indication of the effects of reducing
risk factors, given that there will be a time lag before the risk reduces
and that the results of randomized controlled trials in general give better
estimates of benefits. In general, those who stop smoking rapidly halve
their cumulative risk.

Figure 7 Risk function without high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) for men in populations at high cardiovascular disease risk, with
examples of the corresponding estimated risk when different levels of HDL-C are included.
Box 5 Factors modifying SCORE risks

to allow for time trends in mortality and risk factor distributions.
Such charts are likely to represent current risk levels better.
Social deprivation–the origin of many of the causes of CVD.
Social deprivation and psychosocial stress set the scene for in-
Obesity and central obesity as measured by the body mass index and creased risk.57 For those at intermediate risk, other factors, includ-
waist circumference, respectively.
ing metabolic factors such as increased apolipoprotein B (apoB),
Physical inactivity. lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), triglycerides (TGs) or high-sensitivity
Psychosocial stress including vital exhaustion. C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) or the presence of albuminuria, may
Family history of premature CVD (men: <55 years; women: <60 years). improve risk classification. Many other biomarkers are also asso-
Autoimmune and other inflammatory disorders. ciated with increased CVD risk, although few of these have been
Major psychiatric disorders.
shown to be associated with appreciable reclassification. Total CV
risk will also be higher than indicated in the SCORE charts in asymp-
Treatment for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection.
tomatic persons with abnormal markers of subclinical atheroscler-
Atrial fibrillation. otic vascular damage detected by coronary artery calcium (CAC),
Left ventricular hypertrophy. ankle-brachial index (ABI), pulse wave velocity or carotid ultrason-
Chronic kidney disease. ography. In studies comparing these markers, CAC had the best re-
Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome. classification ability.58 – 60
Subjects in need of reclassification are those belonging to the
intermediate CV risk group. Therefore the use of methods to detect
therapeutic decisions in older people, with a firm commitment to

Box 6 Key messages implementing lifestyle measures such as smoking cessation in the
first instance.
In apparently healthy persons, CVD risk is most frequently the result
With these considerations one can propose the following levels
of multiple, interacting risk factors. This is the basis for total CV risk
estimation and management. of total CV risk (Table 4).
Risk factor screening including the lipid profile should be considered in
men >40 years old and in women >50 years of age or post-menopausal.
Table 4 Risk categories
A risk estimation system such as SCORE can assist in making logical
management decisions, and may help to avoid both under- or over-
treatment. Very high-risk Subjects with any of the following:
• Documented cardiovascular disease (CVD),
Certain individuals declare themselves to be at high or very high CVD clinical or unequivocal on imaging. Documented
risk without needing risk scoring and require immediate attention to all CVD includes previous myocardial infarction

risk factors. (MI), acute coronary syndrome (ACS),
This is true for patients with documented CVD, diabetes or CKD. coronary revascularisation (percutaneous
coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery
All risk estimation systems are relatively crude and require attention to bypass graft surgery (CABG)) and other arterial
qualifying statements. revascularization procedures, stroke and
Additional factors affecting risk can be accommodated in electronic risk transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and peripheral
estimation systems such as HeartScore (www.heartscore.org). arterial disease (PAD). Unequivocally
documented CVD on imaging is what has been
The total risk approach allows flexibility–if perfection cannot be achieved shown to be strongly predisposed to clinical
with one risk factor, risk can still be reduced by trying harder with the events, such as significant plaque on coronary
others. angiography or carotid ultrasound.
• DM with target organ damage such as
proteinuria or with a major risk factor such
as smoking, hypertension or dyslipidaemia.
• Severe CKD (GFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2).
these markers should be of interest in that group (class IIa, level of • A calculated SCORE ≥10% for 10-year risk of
evidence B). Cut-off values that should be used in considering these fatal CVD.
markers as modifiers of total CV risk are CAC score .400 Agatston High-risk Subjects with:
units, ABI ,0.9 or .1.40, aortic pulse wave velocity of 10 m/s and • Markedly elevated single risk factors, in
the presence of plaques on carotid ultrasonography. Some factors particular cholesterol >8 mmol/L (>310 mg/dL)
(e.g. in familial hypercholesterolaemia) or
such as a high HDL-C or apoA1 and a family history of longevity BP ≥180/110 mmHg.
can also reduce risk. • Most other people with DM (some young
people with type 1 diabetes may be at low or
moderate risk).
2.2 Risk levels • Moderate CKD (GFR 30–59 mL/min/1.73 m2).
A total CV risk estimate is part of a continuum. The cut-off points • A calculated SCORE ≥5% and <10% for 10-year
that are used to define high risk are in part arbitrary and based on risk of fatal CVD.
the risk levels at which benefit is evident in clinical trials. In clinical Moderate-risk SCORE is ≥1% and <5% for 10-year risk of fatal
practice, consideration should be given to practical issues in relation CVD.
to the local healthcare and health insurance systems. Not only Low-risk SCORE <1% for 10-year risk of fatal CVD.
should those at high risk be identified and managed, but those at
moderate risk should also receive professional advice regarding life-
ACS ¼ acute coronary syndrome; AMI ¼ acute myocardial infarction; BP ¼ blood
style changes; in some cases drug therapy will be needed to control pressure; CKD ¼ chronic kidney disease; DM ¼ diabetes mellitus; GFR ¼ glomerular
their plasma lipids. filtration rate; PAD ¼ peripheral artery disease; SCORE ¼ systematic coronary risk
In these subjects we realistically can estimation; TIA ¼ transient ischaemic attack.
– prevent further increase in total CV risk,

– increase awareness of the danger of CV risk,
2.2.1 Risk-based intervention strategies
– improve risk communication and
Table 5 presents suggested intervention strategies as a function of
– promote primary prevention efforts.
total CV risk and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level.
Low-risk people should be given advice to help them maintain this This graded approach is based on evidence from multiple
status. Thus the intensity of preventive actions should be tailored to meta-analyses and individual RCTs, which show a consistent and
the patient’s total CV risk. The strongest driver of total CV risk is graded reduction in CVD risk in response to reductions in TC
age, which can be considered as ‘exposure time’ to risk factors. and LDL-C levels.61 – 71 These trials are consistent in showing that
This raises the issue that most older people in high-risk countries the higher the initial LDL-C level, the greater the absolute reduction
who smoke would be candidates for lipid-lowering drug treatment in risk, while the relative risk reduction remains constant at any given
even if they have satisfactory blood pressure levels. The clinician is baseline LDL-C level. Advice on individual drug treatments is given
strongly recommended to use clinical judgment in making in section 6.
Table 5 Intervention strategies as a function of total cardiovascular risk and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level
Total CV risk LDL-C levels

(SCORE)
<70 mg/dL 70 to <100 mg/dL 100 to <155 mg/dL 155 to <190 mg/dL ≥190 mg/dL
%
<1.8 mmol/L 1.8 to <2.6 mmol/L 2.6 to <4.0 mmol/L 4.0 to <4.9 mmol/L ≥4.9 mmol/L
Lifestyle intervention,
<1 No lipid intervention No lipid intervention No lipid intervention No lipid intervention consider drug if
uncontrolled
Class a /Levelb I/C I/C I/C I/C IIa/A
Lifestyle intervention, Lifestyle intervention, Lifestyle intervention,

≥1 to <5 No lipid intervention No lipid intervention consider drug if consider drug if consider drug if
uncontrolled uncontrolled uncontrolled
Class a /Levelb I/C I/C IIa/A IIa/A I/A
Lifestyle intervention, Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention

≥5 to <10,
No lipid intervention consider drug if and concomitant drug and concomitant drug and concomitant drug
or high-risk
uncontrolled intervention intervention intervention
Class a /Levelb IIa/A IIa/A IIa/A I/A I/A
Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention

≥10 or Lifestyle intervention,
and concomitant drug and concomitant drug and concomitant drug and concomitant drug
very high-risk consider drugc
intervention intervention intervention intervention
Class a /Levelb IIa/A IIa/A I/A I/A I/A
CV ¼ cardiovascular; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; SCORE ¼ Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation.
a
b
Level of evidence.
c
In patients with myocardial infarction, statin therapy should be considered irrespective of total cholesterol levels
Table 6 Recommendations for risk estimation

3. Evaluation of laboratory lipid
and apolipoprotein parameters
Recommendations Class a Level b
Screening for dyslipidaemia is always indicated in subjects with
Total risk estimation using a risk estimation clinical manifestations of CVD, in clinical conditions associated
system such as SCORE is recommended for with increased risk for CVD and whenever risk factor screening
asymptomatic adults >40 years of age without I C
evidence of CVD, diabetes, CKD or familial is considered. In several clinical conditions, dyslipidaemia may
hypercholesterolaemia. contribute to an increased risk of developing CVD. Autoimmune
High and very high-risk individuals can be chronic inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, sys-
detected on the basis of documented CVD, temic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and psoriasis are associated with
diabetes mellitus, moderate to severe renal increased CV risk and dyslipidaemia. Furthermore, in women, dia-
disease, very high levels of individual risk I C
betes or hypertension during pregnancy are risk indicators, and in
factors, familial hypercholesterolaemia or a high
SCORE risk and are a high priority for intensive men, erectile dysfunction. Patients with CKD are also at increased
advice with regard to all risk factors. risk for CVD events and should be screened for dyslipidaemias.
Clinical manifestations of genetic dyslipidaemias, including xan-
CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease; SCORE ¼ Systemic Coronary Risk Estimation. thomas, xanthelasmas and premature arcus cornealis (,45
a
Class of recommendation. years), should be sought because they may signal the presence
b
Level of evidence.
of a severe lipoprotein disorder, especially familial hypercholes-
terolaemia (FH), which is the most frequent monogenic disorder
associated with premature CVD. Antiretroviral therapies may

be associated with accelerated atherosclerosis. Screening for Table 8 Recommendations for lipid analyses for
dyslipidaemias is also indicated in patients with peripheral arterial characterization of dyslipidaemias before treatment
disease (PAD) or in the presence of increased carotid intima-
media thickness (CIMT) or carotid plaques. Recommendations Class a Level b
Screening for dyslipidaemias should be considered in all adult LDL-C has to be used as the primary lipid
I C
men ≥40 years of age and in women ≥50 years of age or post- analysis.
menopausal, particularly in the presence of other risk factors (see It is recommended to analyse HDL-C before
I C
section 2.2). It is also indicated to screen offspring of patients with treatment.
severe dyslipidaemia and to follow them in specialized clinics if af- TG adds information about risk, and is indicated
I C
fected. Similarly, screening for significant lipoprotein disorders of for diagnosis and choice of treatment.
family members of patients with premature CVD is recommended Non-HDL-C is recommended to be calculated,
I C

(see section 10) (Table 7). especially in subjects with high TG.
When available, apoB should be an alternative
IIa C
to non-HDL-C.
Table 7 Recommendations for lipid analyses in Lp(a) should be recommended in selected cases
at high-risk, for reclassification at borderline
cardiovascular disease risk estimation risk, and in subjects with a family history of
IIa C
premature CVD (see Box 7).
Recommendations Class a Level b TC may be considered but is usually not enough
TC is to be used for the estimation of total CV for the characterization of dyslipidaemia before IIb C
I C initiation of treatment.
risk by means of the SCORE system.
LDL-C is recommended to be used as the
primary lipid analysis for screening, risk Apo ¼ apolipoprotein; CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease; HDL-C ¼ high-density
estimation, diagnosis and management. HDL-C lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; Lp ¼
I C lipoprotein; TC ¼ total cholesterol; TG ¼ triglycerides.
is a strong independent risk factor and is a
recommended to be used in the HeartScore Class of recommendation.
b
Level of evidence.
algorithm.
TG adds information on risk and is indicated for
I C
risk estimation.
The direct methods for HDL-C and LDL-C analysis are currently
Non-HDL-C is a strong independent risk factor
and should be considered as a risk marker, I C
widely used and are reliable in patients with normal lipid levels.72
especially in subjects with high TG. However, in hypertriglyceridaemia (HTG) these methods have
ApoB should be considered as an alternative
been found to be unreliable, with variable results and variations be-
risk marker whenever available, especially in IIa C tween the commercially available methods. Therefore, under these
subjects with high TG. conditions, the values obtained with direct methods may be over- or
Lp(a) should be considered in selected cases underestimating the LDL-C and HDL-C levels. The use of
at high-risk, in patients with a family history non-HDL-C may overcome some of these problems, but it is still
IIa C
of premature CVD, and for reclassification in dependent on a correct analysis of HDL-C. An alternative to
subjects with borderline risk.
non-HDL-C may be the analysis of apoB. The analysis of apoB is ac-
The ratio apoB/apoA1 may be considered as an curate, with small variations, and is recommended as an alternative
IIb C
alternative analysis for risk estimation.
when available. Near patient testing is also available using dry chem-
The ratio non-HDL-C/HDL-C may be
istry methods. These methods may give a crude estimate, but should
considered as an alternative but HDL-C used in IIb C
HeartScore gives a better risk estimation. be verified by analysis in an established certified laboratory.
Apo ¼ apolipoprotein; CKD ¼ chronic kidney disease; CVD ¼ cardiovascular

disease; HDL-C ¼ high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ low-density
lipoprotein-cholesterol; Lp ¼ lipoprotein; SCORE ¼ Systemic Coronary Risk 3.1 Fasting or non-fasting?
Estimation; TC ¼ total cholesterol; TG ¼ triglycerides.
a Traditionally blood samples for lipid analysis have been drawn in the
b
Level of evidence. fasting state. As recently shown, fasting and non-fasting sampling give
similar results for TC, LDL-C and HDL-C. TGs are affected by food,
resulting in, on average, an 0.3 mmol/L (27 mg/dL) higher plasma
The suggested analyses used for baseline lipid evaluation are TC, level, depending on the composition and the time frame of the last
TGs, HDL-C, LDL-C calculated with the Friedewald formula unless meal. For risk estimation, non-fasting has a prediction strength simi-
TGs are elevated (.4.5 mmol/L or .400 mg/dL) or with a direct lar to fasting, and non-fasting lipid levels can be used in screening and
method, and non-HDL-C. When available, apoB can be considered in general risk estimation.73 – 76 It should be emphasized, however,
as an equivalent to non-HDL-C. Additional plasma lipid analyses that the risk may be underestimated in patients with diabetes, be-
that may be considered are Lp(a), apoB:apoA1 ratio and non- cause in one study, patients with diabetes had up to 0.6 mmol/L low-
HDL-C:HDL-C ratio (Tables 7 and 8). er LDL-C in non-fasting samples.77 Furthermore, to characterize
severe dyslipidaemias further, and for follow-up of patients with † The Friedewald formula may be unreliable when blood is ob-
HTG, fasting samples are recommended. tained under non-fasting conditions. Under these conditions,
non-HDL-C may be determined.
3.2 Intra-individual variation Despite its limitations, the calculated LDL-C value is still widely
There is a considerable intra-individual variation in plasma lipids. used. With very low LDL-C or in patients with high TGs, the Frie-
Variations of 5–10% for TC and .20% for TGs have been reported, dewald formula may underestimate LDL-C, even giving negative va-
particularly in those patients with HTG. This is to some extent due lues. Direct methods for the determination of LDL-C are available
to analytical variation, but is also due to environmental factors and are now widely used. In general, comparisons between calcu-
such as diet and physical activity, and a seasonal variation, with lated and direct LDL-C show good agreement.81 Several of the lim-
higher levels of TC and HDL-C during the winter.78 itations of the Friedewald formula may be overcome with the direct
methods. However, the direct methods have been found to be un-
3.3. Lipid and lipoprotein analyses reliable in patients with HTG and should be used with caution in

Throughout this section it should be noted that most risk estimation these cases72; also, they may underestimate very low values of
systems and virtually all drug trials are based on TC and LDL-C, and LDL-C. Non-HDL-C or apoB should, under these circumstances,
that clinical benefit from using other measures, including apoB, be considered as an alternative.
non-HDL-C and various ratios, while sometimes logical, has largely 3.3.3 Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol
been based on post hoc analyses. Non-HDL-C has recently been Non-HDL-C is used as an estimation of the total amount of
proposed by locally developed guidelines such as NICE using the atherogenic lipoproteins in plasma (VLDL, VLDL remnants,
QRISK2 risk calculator.79,80 While the role of the alternative ana- intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL), LDL, Lp(a)) and relates
lyses is being established, traditional measures of risk such as TC, well to apoB levels. Non-HDL-C is easily calculated from TC minus
LDL-C and HDL-C remain robust and supported by a major evi- HDL-C. Some recent guidelines recommend non-HDL-C as a bet-
dence base. Furthermore, multiple clinical trials have established be- ter risk indicator than LDL-C.82
yond all reasonable doubt that, at least in high-risk subjects, Several analyses have been published comparing these variables in
reduction of TC or LDL-C is associated with statistically and clinic- risk algorithms, but data are inconclusive. In some reports
ally significant reductions in CV events and mortality. Therefore, TC non-HDL-C is superior, but in others, LDL-C and non-HDL-C
and LDL-C remain the primary targets recommended in these are reported to give similar information.83 – 85
guidelines. However, for several reasons non-HDL-C and apoB Non-HDL-C has been shown to have a strong predictive power,
are recommended as secondary targets. In patients with elevated and although the scientific background from randomized trials is
TG levels, the extra risk carried with TG-rich lipoproteins is taken weaker, there are practical aspects of using non-HDL-C instead of
into account. Furthermore, some of the methodological problems LDL-C in certain situations. Non-HDL-C is simple to calculate and
with the direct methods for HDL-C and LDL-C may be reduced. does not require additional analyses. Both Friedewald’s formula
and direct LDL-C estimations have limitations in subjects with
3.3.1 Total cholesterol HTG and in subjects with very low LDL-C. Non-HDL-C also in-
TC is recommended to be used to estimate total CV risk by means cludes the atherogenic TG-rich lipoproteins (VLDL, IDL and
of the SCORE system. In individual cases, however, TC may be mis- remnants), which is essential considering the recent information
leading. This is especially so in women, who often have higher from genome-wide association studies (GWASs) and Mendelian
HDL-C levels, and in subjects with diabetes or with high TGs, randomization76,86 – 89 supporting TGs and remnant particles as
who often have low HDL-C levels. For an adequate risk analysis, causative factors in atherogenesis.
at least LDL-C and HDL-C should be analysed. Note that assess- Since all trials use LDL-C, we still recommend this as the primary
ment of total risk is not required in patients with familial hyperlipid- treatment target. However, non-HDL-C should be used as a sec-
aemia (including FH) or those with TC .7.5 mmol/L (290 mg/dL). ondary target when the LDL-C goal is reached. Goals for
These patients are always at high risk and should receive special non-HDL-C are easily calculated as LDL-C goals plus 0.8 mmol/L
attention. (30 mg/dL).
3.3.2 Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol

3.3.4 High-density lipoprotein cholesterol
In most clinical studies LDL-C has been calculated using the Friede-
Low HDL-C has been shown to be a strong and independent risk
wald formula.
factor in several studies and is included in most of the risk estimation
Friedewald formula, in mmol/L: LDL-C ¼ TC 2 HDL-C 2 (TG/
tools available, including HeartScore. Very high levels of HDL-C
2.2); in mg/dL: LDL-C ¼ TC 2 HDL-C 2 (TG/5).
have consistently not been found to be associated with atheropro-
The calculated value of LDL-C is based on a number of
tection.90 Based on epidemiological data, levels of HDL-C asso-
assumptions:
ciated with increased risk for men are ,1.0 mmol/L (40 mg/dL)
† Methodological errors may accumulate since the formula neces- and for women are ,1.2 mmol/L (48 mg/dL). The causative role
sitates three separate analyses of TC, TGs and HDL-C. of HDL-C for protection against CVD has been questioned in sev-
† A constant cholesterol:TG ratio in very low-density lipoprotein eral studies utilizing Mendelian randomization.87,89,91,92 Recent stud-
(VLDL) is assumed. With high TG values (.4.5 mmol/L or ies suggest that HDL has a complex role in atherogenesis and that
.400 mg/dL), the formula cannot be used. the presence of dysfunctional HDL may be more relevant to the
development of atherosclerosis than the HDL-C level.93 – 95 Most estimation, but not for diagnosis or as treatment targets. The com-
available assays are of high quality, but the method used should be ponents of the ratio have to be considered separately.
evaluated against the available reference methods and controlled in Apolipoprotein CIII. ApoCIII has been identified as a potentially im-
international quality programmes. It should also be considered that portant new risk factor.104 – 106 ApoCIII is a key regulator of TG me-
HTG might interfere with the direct HDL-C assays.72 tabolism, and high apoCIII plasma levels are associated with high
plasma VLDL and plasma TGs. Furthermore, loss of function muta-
3.3.5 Triglycerides tions are associated with low TGs as well as with reduced risk
TGs are determined by accurate enzymatic techniques. A rare error for CVD.106,107 ApoCIII has been identified as a new potential thera-
occurs in patients with hyperglycerolaemia, where falsely very high peutic target that is currently being studied, but whether it has a role
values for TGs are detected. in clinical practice is unknown and its measurements on a routine
High TG levels are often associated with low HDL-C and high le- basis are not encouraged.108
vels of small dense LDL particles. In a number of meta-analyses, TGs

has been shown to be an independent risk factor.96,97 Furthermore,
recent genetic data support the contention that elevated TG levels 3.3.7 Lipoprotein(a)
are a direct cause of CV disease.76,88 Lp(a) has been found in several studies to be an additional independ-
Recent studies suggest that non-fasting TGs may carry informa- ent risk marker; indeed, genetic data show it to be causal in the patho-
tion regarding remnant lipoproteins associated with increased physiology of atherosclerotic vascular disease and aortic stenosis.109 –
111
risk.76,86,98,99 For general screening and risk evaluation, non-fasting Lp(a) has properties in common with LDL, but it contains a unique
TGs can be used. protein, apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)], that is structurally homologous
to plasminogen. The plasma level of Lp(a) is to a major extent genet-
3.3.6 Apolipoproteins ically determined. Several methods for determination of Lp(a) are
From a technical point of view, there are advantages in the deter- available, but standardization between assays is needed.112 The meas-
mination of apoB and apoA1. Good immunochemical methods urement of Lp(a) is particularly stable over time. Plasma Lp(a) is not
are available and easily run in conventional autoanalysers. The ana- recommended for risk screening in the general population; however,
lytical performance is good and the assays do not require fasting Lp(a) measurement should be systematically considered in people
conditions and are not sensitive to markedly elevated TG levels. with high CVD risk or a strong family history of premature athero-
Apolipoprotein B. ApoB is the major apolipoprotein of the atherothrombotic disease (Box 7).109 The risk is regarded as significant
genic lipoprotein families (VLDL, IDL and LDL). ApoB is a good es- when Lp(a) is above the 80th percentile (50 mg/dL).109 Including
timate of the number of these particles in plasma. This might be of Lp(a) in risk evaluation has been shown to give a correct reclassifica-
special importance in the case of high concentrations of small dense tion113,114 and should be considered in patients on the borderline be-
LDL. Several prospective studies have shown that apoB is equal to tween high and moderate risk.
LDL-C and non-HDL-C in risk prediction. ApoB has not been eval-
uated as a primary treatment target in clinical trials, but several post Box 7 Individuals who should be considered for
hoc analyses of clinical trials suggest that apoB may be not only a risk lipoprotein(a) screening
marker, but also a treatment target.100 A major disadvantage of
apoB is that it is not included in algorithms for calculation of global Individuals with:
risk, and it has not been a predefined treatment target in controlled • Premature CVD
trials. Recent data from a meta-analysis83,90 indicate that apoB does • Familial hypercholesterolaemia
not provide any benefit beyond non-HDL-C or traditional lipid ra- • A family history of premature CVD and/or elevated Lp(a)
tios.101 Likewise, apoB provided no benefit beyond traditional lipid
• Recurrent CVD despite optimal lipid-lowering treatment
markers in people with diabetes in the Fenofibrate Intervention and
Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study.102 In contrast, in another • ≥5% 10-year risk of fatal CVD according to SCORE
meta-analysis of LDL-C, non-HDL-C and apoB, the latter was su-
perior as a marker of CV risk.103 ApoB can be used as a secondary
target, as suggested for non-HDL-C, when analysis for apoB is
Reduction of Lp(a) has been shown with several of the
available.
emerging lipid-lowering drugs. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/
Apolipoprotein A1. ApoA1 is the major protein of HDL-C and pro-
kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and nicotinic acid reduce Lp(a) by
vides a satisfactory estimate of HDL-C concentration. However,
30%.115 – 117 An effect on CVD events targeting Lp(a) has not been
each HDL particle may carry from one to five apoA1 molecules.
shown. Antisense drugs targeting the Lp(a) gene reduce the circulat-
Plasma apoA1 levels ,120 mg/dL for men and ,140 mg/dL for
ing levels of this protein by up to 80%. A reasonable option for pa-
women correspond approximately to what is considered as low
tients at risk with high Lp(a) is an intensified treatment of the
for HDL-C.
modifiable risk factors, including LDL-C.
Apolipoprotein B:apolipoprotein A1 ratio, total cholesterol:high-
density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio and non-high-density lipopro-
tein cholesterol:high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio. Ratios 3.3.8 Lipoprotein particle size
between atherogenic lipoproteins and HDL-C or apoA1 Lipoproteins are heterogeneous, and evidence suggests that
(TC:HDL-C, non-HDL-C:HDL-C, apoB:apoA1) are useful for risk subclasses of LDL and HDL may contribute differently to estimation
of the risk of CVD.118 However, the causal relation of subclasses to recommendations for lipid analyses as treatment targets in the
atherosclerosis is unclear. Determination of small dense LDL may prevention of CVD.
be regarded as an emerging risk factor and may be used in the future,
but it is not currently recommended for risk estimation.119
4. Treatment targets
In both the 2011 EAS/ESC guidelines for the management of
3.3.9 Genotyping dyslipidaemias125 and the American Heart Association/Ameri-
Several genes have been associated with CVD. Large GWASs have can College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) guidelines on the treat-
been published for coronary heart disease (CHD), as well as for as- ment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic CV risk in
sociated biomarkers and risk factors. At present, the use of genotyp- adults,71 the importance of LDL-C lowering to prevent CVD is
ing for risk estimation is not recommended since known risk loci strongly emphasized. The approaches that are proposed to
account for only a small proportion of risk.120 For the diagnosis of reach that LDL-C reduction are different. The task force

specific genetic hyperlipidaemias, genotyping of apolipoprotein E charged with the development of the 2016 EAS/ESC updated
(apoE) and of genes associated with FH [low-density lipoprotein re- guidelines on dyslipidaemias examined this issue in depth. It
ceptors (LDLRs), apoB and PCSK9] should be considered. In FH, a was recognized that the US expert panel confined itself to a
genetic diagnosis is important for family screening, to establish the simple, hard source of evidence coming from results in RCTs.
diagnosis in patients with borderline LDL-C and to improve patient Despite this, there has not been an RCT to support the
adherence to therapy.121 AHA/ACC recommendation for the use of high-dose statins
ApoE is present in three isoforms (apoE2, apoE3 and apoE4). ApoE in all high-risk people regardless of baseline LDL-C level. The
genotyping is used primarily for the diagnosis of dysbetalipoprotei- European Task Force felt that limiting the current knowledge
naemia (apoE2 homozygosity) and is indicated in cases with severe on CV prevention only to results from RCTs reduces the ex-
combined hyperlipidaemia. With increasing knowledge about com- ploitation of the potential that is available for prevention of
mon polymorphisms and lipoproteins, the importance of a polygenic CVD. It is the concordance of the conclusions from many different
background to familial hyperlipidaemias is emphasized.67,122 approaches (from basic science, clinical observations, genetics, epi-
Table 7 lists recommendations for lipid analyses in CVD risk demiology, RCTs, etc.) that contributes to the understanding of the
estimation, Table 8 lists recommendations for lipid analyses for char- causes of CVD and to the potential of prevention. The task force is
acterization of dyslipidaemias before treatment and Table 9 lists aware of the limitations of some of the sources of evidence and
accepts that RCTs have not examined different LDL-C goals sys-
tematically, but felt that it was appropriate to look at the totality
Table 9 Recommendations for lipid analyses as of the evidence. Indeed, the task force accepts that the choice of
treatment targets in the prevention of cardiovascular any given target goal for LDL-C may be open to debate given the
disease continuous nature of the relationship between LDL-C reduction
and reduction in risk. Particular consideration was given to results
Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c from systematic reviews confirming the dose-dependent reduction
LDL-C is recommended as the in CVD with LDL-C lowering; the greater the LDL-C reduction,
I A 64, 68 the greater the CV risk reduction.65,66 The benefits related to
primary target for treatment.
TC should be considered as a LDL-C reduction are not specific for statin therapy.63 No level
treatment target if other analyses IIa A 64, 123 of LDL-C below which benefit ceases or harm occurs has been
are not available. defined.
Non-HDL-C should be considered There is considerable individual variability in the LDL-C re-
IIa B 103
as a secondary treatment target. sponse to dietary and drug treatments,61 which is traditionally
ApoB should be considered as a taken to support a tailored approach to management. Total
secondary treatment target, when IIa B 103, 124 CV risk reduction should be individualized, and this can be
available.
more specific if goals are defined. The use of goals can also
HDL-C is not recommended as a aid patient – doctor communication. It is judged likely that a
III A 92, 93
target for treatment.
goal approach may facilitate adherence to treatment, although
The ratios apoB/apoA1 and this consensus opinion has not been fully tested. For all these
non-HDL-C/HDL-C are not
recommended as targets for
III B 103 reasons the European Task Force retains a goal approach to
treatment. lipid management and treatment goals are defined, tailored
to the total CV risk level. There is also evidence suggesting
Apo ¼ apolipoprotein; HDL-C ¼ high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ that lowering LDL-C beyond the goals that were set in
low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; TC ¼ total cholesterol. the previous EAS/ESC guidelines is associated with fewer
a
b
Class of recommendation. CVD events. 126 Therefore, it seems appropriate to reduce
Level of evidence.
c
Reference(s) supporting recommendations. LDL-C as low as possible, at least in patients at very high
CV risk.
The lipid goals are part of a comprehensive CV risk reduc-

tion strategy, summarized in Table 10. The rationale for the Box 8 Recommendations for treatment goals for
non-lipid targets are given in the 2016 ESC Joint Prevention lowdensity lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) –examples
guidelines.485
Patient A Very high-risk, LDL-C >1.8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) on statin:
the goal is still <1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL).
Patient B High-risk, LDL-C >2.6 mmol/L (>100 mg/dL) on statin: the
goal is still <2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL).
Table 10 Treatment targets and goals for Patient C Very high-risk, LDL-C 1.8–3.5 mmol/L (70–135 mg/dL)
cardiovascular disease prevention not on pharmacological therapy: the goal is at least a
50% reduction.
Smoking No exposure to tobacco in any form. Patient D High-risk, LDL-C 2.6–5.2 mmol/L (100–200 mg/dL)
not on pharmacological therapy: the goal is at least a
Diet Healthy diet low in saturated fat with a focus on whole

50% reduction.
grain products, vegetables, fruit and fish.
Patient E Very high-risk, LDL-C >3.5 mmol/L (135 mg/dL) not in
Physical 2.5–5 h moderately vigorous physical activity per week or
pharmacological therapy: the goal is <1.8 mmol/L
activity 30–60 min most days.
(70 mg/dL).
Body BMI 20–25 kg/m2, waist circumference <94 cm (men) and
Patient F High-risk LDL-C >5.2 mmol/L (200 mg/dL) not in
weight <80 cm (women).
pharmacological therapy: the goal is <2.6 mmol/L
Blood <140/90 mmHga (100 mg/dL).
pressure
Lipids Very high-risk: LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L
LDL-C is (70 mg/dL) or a reduction of at least 50% if the baselineb
the is between 1.8 and 3.5 mmol/L (70 and 135 mg/dL).
primary
High-risk: LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) or
targetb Table 11 Recommendations for treatment goals for
a reduction of at least 50% if the baselineb is between 2.6
and 5.2 mmol/L (100 and 200 mg/dL). low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol
Low to moderate risk: LDL-C <3.0 mmol/L
(115 mg/dL). Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c
d
Non-HDL-C secondary targets are <2.6, 3.4 and In patients at VERY HIGH CV risk ,
3.8 mmol/L (100, 130 and 145 mg/dL) for very high-, an LDL-C goal of <1.8 mmol/L
high- and moderate-risk subjects, respectively. (70 mg/dL) or a reduction of at 61, 62,
least 50% if the baseline LDL-Ce is I B 65, 68,
HDL-C: no target, but >1.0 mmol/L (40 mg/dL) in men and
between 1.8 and 3.5 mmol/L 69, 128
>1.2 mmol/L (48 mg/dL) in women indicates lower risk.
(70 and 135 mg/dL) is
TG: no target but <1.7 mmol/L (150 mg/dL) indicates recommended.
lower risk and higher levels indicate a need to look for
In patients at HIGH CV riskd, an
other risk factors.
LDL-C goal of <2.6 mmol/L
Diabetes HbA1c: <7% (<53 mmol/mol). (100 mg/dL), or a reduction of at
least 50% if the baseline LDL-Ce is I B 65, 129
between 2.6 and 5.2 mmol/L
BMI ¼ body mass index; HbA1C ¼ glycated haemoglobin; HDL-C ¼ high-density
(100 and 200 mg/dL) is
lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; TG ¼
recommended.
triglycerides.
a
The BP target can be lower in some patients with type 2 diabetes127 and in some In subjects at LOW or MODERATE
high-risk patients without diabetes who can tolerate multiple antihypertensive riskd an LDL-C goal of <3.0 mmol/L IIa C -
drugs.70 (<115 mg/dL) should be considered.
b
The term “baseline LDL-C“ refers to the level in a subject not taking any lipid
lowering medication.
CV ¼ cardiovascular; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol.
a
b
Level of evidence.
c
The targeted approach to lipid management is primarily aimed at d
For definitions see section 2.2.
reducing LDL-C. For patients at a very high total CV risk, the goal is e
The term “baseline LDL-C” refers to the level in a subject not taking any lipid
an LDL-C ,1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL). At least a 50% reduction from lowering medication.
baseline (if .1.8 mmol/L) should also be achieved. For subjects at
high total CV risk, the goal is an LDL-C level ,2.6 mmol/L
(100 mg/dL). At least a 50% reduction from baseline [if When secondary targets are used the recommendations are
.2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL)] should also be achieved. In people at
moderate total CV risk, the LDL-C goal is ,3 mmol/L (115 mg/ – non-HDL-C ,2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) and ,3.4 mmol/L
dL) (Table 11). (130 mg/dL) in subjects at very high and high total CV risk,
respectively (Class IIa, Level B).100,130
– apoB ,80 mg/dL and ,100 mg/dL in those at very high and high
total CV risk, respectively (Class IIa, Level B).100,131
Secondary targets have also been defined by inference for 5. Lifestyle modifications to
non-HDL-C and for apoB; they receive a moderate grading, as they
have not been extensively studied in RCTs. Clinicians who are using improve the plasma lipid profile
apoB in their practice can use targets levels of ,100 mg/dL and The role of nutrition in the prevention of CVD has been extensively
,80 mg/dL for subjects at high or at very high total CV risk, respect- reviewed.132 – 134 There is strong evidence showing that dietary fac-
ively. The specific goal for non-HDL-C should be 0.8 mmol/L (30 mg/ tors may influence atherogenesis directly or through effects on trad-
dL) higher than the corresponding LDL-C goal; adjusting itional risk factors such as plasma lipids, blood pressure or glucose
lipid-lowering therapy in accordance with these secondary targets levels.
may be considered after having achieved an LDL-C goal in patients Results from RCTs relating dietary patterns to CVD have been
at very high CV risk, although the clinical advantages of this approach reviewed.132 Some interventions resulted in significant CVD pre-
with respect to outcomes remain to be addressed. To date, no spe- vention, whereas others did not. In order to get an overall estimate
cific goals for HDL-C or TG levels have been determined in clinical of the impact of dietary modifications on the CV risk, different

trials, although increases in HDL-C predict atherosclerosis regression meta-analyses have been performed, sometimes with inconsistent
and low HDL-C is associated with excess events and mortality in outcomes.135,136 This is due not only to methodological problems,
CAD patients, even when LDL-C is ,1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL). How- particularly inadequate sample size or the short duration of many
ever, clinical trial evidence is lacking on the effectiveness of interven- trials included in the systematic revision, but also to the difficulty
ing in these variables to reduce CV risk further. of evaluating the impact of a single dietary factor independently of
Clinicians should use clinical judgment when considering further any other changes in the diet. Such studies rarely allow attribution
treatment intensification in patients at high or very high total CV risk. of reduction in CV risk to a single dietary component. These
Table 12 Impact of specific lifestyle changes on lipid levels
Magnitude of the effect Level of evidence References

Lifestyle interventions to reduce TC and LDL-C levels
Reduce dietary trans fat +++ A 136, 139
Reduce dietary saturated fat +++ A 136, 137
Increase dietary fibre ++ A 140, 141
Use functional foods enriched with phytosterols ++ A 142, 143
Use red yeast rice supplements ++ A 144–146
Reduce excessive body weight ++ A 147, 148
Reduce dietary cholesterol + B 149
Increase habitual physical activity + B 150
Use soy protein products +/- B 151
Lifestyle interventions to reduce TG-rich lipoprotein levels
Reduce excessive body weight +++ A 147, 148
Reduce alcohol intake +++ A 152, 153
Increase habitual physical activity ++ A 150, 154
Reduce total amount of dietary carbohydrate ++ A 148, 155
Use supplements of n-3 polyunsaturated fat ++ A 156, 157
Reduce intake of mono- and disaccharides ++ B 158, 159
Replace saturated fat with mono- or polyunsaturated fat + B 136, 137
Lifestyle interventions to increase HDL-C levels
Reduce dietary trans fat +++ A 136, 160
Increase habitual physical activity +++ A 150, 161
Reduce excessive body weight ++ A 147, 148
Reduce dietary carbohydrates and replace them with unsaturated fat ++ A 148, 162
Modest consumption in those who take alcohol may be continued ++ B 152
Quit smoking + B 163
Among carbohydrate-rich foods prefer those with low glycaemic index and +/- C 164
high fibre content
Reduce intake of mono- and disaccharides +/- C 158, 159
HDL-C ¼ high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; TC ¼ total cholesterol; TG ¼ triglycerides.

The magnitude of the effect (+ + + ¼ marked effects, + + ¼ less pronounced effects, + ¼ small effects, – ¼ not effective) and the level of evidence refer to the impact of each
dietary modification on plasma levels of a specific lipoprotein class.
limitations suggest that caution is required in interpreting the results significantly reduced the incidence of major CV events by almost
of meta-analyses of RCTs in relation to the impact of a single dietary 30%.137 However, despite the strong support of lifestyle interven-
change on CVD, particularly where they conflict with the existing tion for CVD prevention coming from the PREDIMED and other
global research, including clinical studies on risk factors and epi- intervention studies with CVD endpoints, most evidence linking nu-
demiological observations. In this respect, it is relevant that a trition to CVD is based on observational studies and investigations
meta-analysis of the relationship between improvement of the plas- of the effects of dietary changes on CV risk factors.
ma lipoprotein profile and the rate of CV events has demonstrated The influence of lifestyle changes and functional foods on lipopro-
that non-HDL-C lowering translates into a reduction in risk inde- teins is evaluated and summarized in Table 12; in this table the mag-
pendent of the mechanisms (statins, resins, diet and ileal bypass) nitude of the effects and the levels of evidence refer to the impact of
involved.131 dietary modifications on the specific lipoprotein class and not to
In summary, the available evidence from RCTs addressing the is- CVD endpoints.
sue of how to modify the habitual diet in order to contribute to

CVD prevention shows that the dietary patterns that have been
more extensively evaluated are the Dietary Approaches to Stop
5.1 The influence of lifestyle on total
Hypertension (DASH) diet, particularly in relation to blood pres- cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein
sure control, and the Mediterranean diet; both have been proven cholesterol levels
to be effective in reducing CV risk factors and, possibly, to contrib- Saturated fatty acids (SFAs) are the dietary factor with the greatest
ute to CVD prevention.133 They are characterized by high con- impact on LDL-C levels (0.02 – 0.04 mmol/L or 0.8 – 1.6 mg/dL of
sumption of fruits, vegetables and wholegrain cereal products; LDL-C increase for every additional 1% energy coming from satu-
frequent intake of legumes, nuts, fish, poultry and low fat dairy pro- rated fat).165 Stearic acid, in contrast to other SFAs (lauric, myristic
ducts and limited intake of sweets, sugar-sweetened drinks and red and palmitic), does not increase TC levels. Trans unsaturated fatty
meat. The DASH diet and the Mediterranean diet derive a large pro- acids can be found in limited amounts (usually ,5% of total fat) in
portion of dietary fat from non-tropical vegetable oil rather than dairy products and in meats from ruminants. ‘Partially hydrogenated
from animal sources; the most relevant difference between them fatty acids’ of industrial origin represent the major source of trans
is the emphasis on extra virgin olive oil given in the Mediterranean fatty acids in the diet; the average consumption of trans fatty acids
diet. This latter dietary pattern has been proven in RCTs to be ef- ranges from 0.2% to 6.5% of the total energy intake in different po-
fective in reducing CV diseases in primary and secondary preven- pulations.166 Quantitatively, dietary trans fatty acids have a similar
tion.137,138 In particular, the PREDIMED trial, a multicentre elevating effect on LDL-C to that of SFAs; however, while SFAs in-
randomized intervention study conducted in Spain, evaluated the crease HDL-C levels, trans fats decrease them.137 If 1% of the diet-
impact of a Mediterranean type of diet, supplemented with either ary energy derived from SFAs is replaced by n-6 polyunsaturated
extra-virgin olive oil or mixed nuts, on the rate of major CV events fatty acids (PUFAs), LDL-C decreases by 0.051 mmol/L (2.0 mg/
[myocardial infarction (MI), stroke or death from CV causes) in in- dL); if replaced by monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), the de-
dividuals at high CV risk but with no CVD at enrolment. The Medi- crease would be 0.041 mmol/L (1.6 mg/dL); and if replaced by
terranean diet supplemented with extra-virgin olive oil or nuts carbohydrate, it would be 0.032 mmol/L (1.2 mg/dL). PUFAs of
Table 13 Dietary recommendations to lower low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol and improve the overall lipoprotein
profile
To be preferred To be used with moderation To be chosen occasionally in limited amounts

Cereals Whole grains Refined bread, rice and pasta, biscuits, Pastries, muffins, pies, croissants
corn flakes
Vegetables Raw and cooked vegetables Potatoes Vegetables prepared in butter or cream
Legumes Lentils, beans, fava beans, peas,
chickpeas, soybean
Fruit Fresh or frozen fruit Dried fruit, jelly, jam, canned fruit,
sorbets, popsicles, fruit juice
Sweets and sweeteners Non-caloric sweeteners Sucrose, honey, chocolate, candies Cakes, ice creams, fructose, soft drinks
Meat and fish Lean and oily fish, Lean cuts of beef, lamb, pork or veal, Sausages, salami, bacon, spare ribs, hot dogs,
poultry without skin seafood, shellfish organ meats
Dairy food and eggs Skim milk and yogurt Low-fat milk, low-fat cheese and other Regular cheese, cream, whole milk and yogurt
milk products, eggs
Cooking fat and dressings Vinegar, mustard, Olive oil, non-tropical vegetable oils, Trans fats and hard margarines (better to avoid
fat-free dressings soft margarines, salad dressing, them), palm and coconut oils, butter, lard,
mayonnaise, ketchup bacon fat
Nuts/seeds All, unsalted (except coconut) Coconut
Cooking procedures Grilling, boiling, steaming Stir-frying, roasting Frying
the n-3 series have no hypocholesterolaemic effect; conversely, are directly transported and metabolized in the liver following
when they are used at high dosages (.3 g/day), the effect on transport in the portal vein.
LDL-C levels is either neutral or a slight increase [particularly Glucose and lipid metabolism are strongly related, and any per-
with docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)] with a concomitant decrease turbation of carbohydrate metabolism induced by a high carbohy-
of TGs.165 drate diet will also lead to an increase in TG concentrations.148,165
A positive relationship exists between dietary cholesterol and The greater and more rapid this perturbation, the more pro-
CAD mortality, which is partly independent of TC levels. Several ex- nounced are the metabolic consequences. Most detrimental ef-
perimental studies in humans have evaluated the effects of dietary fects of a high carbohydrate diet could be minimized if
cholesterol on cholesterol absorption and lipid metabolism and carbohydrate digestion and absorption were slowed down. The
have revealed marked variability among individuals.167,168 Dietary glycaemic index permits identification, among carbohydrate-rich
carbohydrate is ‘neutral’ on LDL-C; therefore, carbohydrate-rich foods, of those with ‘fast’ and ‘slow’ absorption. In particular,
foods represent one of the possible options to replace saturated the detrimental effects of a high carbohydrate diet on TGs occur

fat in the diet. However, the major drawback of their excessive con- mainly when refined carbohydrate-rich foods are consumed,
sumption is represented by untoward effects on plasma TGs and on while they are much less prominent if the diet is based largely
HDL-C levels.165 Dietary fibre (particularly of the soluble type), on fibre-rich, low glycaemic index foods. This applies particularly
which is present in legumes, fruits, vegetables, and wholegrain cer- to people with diabetes or with metabolic syndrome
eals (oats, barley), has a direct hypocholesterolaemic effect. There- (MetS).173,174
fore, carbohydrate foods rich in fibre represent a good dietary Habitual consumption of significant amounts (.10% energy) of
substitute for saturated fat in order to maximize the effects of the dietary fructose contributes to TG elevations, particularly in people
diet on LDL-C levels and to minimize the untoward effects of a with HTG. These effects are dose dependent; with a habitual fruc-
high carbohydrate diet on other lipoproteins.140 Conversely, re- tose consumption between 15 and 20% of the total energy intake,
fined carbohydrate foods and beverages should not be recom- plasma TG increases as much as 30 –40%. Sucrose, a disaccharide-
mended to replace saturated fat since they may contribute to containing glucose and fructose, represents an important source of
elevated plasma TGs and lower HDL-C levels. fructose in the diet.158,175
Body weight reduction also influences TC and LDL-C, but the Weight reduction improves insulin sensitivity and decreases TG
magnitude of the effect is rather small; in grossly obese subjects, a levels. In many studies the reduction of TG levels due to weight re-
decrease in LDL-C concentration of 0.2 mmol/L (8 mg/dL) is ob- duction is between 20–30%; this effect is usually preserved as long
served for every 10 kg of weight loss; the reduction of LDL-C is as weight is not regained. Regular physical exercise reduces plasma
greater if weight loss is achieved with a low fat diet.147,148 Even smal- TG levels over and above the effect of weight reduction.150,169,176
ler is the reduction of LDL-C levels induced by regular physical ex- Alcohol intake has a major impact on TG levels. While in indivi-
ercise.150,169 However, the beneficial effects of weight reduction duals with HTG even a small amount of alcohol can induce a further
and physical exercise on the CV risk profile go beyond LDL-C re- elevation of TG concentrations, in the general population alcohol
duction and involve not only other lipoprotein classes but also other exerts detrimental effects on TG levels only if the intake is
risk factors. excessive.152,177
In Table 13, lifestyle interventions to lower TC and LDL-C are
summarized. Given the cultural diversity of the European popula-
tions, they should be translated into practical behaviours, taking 5.3 The influence of lifestyle on
into account local habits and socio-economic factors. high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels
SFAs increase HDL-C levels in parallel with LDL-C; in contrast, trans
fats decrease them.137 MUFA consumption as a replacement for
5.2 The influence of lifestyle on SFAs has almost no effect on HDL-C, while n-6 PUFAs induce a
triglyceride levels slight decrease. In general, n-3 fatty acids have limited (,5%) or
A high monounsaturated fat diet significantly improves insulin sen- no effect on HDL-C levels.156,172
sitivity compared with a high saturated fat diet.170 This goes in par- Increased carbohydrate consumption as an isocaloric substitution
allel with a reduction in TG levels, mostly in the post-prandial for fat is associated with a significant decrease in HDL-C
period. 171 A more relevant hypotriglyceridaemic effect is [0.01 mmol/L (0.4 mg/dL) for every 1% energy substitution]. In
observed when saturated fat is replaced by n-6 PUFA. A marked this respect, both the glycaemic index and the fibre content do
reduction of TGs can be obtained with a high dosage of long chain not seem to play a relevant role.178,179 The impact of fructose/su-
n-3 PUFAs; however, a dietary approach based exclusively on nat- crose intake on HDL-C does not seem different from that of other
ural foods will seldom reach an intake adequate to achieve a clin- refined carbohydrates.158,159 Moderate alcohol consumption is as-
ically significant effect. To this aim, either pharmacological sociated with increased HDL-C levels as compared with abstainers,
supplements or foods artificially enriched with n-3 PUFAs may with a dose-response relationship. Weight reduction has a beneficial
be utilized.172 In people with severe HTG, in whom chylomicrons influence on HDL-C levels: a 0.01 mmol/L (0.4 mg/dL) increase is
are equally present in the fasting state, it is appropriate to reduce observed for every kilogram decrease in body weight when weight
the total amount of dietary fat as much as possible (,30 g/day). In reduction has stabilized. Aerobic physical activity corresponding to
these patients, the use of medium chain TGs (from C6 to C12) that a total energy expenditure of 1500 – 2200 kcal/week, such as 25 –
avoid the formation of chylomicrons may be considered since they 30 km of brisk walking per week (or any equivalent activity), may
increase HDL-C levels by 0.08 – 0.15 mmol/L (3.1 – 6 mg/dL).176

Smoking cessation may also contribute to HDL-C elevation, pro- Table 14 Definition of central obesity
vided that weight gain is prevented; this is often observed soon after
Waist circumference
quitting smoking.163
Caucasians (Europids) Men ≥94 cm, women ≥80 cm
South Asians, Chinese, Japanese Men ≥90 cm, women ≥80 cm
5.4 Lifestyle recommendations to South and Central Americans Use recommendations for South
Asians until more specific data are
improve the plasma lipid profile available.
LDL-C represents the primary lipoprotein target for reducing CV
Sub-Saharan Africans Use European data until more
risk and therefore it deserves special emphasis in the evaluation of specific data are available.
lifestyle measures useful for CVD prevention. However, it may be
Eastern Mediterranean and Use European data until more
appropriate that the diet recommended to the general population, Middle East (Arabic populations) specific data are available.

and particularly to people at increased CV risk, should not only low-
er LDL-C, but should also be able to improve plasma TG and
HDL-C levels (Table 12). This section focuses on dietary and other
lifestyle factors that have an effect on lipids. It has to be kept in mind 5.4.2 Dietary fat
that dietary components, other lifestyle factors and weight loss also Limiting as much as possible the intake of trans fat is a key measure
contribute to reducing the overall CV risk through their influence of the dietary prevention of CVD. Trying to avoid the consumption
on other risk factors, e.g. hypertension, subclinical inflammation of foods made with processed sources of trans fats provides the
or impaired insulin sensitivity. most effective means of reducing the intake of trans fats to ,1%
of energy. Because the trans fatty acids produced in the partial hy-
5.4.1 Body weight and physical activity drogenation of vegetable oils account for 80% of total intake,
Since overweight, obesity and abdominal adiposity often contribute the food industry has an important role in decreasing the trans
to dyslipidaemia, caloric intake should be reduced and energy ex- fatty acid content of the food supply. As for saturated fat, its
penditure increased in those with excessive weight and/or abdom- consumption should be ,10% of the total caloric intake and
inal adiposity. Overweight is defined as a body mass index (BMI) should be further reduced (,7% of energy) in the presence of
≥25–30 kg/m2 and obesity as a BMI ≥30 kg/m2. hypercholesterolaemia. For most individuals, a wide range of total
Abdominal adiposity can be detected easily by measuring waist fat intakes is acceptable and will depend upon individual preferences
circumference; this should be performed in all individuals who are and characteristics. However, fat intakes that .35% of calories are
either overweight, have dyslipidaemia or are at increased CV risk. generally associated with increased intakes of both saturated fat and
Measurements of waist circumference .80 cm for women of any calories. Conversely, a low intake of fats and oils increases the risk of
ethnicity and .94 cm for men of European ancestry or .90 cm inadequate intakes of vitamin E and of essential fatty acids, and may
for men of Asian origin indicate the presence of abdominal adipos- contribute to unfavourable changes in HDL-C.165
ity, even in people of normal weight (Table 14).180 Body weight re- Fat intake should predominantly come from sources of MUFAs
duction, even if modest (5 – 10% of basal body weight), improves and both n-6 and n-3 PUFAs. However, the intake of n-6 PUFAs
lipid abnormalities and favourably affects the other CV risk factors should be limited to ,10% of the energy intake, both to minimize
often present in dyslipidaemic individuals.147 An even more the risk of lipid peroxidation of plasma lipoproteins and to avoid any
marked hypolipidaemic effect occurs when weight reduction is clinically relevant HDL-C decrease.182 Not enough data are avail-
more relevant, as observed in severely obese patients who under- able to make a recommendation regarding the optimal n-3:n-6 fatty
go bariatric surgery. This treatment seems to induce beneficial ef- acid ratio.182,183 The cholesterol intake in the diet should be re-
fects not only on the overall risk factor profile, but also on CV duced (,300 mg/day), particularly in people with high plasma chol-
events.181 esterol levels.
Weight reduction can be achieved by decreasing the consump-
tion of energy-dense foods, inducing a caloric deficit of 300 – 500 5.4.3 Dietary carbohydrate and fibre
kcal/day. To be effective in the long run, this advice should be in- Carbohydrate intake should range between 45 and 55% of total en-
corporated into structured, intensive lifestyle education pro- ergy intake. Consumption of vegetables, legumes, fruits, nuts and
grammes. In order to facilitate the maintenance of body weight wholegrain cereals should be particularly encouraged, together
close to the target, it is always appropriate to advise people with all the other foods rich in dietary fibre and/or with a low gly-
with dyslipidaemia to engage in regular physical exercise of mod- caemic index. A fat-modified diet that provides 25 – 40 g of total
erate intensity.150 dietary fibre, including at least 7 –13 g of soluble fibre, is well toler-
Modest weight reduction and regular physical exercise of moderate ated, effective and recommended for plasma lipid control; converse-
intensity are very effective in preventing type 2 diabetes and improving ly, there is no justification for the recommendation of very low
all the metabolic abnormalities and CV risk factors clustering with in- carbohydrate diets.164
sulin resistance, which are often associated with abdominal adiposity. Intake of sugars should not exceed 10% of total energy (in add-
Physical activity should be encouraged, with a goal of regular physical ition to the amount present in natural foods such as fruits and dairy
exercise for at least 30 min/day every day.169 products); more restrictive advice concerning sugars may be useful
for those needing to lose weight or with high plasma TG values, possible decrease in carotenoid and fat-soluble vitamin levels by
MetS or diabetes. Soft drinks should be used with moderation by sterols/stanols can be prevented with a balanced diet rich in these
the general population and should be drastically limited in those nutrients.185 Based on LDL-C lowering and the absence of ad-
individuals with elevated TG values.158,159 verse signals, functional foods with plant sterols/stanols (at least
2 g/day with the main meal) may be considered: (i) in individuals
5.4.4 Alcohol with high cholesterol levels at intermediate or low global CV
Moderate alcohol consumption [up to 20 g/day (2 units) for men risk who do not qualify for pharmacotherapy; (ii) as an adjunct
and 10 g/day (1 unit) for women] is acceptable for those who drink to pharmacologic therapy in high- and very high-risk patients
alcoholic beverages, provided that TG levels are not elevated. who fail to achieve LDL-C goals on statins or are statin intolerant;
and (iii) in adults and children (.6 years) with FH, in line with cur-
5.4.5 Smoking rent guidance.142
Smoking cessation has clear benefits on the overall CV risk, and spe-
cifically on HDL-C, but special attention should be paid in order to

5.5.2 Monacolin and red yeast rice
prevent weight gain in people who stop smoking.163 Red yeast rice (RYR) is a source of fermented pigment that has been
used in China as a food colorant and flavour enhancer for centuries.
5.5 Dietary supplements and functional Hypocholesterolaemic effects of RYR are related to a statin-like
foods for the treatment of dyslipidaemias mechanism, inhibition of hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A
Innovative nutritional strategies to improve dyslipidaemias have (HMG-CoA) reductase, of monacolins, which represent the bioactive
been developed. They are based on either changing some ‘risky’ ingredient. Different commercial preparations of RYR have different
dietary components or encouraging the consumption of specifically concentrations of monacolins, and lower TC and LDL-C to a variable
targeted ‘healthy’ functional foods and/or dietary supplements; extent,145 but the long-term safety of the regular consumption of
these so-called nutraceuticals can be used either as alternatives or these products is not fully documented. However, side effects similar
in addition to lipid-lowering drugs.184 Nutritional evaluation of func- to those observed with statins have been reported in some people
tional foods includes not only the search for clinical evidence of using these nutraceuticals. Furthermore, their quality may vary widely.
beneficial effects relevant to improved health or reduction of dis- In one RCT from China in patients with CAD, a partially puri-
ease risk, but also the demonstration of good tolerability and the ab- fied extract of RYR reduced recurrent events by 45%. 144 No
sence of major undesirable effects. The substantiation of health other trial has been performed to confirm this finding. A clinically
claims relevant for each food should be based on results from inter- relevant hypocholesterolaemic effect (up to a 20% reduction) is
vention studies in humans that are consistent with the proposed observed with RYR preparations providing a daily dose of
claims. Overall, the available evidence on functional foods so far 2.5 – 10 mg monacolin K.146 Nutraceuticals containing purified
identified in this field is incomplete; the major gap is the absence RYR may be considered in people with elevated plasma choles-
of diet-based intervention trials of sufficient duration to be relevant terol concentrations who do not qualify for treatment with statins
for the natural history of dyslipidaemia and CVD. in view of their global CV risk.
5.5.1 Phytosterols 5.5.3 Dietary fibre

The principal phytosterols are sitosterol, campesterol and stigmas- Available evidence consistently demonstrates a TC- and LDL-C-lower-
terol; they occur naturally in vegetable oils and in smaller amounts in ing effect of water-soluble fibre from oat and barley beta-glucan. Foods
vegetables, fresh fruits, chestnuts, grains and legumes. The dietary enriched with these fibres are well tolerated, effective and recom-
intake of plant sterols ranges between an average of 250 mg/day mended for LDL-C lowering at a daily dose of at least 3 g/day.186,187
in Northern Europe to 500 mg/day in Mediterranean countries.
Phytosterols compete with cholesterol for intestinal absorption, 5.5.4 Soy protein
thereby modulating TC levels. Soy protein has been indicated as being able to induce a modest
Phytosterols have been added to spreads and vegetable oils LDL-C-lowering effect when replacing animal protein foods.151
(functional margarine, butter and cooking oils), as well as yoghurt However, this was not confirmed when changes in other dietary
and other foods; however, food matrices do not significantly influ- components were taken into account.
ence the cholesterol-lowering efficacy of phytosterols at equivalent
doses.142 The daily consumption of 2 g of phytosterols can effective- 5.5.5 Policosanol and berberine
ly lower TC and LDL-C by 7–10% in humans (with a certain degree Policosanol is a natural mixture of long chain aliphatic alcohols ex-
of heterogeneity among individuals), while it has little or no effect on tracted primarily from sugarcane wax.188 Studies show that polico-
HDL-C and TG levels.143 Although the effect of plant sterol con- sanol from sugarcane, rice or wheat germ has no significant effect on
sumption on TC levels has been clearly shown, no studies have LDL-C, HDL-C, TGs, apoB, Lp(a), homocysteine, hs-CRP, fibrino-
been performed yet on the subsequent effect on CVD. However, gen or blood coagulation factors.189
the meta-analysis of Robinson et al.131 indicates that LDL-C reduc- As for berberine, a recent meta-analysis has evaluated its effects
tion translates into CV benefits, independent of the mechanism in- on plasma lipids in humans; six trials were available for this purpose:
volved. Long-term surveillance is also needed to guarantee the the berberine group contained 229 patients and the control group
safety of the regular use of phytosterol-enriched products. The contained 222 patients.190 The studies, showing a statistically
significant heterogeneity, were all performed in China in people of Food choices to lower TC and LDL-C are summarized in
Asian ethnicity. The comparative evaluation of berberine and life- Table 13. Box 9 lists lifestyle measures and healthy food choices
style intervention or placebo indicated that in the berberine group, for managing total CV risk. All individuals should be advised on life-
LDL-C and plasma TG levels were more effectively reduced than in styles associated with a lower CVD risk. High-risk subjects, in par-
the control group. However, due to the lack of high-quality rando- ticular those with dyslipidaemia, should receive specialist dietary
mized clinical trials, the efficacy of berberine for treating dyslipidae- advice, if feasible.
mia needs to be further validated.
5.5.6 n-3 unsaturated fatty acids Box 9 Summary of lifestyle measures and healthy food
Observational evidence supports the recommendation that the choices for managing total cardiovascular risk
intake of fish (at least twice a week) and long chain n-3 fatty acids
Dietary recommendations should always take into account local food
supplements at low dosage may reduce the risk of CV death and
habits; however, interest in healthy food choices from other cultures

stroke in primary prevention, but have no major effects on plasma should be promoted.
lipoprotein metabolism.183 Pharmacological doses of n-3 fatty acids
A wide variety of foods should be eaten. Energy intake should be
(2–3 g/day) reduce TG levels up to 30%, but a higher dosage may adjusted to prevent overweight and obesity.
increase LDL-C. Alfa-linolenic acid (a medium chain n-3 fatty acid
Consumption of fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, wholegrain cereal foods
present in chestnuts, some vegetables and some seed oils) is less ef- and fish (especially oily) should be encouraged.
fective on TG levels. Long chain n-3 PUFAs also reduce the post- Foods rich in trans or saturated fat (hard margarines, tropical oils, fatty
prandial lipaemic response.156,172 or processed meat, sweets, cream, butter, regular cheese) should be
replaced with the above foods and with monounsaturated fat (extra
virgin olive oil) and polyunsaturated fat (non-tropical vegetable oils) in
5.6 Other features of a healthy diet order to keep trans fats <1.0% of total energy and saturated fat <10%
contributing to cardiovascular disease (<7% in the presence of high plasma cholesterol values).
prevention Salt intake should be reduced to <5 g/day by avoiding table salt and
limiting salt in cooking, and by choosing fresh or frozen unsalted foods;
The results of the PREDIMED trial are clearly in support of a diet many processed and convenience foods, including bread, are high in salt.
inspired by the traditional Mediterranean diet as an effective ap-
For those who drink alcoholic beverages, moderation should be advised
proach to the lifestyle prevention of CVDs. This type of diet is char- (<10 g/day for women and <20 g/day for men) and patients with
acterized by the regular consumption of extra-virgin olive oil, fruits, hypertriglyceridaemia should abstain.
nuts, vegetables and cereals; a moderate intake of fish and poultry The intake of beverages and foods with added sugars, particularly soft
and a low intake of dairy products, red meat, processed meats drinks, should be limited, especially for persons who are overweight, have
and sweets; wine is consumed in moderation with meals.137 Dietary hypertriglyceridaemia, metabolic syndrome or diabetes.
choices inspired by this model should be recommended for both Physical activity should be encouraged, aiming at regular physical exercise
primary and secondary prevention of CVD. for at least 30 min/day every day.
One of the important features of this type of diet is represented Use of and exposure to tobacco products should be avoided.
by the consumption of large amounts of fruits and vegetables of dif-
ferent types providing a sufficient amount and variety of minerals,
vitamins and antioxidants, particularly polyphenols. New evidence
is accumulating on the possible beneficial effects of these com-
pounds, which are also present in olive oil, red wine, coffee, tea
6. Drugs for treatment of
and cocoa, on subclinical inflammation and endothelial function, as hypercholesterolaemia
well as their beneficial influence on plasma TGs at fasting and par-
ticularly in the postprandial period. 6.1 Statins
As for the consumption of fish, at least two portions per week are 6.1.1 Mechanism of action
recommended to the general population for the prevention of Statins reduce the synthesis of cholesterol in the liver by competi-
CVD, together with the regular consumption of other food sources tively inhibiting HMG-CoA reductase activity. The reduction in
of n-3 PUFAs (nuts, soy and flaxseed oil). For secondary prevention intracellular cholesterol concentration induces an increased expres-
of CVD, the use of n-3 PUFA supplements is no longer recom- sion of LDLR on the surface of the hepatocytes, which results in in-
mended in view of the recent evidence showing no benefit on creased uptake of LDL-C from the blood and a decreased plasma
CVD of this supplementation in people who have already experi- concentration of LDL-C and other apoB-containing lipoproteins,
enced a CV event. Previous RCTs where omega-3 supplementation including TG-rich particles.
was beneficial were not blinded or had low use of standard CV med- The degree of LDL-C reduction is dose dependent and varies
ications (such as statins). between the different statins (supplementary Figure A and supple-
Salt intake should be limited to ,5 g/day, not only by reducing mentary Table A).191 There is also considerable interindividual
the amount of salt used for food seasoning, but especially by redu- variation in LDL-C reduction with the same dose of drug. 61
cing the consumption of foods preserved by the addition of salt; this Poor response to statin treatment in clinical studies is to some
recommendation should be more stringent in people with hyper- extent caused by poor compliance, but may also be explained
tension or MetS.132 – 134 by a genetic background involving variations in genes of both
70
60
50
LDL %
40
30
20

10
0
A10 A20 A40 A80 F20 F40 F80 L10 L20 L40 L80 P10 P20 P40 S10 S20 S40 S80 R5 R10 R20 R40 P1 P2 P4
ATOR FLUVA LOVA PRAVA SIMVA ROSU PITA
Weng TC, et al. J Clin Pharm Ther . 2010;35:139-151

Mukhtar RY, et Al. Int J Clin Pract . 2055;59(2):239-252
Supplementary Figure A A systematic review and meta-analysis of the therapeutic equivalence of statins. ATOR ¼ atorvastatin; FLUVA ¼
fluvastatin; LOVA ¼ lovastatin; PRAVA ¼ pravastatin; SIMVA ¼ simvastatin; ROSU ¼ rosuvastatin; PITA ¼ pitavastatin.
Supplementary Table A Percentage reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) requested to achieve
goals as a function of the starting value.
Starting LDL-C Reduction to reach LDL-C goal, %

mmol/L ~mg/dL <1.8 mmol/L <2.6 mmol/L <3 mmol/L
(~70 mg/dL) (~100 mg/dL) (~115 mg/dL)
>6.2 >240 >70 >60 >55
5.2–6.2 200–240 65–70 50–60 40–55
4.4–5.2 170–200 60–65 40–50 30–45
3.9–4.4 150–170 55–60 35–40 25–30
3.4–3.9 130–150 45–55 25–35 10–25
2.9–3.4 110–130 35–45 10–25 <10
2.3–2.9 90–110 22–35 <10 –
1.8–2.3 70–90 <22 – –
cholesterol metabolism and of statin uptake and metabolism in secondary prevention, in both genders and in all age groups. Statins
the liver.192,193 Furthermore, conditions causing high cholesterol have also been shown to slow the progression or even promote
(e.g. hypothyroidism) should be considered. Indeed, interindivi- regression of coronary atherosclerosis.
dual variations in statin response warrant monitoring of individual Meta-analyses. A large number of meta-analyses have been per-
response on initiation of therapy. formed to analyse the effects of statins in larger populations and in
subgroups.64 – 66,68,129,194 – 200 In the large Cholesterol Treatment
6.1.2 Efficacy of cardiovascular disease prevention in Trialists (CTT) analysis data, .170 000 participants and 26 RCTs
clinical studies with statins were included.64 A 10% proportional reduction in all-
Statins are among the most studied drugs in CVD prevention, and cause mortality and 20% proportional reduction in CAD death
dealing with single studies is beyond the scope of the present guide- per 1.0 mmol/L (40 mg/dL) LDL-C reduction was reported. The
lines. A number of large-scale trials have demonstrated that statins risk of major coronary events was reduced by 23% and the risk
substantially reduce CV morbidity and mortality in both primary and of stroke was reduced by 17% per 1 mmol/L (40 mg/dL) LDL-C
reduction. The benefits were similar in all subgroups examined. HDL-C by 5 – 10%. For indications for statins in HTG, see section
The benefits were significant within the first year, but were great- 7.4.
er in subsequent years. There was no increased risk for any The suggested effect on Alzheimer’s disease was recently re-
non-CV cause of death, including cancer, in those receiving statins. viewed in a Cochrane analysis reporting no conclusive positive ef-
Other meta-analyses have confirmed these results, coming to es- fect from statins. Furthermore, case reports on neurocognitive
sentially the same conclusions. Most of the meta-analyses include side effects of statins have not been confirmed in analyses of larger
studies in primary as well as secondary prevention. The absolute patient populations or in meta-analyses.210
benefit from statin treatment may be less evident in patients in pri-
mary prevention, who are typically at lower risk. Several 6.1.3 Adverse effects of statins
meta-analyses have specifically studied statins in primary preven- Statins differ in their absorption, bioavailability, plasma protein bind-
tion.66,68,199 The largest of these was published as a Cochrane re- ing, excretion and solubility. Lovastatin and simvastatin are pro-
view in 2013.200 The analysis included 19 studies with different drugs, whereas the other available statins are administered in their

statins and with somewhat varying inclusion criteria. In this ana- active form. Their absorption rate varies between 20 and 98%. Many
lysis, all-cause mortality was reduced by 14%, CVD events by statins undergo significant hepatic metabolism via cytochrome P450
27%, fatal and non-fatal coronary events by 27% and stroke by isoenzymes (CYPs), except pravastatin, rosuvastatin and pitavasta-
22% per 1 mmol/L (40 mg/dL) LDL-C reduction. The relative tin. These enzymes are expressed mainly in the liver and gut wall.
risk reduction in primary prevention is about the same as that ob- Although statins are generally well tolerated, there are adverse ef-
served in secondary prevention. Similar results were also ob- fects to be considered when statins are prescribed.
served in analyses of statin treatment in people with low risk of Muscle. Muscle symptoms are the most commonly described clin-
vascular disease.66 However, it should be emphasized that in sub- ically relevant adverse effect of statin treatment.57 Rhabdomyolysis
jects with lower risk, the absolute risk reduction is also lower. is the most severe form of statin-induced myopathy, characterized
Current available evidence from meta-analyses suggests that the by severe muscular pain, muscle necrosis and myoglobinuria poten-
clinical benefit is largely independent of the type of statin but de- tially leading to renal failure and death. In rhabdomyolysis, creatine
pends on the extent of LDL-C lowering, therefore the type of statin kinase (CK) levels are elevated at least 10 times, often up to 40 times
used should reflect the LDL-C goal in a given patient. the upper limit of normal.211 The frequency of rhabdomyolysis has
p
The following scheme may be proposed. been estimated to represent 1 –3 cases/100 000 patient-years.212
† Evaluate the total CV risk of the subject. A more commonly described form of muscular adverse effect is
† Involve the patient with decisions on CV risk management. muscular pain and tenderness (myalgia) without CK elevation or
† Identify the LDL-C goal for that risk level. major functional loss. The actual frequency of this adverse effect,
† Calculate the percentage reduction of LDL-C required to achieve however, is unclear, and varies between different reports. In
that goal. meta-analyses of RCTs, no increased frequency in statin-treated
† Choose a statin and a dose that, on average, can provide this groups has been shown.213,214 On the other hand, the reported fre-
reduction. quency varies between 10 and 15% in observational studies.215,216
† Response to statin treatment is variable, therefore up-titration of One study, designed specifically to study the effects of statins on
the dose may be required. muscle symptoms, suggests that the frequency of muscle-related
† If the highest tolerated statin dose does not reach the goal, complaints is 5%.217 The diagnosis is based on the clinical obser-
consider drug combinations. vation and whether symptoms disappear after discontinuation of
† In addition, for subjects at very high and high risk, a ≥50% reduc- statins and recur with statin rechallenge. The symptoms are often
tion in LDL-C should be achieved. vague and the association with statin treatment is often difficult to
confirm. In patients with a high risk for CVD, it is essential to con-
Of course, these are general criteria for the choice of drug. Factors firm the diagnosis before leaving the patient without the benefits of
such as the clinical condition of the subject, concomitant medica- statin treatment. Risk factors for muscular adverse effects have been
tions, drug tolerability, local treatment tradition and drug cost will identified. Among these, the interaction with concomitant drug
play major roles in determining the final choice of drug and dose. therapy should especially be considered (see below). Suggested
Other effects of statins. Although the reduction of LDL-C is the ma- practical management of muscular symptoms is given in supplemen-
jor effect of statins, a number of other, potentially important effects tary material. In patients with high or very high risk for CVD, treat-
have been suggested (pleiotropic effects of statins).201,202 Among ment with the highest tolerable dose of statin should be considered,
such effects that are potentially relevant for the prevention of in combination with a cholesterol absorption inhibitor, and if avail-
CVD are anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant effects of statin treat- able a PCSK9 inhibitor may also be considered.218,219 Several studies
ment. Effects have been shown in vitro and in experimental systems, have shown a considerable LDL-C lowering effect of alternative
but their clinical relevance remains controversial.203 dosing such as every other day or twice a week with atorvastatin
Furthermore, the effects of statins on a number of other clinical or rosuvastatin.57,220 Although no clinical endpoint trials are avail-
conditions have been evaluated, including dementia,204 hepatic stea- able, this treatment should be considered in high-risk patients
tosis,205 cancer,206,207 venous thromboembolism208 and polycystic who do not tolerate daily doses of statin treatment.
ovary syndrome.209 Available data are controversial and thus far Liver. The activity of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in plasma is
no clinically relevant effect on these conditions has been demon- commonly used to assess hepatocellular damage. Mild elevation of
strated. Statins also reduce TGs by 30 – 50% and may increase ALT occurs in 0.5 – 2.0% of patients on statin treatment, more
commonly with potent statins or high doses. The common defin-

ition of clinically relevant ALT elevation has been an increase of Table 15 Drugs potentially interacting with statins
three times the upper limit of normal (ULN) on two occasions. metabolized by CYP3A4 leading to increased risk of
Mild elevation of ALT has not been shown to be associated with myopathy and rhabdomyolysis
true hepatotoxicity or changes in liver function. Progression to liver
Anti-infective agents Calcium Other
failure is exceedingly rare, therefore routine monitoring of ALT dur-
antagonists
ing statin treatment is no longer recommended.221 Patients with
Itraconazole Verapamil Ciclosporin
mild ALT elevation due to steatosis have been studied during statin
treatment and there is no indication that statins cause any worsening Ketoconazole Diltiazem Danazol
of liver disease.222 – 224 Posaconazole Amlodipine Amiodarone
Diabetes. Patients on statin treatment have been shown to exhibit an Erythromycin Ranolazine
increased risk of dysglycaemia and development of diabetes type 2. In a Clarithromycin Grapefruit juice

meta-analysis including 91 140 subjects, the relative risk was increased
Telithromycin Nefazodone
by 9% relative to placebo. The absolute risk was increased by 0.2%.
HIV protease inhibitors Gemfibrozil
A minor, not clinically relevant elevation of glycated haemoglobin
(HbA1C) has also been observed. The number needed to cause one
Adapted from Egan and Colman232 and Wiklund et al.233
case of diabetes was estimated at 255 over 4 years.225 However, the
risk is higher with the more potent statins in high doses,226 and the
risk for diabetes is higher in the elderly and in the presence of other
Combinations of statins with fibrates may enhance the risk for
risk factors for diabetes such as overweight or insulin resistance.227
myopathy. This risk is highest for gemfibrozil, and the association
Overall, the absolute reduction in the risk of CVD in high-risk pa-
of gemfibrozil with statins should be avoided. The increased risk
tients outweighs the possible adverse effects of a small increase in
for myopathy when combining statins with other fibrates such as fe-
the incidence of diabetes.
nofibrate, bezafibrate or ciprofibrate seems to be small.234,235
Kidney. The effect of statin treatment on renal function is still being
The increased risk for myopathy with nicotinic acid has been de-
debated. A recent Cochrane analysis could not find support for bene-
bated, but in recent reviews no increased risk of myopathy was
ficial effects on renal function based on studies where creatinine clear-
found with this agent.236,237
ance was available, and no deleterious effects were observed.228 An
increased frequency of proteinuria has been reported for all statins, 6.2 Bile acid sequestrants
but has been analysed in more detail for rosuvastatin, probably due
6.2.1 Mechanism of action
to the high frequency of proteinuria observed with a higher dose
Bile acids are synthesized in the liver from cholesterol and are re-
(80 mg). With a dose of 80 mg, a frequency of 12% was reported.
leased into the intestinal lumen, but most of the bile acid is returned
With the approved doses up to 40 mg, the frequency is much lower
to the liver from the terminal ileum via active absorption. The two
and in line with the frequency for other statins. The proteinuria induced
older bile acid sequestrants, cholestyramine and colestipol, are both
by statins is of tubular origin and is supposed to be due to reduced
bile acid–binding exchange resins. Recently the synthetic drug cole-
tubular reabsorption and not to glomerular dysfunction.229 In experi-
sevelam was introduced. The bile acid sequestrants are not system-
mental systems, reduced pinocytosis has been shown in renal cells. The
ically absorbed or altered by digestive enzymes, therefore the
statin-induced reduced pinocytosis is directly related to the inhibition
beneficial clinical effects are indirect. By binding the bile acids, the
of cholesterol synthesis.230 In clinical trials the frequency of proteinuria
drugs prevent the entry of bile acids into the blood and thereby re-
is in general low and in most cases is not higher than for placebo.231
move a large portion of the bile acids from the enterohepatic circu-
lation. The liver, depleted of bile, synthesizes more from hepatic
6.1.4 Interactions
stores of cholesterol. The decrease in bile acid returned to the liver
A number of important drug interactions with statins have been de- leads to upregulation of key enzymes responsible for bile acid syn-
scribed that may increase the risk of adverse effects. Inhibitors and thesis from cholesterol, particularly CYP7A1. The increase in chol-
inducers of enzymatic pathways involved in statin metabolism are
esterol catabolism to bile acids results in a compensatory increase in
summarized in Table 15. All currently available statins, except pra- hepatic LDLR activity, clearing LDL-C from the circulation and thus
vastatin, rosuvastatin and pitavastatin, undergo major hepatic me- reducing LDL-C levels. These agents also reduce glucose levels in
tabolism via the CYPs. These isoenzymes are mainly expressed in
hyperglycaemic patients. A recent Cochrane review found that co-
the liver and intestine. Pravastatin does not undergo metabolism lesevelam, when added to other antidiabetic agents, showed signifi-
through the CYP system, but is metabolized by sulfation and conju- cant effects on glycaemic control; however, more research on the
gation. CYP3A isoenzymes are the most abundant, but other isoen-
impact of CV risk is required.238
zymes such as CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 are
frequently involved in the metabolism of statins. Thus other 6.2.2 Efficacy in clinical studies
pharmacological substrates of these CYPs may interfere with statin At the top dose of 24 g of cholestyramine, 20 g of colestipol or 4.5 g
metabolism. Conversely, statin therapy may interfere with the ca- of colesevelam, a reduction in LDL-C of 18 – 25% has been ob-
tabolism of other drugs that are metabolized by the same enzymatic served. No major effect on HDL-C has been reported, while TGs
system. may increase in some predisposed patients.
In clinical trials, bile acid sequestrants have contributed greatly to of harm caused by the further LDL-C reduction. In this group of pa-
the demonstration of the efficacy of LDL-C lowering in reducing CV tients already treated with statins to reach goals, the absolute bene-
events in hypercholesterolaemic subjects, with a benefit propor- fit from added ezetimibe was small, although significant. However,
tional to the degree of LDL-C lowering. However, this study was the study supports the proposition that LDL-C lowering by means
performed before many of the modern treatment options were other than statins is beneficial and can be performed without ad-
available.239 – 241 verse effects. The beneficial effect of ezetimibe is also supported
by genetic studies of mutations in NPC1L1. Naturally occurring mu-
6.2.3 Adverse effects and interactions tations that inactivate the protein were found to be associated with
Gastrointestinal adverse effects (most commonly flatulence, consti- reduced plasma LDL-C and reduced risk for CAD.245
pation, dyspepsia and nausea) are often present with these drugs, Taken together with other studies such as the PRECISE-IVUS
even at low doses, which limits their practical use. These adverse ef- study,246 IMPROVE-IT supports the proposal that ezetimibe should
fects can be attenuated by beginning treatment at low doses and in- be used as second-line therapy in association with statins when the

gesting ample fluid with the drug. The dose should be increased therapeutic goal is not achieved at the maximal tolerated statin dose
gradually. Reduced absorption of fat-soluble vitamins has been re- or in patients intolerant of statins or with contraindications to these
ported. Furthermore, these drugs may increase circulating TG levels drugs.
in certain patients.
Bile acid sequestrants have major drug interactions with many 6.3.3 Adverse effects and interactions
commonly prescribed drugs and should therefore be administered Ezetimibe is rapidly absorbed and extensively metabolized to
either 4 h before or 1 h after other drugs. Colesevelam represents a pharmacologically active ezetimibe glucuronide. The recom-
newer formulation of the bile acid sequestrant, which may be better mended dose of ezetimibe of 10 mg/day can be administered in
tolerated than cholestyramine. Colesevelam has fewer interactions the morning or evening without regard to food intake. There are
with other drugs and can be taken together with statins and several no clinically significant effects of age, sex or race on ezetimibe
other drugs.242 pharmacokinetics, and no dosage adjustment is necessary in pa-
tients with mild hepatic impairment or mild to severe renal insuf-
6.3 Cholesterol absorption inhibitors ficiency. Ezetimibe can be co-administered with any dose of any
6.3.1 Mechanism of action statin. No major adverse effects have been reported; the most fre-
Ezetimibe is the first lipid-lowering drug that inhibits intestinal up- quent adverse effects are moderate elevations of liver enzymes
take of dietary and biliary cholesterol without affecting the absorp- and muscle pain.
tion of fat-soluble nutrients. By inhibiting cholesterol absorption at
the level of the brush border of the intestine [by interaction with the 6.4 PCSK9 inhibitors
Niemann-Pick C1-like protein 1 (NPC1L1)], ezetimibe reduces the 6.4.1 Mechanism of action
amount of cholesterol delivered to the liver. In response to reduced Recently a new class of drugs, PCSK9 inhibitors, has become avail-
cholesterol delivery, the liver reacts by upregulating LDLR expres- able that targets a protein (PCSK9) involved in the control of the
sion, which in turn leads to increased clearance of LDL-C from the LDLR.247 Elevated levels/functions of this protein in plasma reduce
blood. LDLR expression by promoting, upon binding, the LDLR lysosomal
catabolism and increase plasma LDL-C concentration, while lower
6.3.2 Efficacy in clinical studies levels/functions of PCSK9 are related to lower plasma LDL-C le-
In clinical studies, ezetimibe in monotherapy reduces LDL-C in hy- vels.248 Therapeutic strategies have been developed mainly using
percholesterolaemic patients by 15 – 22%. Combined therapy with monoclonal antibodies that reduce LDL-C levels by 60% inde-
ezetimibe and a statin provides an incremental reduction in pendent from the presence of a background lipid-lowering therapy.
LDL-C levels of 15 – 20%. The efficacy of ezetimibe in association The mechanism of action relates to the reduction of plasma levels of
with simvastatin has been addressed in subjects with aortic stenosis PCSK9, which in turn is not available to bind the LDLR. Since this
in the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study243 interaction triggers the intracellular degradation of the LDLR, lower
and in patients with CKD in the Study of Heart and Renal Protection levels of circulating PCSK9 will result in a higher expression of
(SHARP) (see sections 9.7.3 and 9.9.2). In both the SEAS and LDLRs at the cell surface and therefore in a reduction of circulating
SHARP trials, a reduction in CV events was demonstrated in the LDL-C levels.248
simvastatin–ezetimibe arm vs. placebo.243,244
In the Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy Inter- 6.4.2 Efficacy in clinical studies
national Trial (IMPROVE-IT) ezetimibe was added to simvastatin The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug
(40 mg) in patients after ACS.63 A total of 18 144 patients were ran- Administration (FDA) have recently approved two monoclonal anti-
domized and 5314 patients over 7 years experienced a CVD event; bodies (Mabs) for the control of elevated plasma LDL-C. The effi-
170 fewer events (32.7 vs. 34.7%) were recorded in the group taking cacy at reducing LDL-C is in the range of 50 – 70%, independent
simvastatin plus ezetimibe (P ¼ 0.016). The average LDL-C during of the presence of a background therapy (statins, ezetimibe, etc.);
the study was 1.8 mmol/L in the simvastatin group and 1.4 mmol/L preliminary data from phase 3 trials suggest a reduction of CV events
in patients taking ezetimibe plus simvastatin. Also, ischaemic stroke in line with the LDL-C reduction achieved. 115,116 A recent
was reduced by 21% in this trial (P ¼ 0.008). There was no evidence meta-analysis confirmed these findings.249 No major effects are
reported on HDL-C or plasma TGs. However, the TG effect must found to reduce atherosclerosis, as evaluated by coronary
be reconfirmed in populations with higher starting plasma TG levels. angiography.253
Given the mechanism of action, these drugs are effective at redu-
cing LDL-C in all patients with the capability of expressing LDLRs in 6.6.3 Other combinations
the liver. Therefore this pharmacological approach is effective in the In high-risk patients such as those with FH, or in cases of statin intoler-
vast majority of patients, including those with heterozygous FH ance, other combinations may be considered. Co-administration of
(HeFH) and, albeit to a lower level, those with homozygous FH ezetimibe and bile acid sequestrants (colesevelam, colestipol or cho-
(HoFH) with residual LDLR expression. Receptor-deficient HoFH lestyramine) resulted in an additional reduction of LDL-C levels with-
responds poorly to the therapy. out any additional adverse effects when compared with the stable bile
People at very high total CV risk, people with HeFH (and some acid sequestrant regimen alone.254 Clinical outcome studies with these
with HoFH) on maximally tolerated doses of first- and second-line combinations have not been performed.
therapy and/or in apheresis and who are statin ‘intolerant’ with per- Functional foods containing phytosterols as well as plant sterol–

sistent high levels of LDL-C are reasonable candidates for the use of containing tablets additionally reduce LDL-C levels by up to 5–10%
these drugs. in patients taking a stable dose of a statin, and this combination is
also well tolerated and safe.142,255 Phytosterols and plant sterols
6.4.3 Adverse effects and interactions should be taken after a meal. However, it is still not known whether
Anti-PCSK9 Mabs are injected subcutaneously, usually every other this could reduce the risk of CVD since no trials with plant sterols or
week, at doses up to 150 mg. The potential for interaction with or- stanols in combination with other lipid-lowering drugs are available
ally absorbed drugs is absent, as they will not interfere with pharma- for CVD outcomes. The combination of red yeast with statins is not
cokinetics or pharmacodynamics. Anti-PCSK9 Mabs do not recommended.
modulate pathways involved in biotransformation or drug uptake/ In patients at very high risk, with persistent high LDL-C despite
extrusion from cells. Among the most frequently reported side ef- being treated with a maximal statin dose in combination with ezeti-
fects are itching at the site of injection and flu-like symptoms. In mibe, or in patients with statin intolerance, a PCSK9 inhibitor may
some studies an increase of patient-reported neurocognitive effects be considered.
was described. This finding requires further scrutiny.250 Recommendations for the treatment of hypercholesterolaemia
are shown in Table 16.
6.5 Nicotinic acid
Nicotinic acid has broad lipid-modulating action, raising HDL-C in a
dose-dependent manner by up to 25% and reducing LDL-C by 15 – Table 16 Recommendations for the pharmacological
18% and TGs by 20– 40% at the 2 g/day dose. Nicotinic acid is un- treatment of hypercholesterolaemia
ique in lowering Lp(a) levels by up to 30% at this dose. After two
large studies with nicotinic acid, one with extended-release niacin251 Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c
and one with niacin plus laropiprant,252 showed no beneficial effect,
Prescribe statin up to the highest
but rather an increased frequency of serious adverse effects, no 62, 64,
recommended dose or highest I A
medication containing nicotinic acid is currently approved in Europe. 68
tolerable dose to reach the goal.
For the role of niacin in hypertriglyceridaemia, see section 7.6.
In the case of statin intolerance,
ezetimibe or bile acid sequestrants, 239,
IIa C
6.6 Drug combinations or these combined, should be 256, 257
considered.
Although the LDL-C goals are attained with monotherapy in many
patients, a significant proportion of high-risk subjects or patients If the goal is not reached, statin
combination with a cholesterol
with very high LDL-C levels need additional treatment. There are IIa B 63
absorption inhibitor should be
also patients who are statin intolerant or are not able to tolerate considered.
higher statin doses. In these cases, combination therapy should be
If the goal is not reached, statin
considered (Table 19). More information on statin intolerance is combination with a bile acid IIb C
provided in Supplementary Figure C. sequestrant may be considered.
In patients at very high-risk, with
6.6.1 Statins and cholesterol absorption inhibitors persistent high LDL-C despite
The combination of statins and ezetimibe is discussed above (see treatment with maximal tolerated
statin dose, in combination with IIb C 115, 116
section 6.3.2).
ezetimibe or in patients with statin
intolerance, a PCSK9 inhibitor may
6.6.2 Statins and bile acid sequestrants be considered.
The combination of a statin and cholestyramine, colestipol or cole-
sevelam could be useful in achieving LDL-C goals. On average, the LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; PCSK9 ¼ proprotein convertase
addition of a bile acid sequestrant to a statin reduces LDL-C by an subtilisin/kexin type 9.
a
additional 10 – 20%. However, there are no published clinical out- Class of recommendation.
b
Level of evidence.
come trials with either conventional bile acid sequestrants or cole- c
sevelam in combination with other drugs. The combination has been
7. Drugs for treatment of recommendations.67,259 According to the EAS consensus docu-

ment, mild to moderate HTG is defined as TGs .1.7 mmol/L
hypertriglyceridaemia (150 mg/dL) and ,10 mmol/L (880 mg/dL); TGs .10 mmol/L is
defined as severe HTG.260 Age/gender, race/ethnicity and lifestyle
7.1 Triglycerides and cardiovascular are modulating factors at the population level for serum TGs. In
disease risk the Copenhagen general population 27% had TGs .1.7 mmol/
Although the role of TGs as a risk factor for CVD has been strong- L.75 Severe HTG is rare and is typically associated with monogenic
ly debated, recent data favour the role of TG-rich lipoproteins as a mutations. Severe HTG is associated with an increased risk for
risk factor for CVD.87 Large prospective studies have reported pancreatitis.
that non-fasting TGs predict CAD risk more strongly than fasting
TGs.98,99 Recent data from genetic studies utilizing a Mendelian 7.3 Strategies to control plasma
randomization design have consistently linked both non-fasting
triglycerides

TG levels as well as remnant cholesterol to increased risk of
A level of fasting TGs ≤1.7 mmol/L (150 mg/dL) is desirable. The
CVD events and all-cause mortality. 86,107 Remnant cholesterol
first step is to consider possible causes of HTG and to evaluate
is a calculated parameter in these studies and equals TC 2
the total CV risk. The primary goal is to achieve the LDL-C level re-
(HDL-C + LDL-C). These genetic data have strengthened the
commended based on the total CV risk level. As compared with the
position of remnant cholesterol as a causal factor driving athero-
overwhelming evidence for the benefits of LDL-C reduction, the
sclerosis and CVD events. 75 Recently, remnant cholesterol has
evidence on the benefits of lowering elevated TG levels is still mo-
turned out to be a good surrogate marker of TGs and remnants.90
dest, and is primarily derived from subgroup or post hoc analyses.
The burden of HTG as a CVD risk factor is highlighted by the fact
However, recent evidence of TGs as a causal risk factor may en-
that about one-third of adult individuals have TG levels
courage TG lowering (Table 18).
.1.7 mmol/L (150 mg/dL). 258 HTG can have different causes
(Table 17), among which its polygenic nature is most important
in relation to CVD prevention. Table 18 Recommendations for drug treatments of
hypertriglyceridaemia
Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c

Table 17 Possible causes of hypertriglyceridaemia
Drug treatment should be
considered in high-risk patients with IIa B 261, 262
Genetic predisposition TG >2.3 mmol/L (200 mg/dL).
Obesity Statin treatment may be
Type 2 diabetes considered as the first drug of
263,
choice for reducing CVD risk IIb B
Alcohol consumption 264
in high-risk individuals with
Diet high in simple carbohydrates hypertriglyceridaemia.
Renal disease In high-risk patients with TG

>2.3 mmol/L (200 mg/dL) despite
Hypothyroidism statin treatment, fenofibrate may IIb C 261–264
Pregnancy (physiological triglyceride concentrations double during the be considered in combination with
third trimester) statins.
Paraproteinaemia and autoimmune disorders such as systemic lupus
erythematosus CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease; TG ¼ triglycerides.
a
Multiple medications including: b
Level of evidence.
• Corticosteroids c
• Oestrogens, especially those taken orally
• Tamoxifen
• Antihypertensives: adrenergic beta-blocking agents (to a different
degree), thiazides Although the CVD risk is increased if fasting TGs are .1.7 mmol/
• Isotretinoin L (150 mg/dL),87 the use of drugs to lower TGs may only be consid-
• Bile acid-binding resins ered in high-risk subjects when TGs are .2.3 mmol/L (200 mg/dL)
• Ciclosporin
• Antiretroviral regimens (protease inhibitors) and cannot be lowered by lifestyle measures. The available pharma-
• Psychotropic medications: phenothiazines, second generation cological interventions include statins, fibrates, PCSK9 inhibitors and
antipsychotics n-3 PUFAs.
For information on lifestyle management, please refer to
section 5.
7.2 Definition of hypertriglyceridaemia 7.4 Statins

The definition of different categories for elevated fasting TG levels Since statins have significant effects on mortality as well as most
seems to be slightly variable in different guidelines and CVD outcome parameters, these drugs are the first choice to
reduce both total CVD risk and moderately elevated TG levels. study, one case of rhabdomyolysis was reported in the placebo
More potent statins (atorvastatin, rosuvastatin and pitavastatin) group and three cases in the fenofibrate group.261 The risk of my-
demonstrate a robust lowering of TG levels, especially at high doses opathy has been reported to be 5.5-fold greater with fibrate use as
and in patients with elevated TGs. In subgroup analyses from statin a monotherapy compared with statin use. The risk of myopathy is
trials, the risk reduction is the same in subjects with HTG as in greater in patients with CKD, and it varies with different fibrates
normotriglyceridaemic subjects. and statins used in combination. This is explained by the pharma-
cological interaction between different fibrates and glucuronida-
7.5 Fibrates tion of statins. Gemfibrozil inhibits the metabolism of statins via
7.5.1 Mechanism of action the glucuronidation pathway, which leads to highly increased plas-
Fibrates are agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated ma concentrations of statins. As fenofibrate does not share the
receptor-a (PPAR-a), acting via transcription factors regulating vari- same pharmacokinetic pathways as gemfibrozil, the risk of myop-
ous steps in lipid and lipoprotein metabolism. By interacting with athy is much less with this combination therapy.273

PPAR-a, fibrates recruit different cofactors and regulate gene ex- As a class, fibrates have been reported to raise both serum cre-
pression. As a consequence, fibrates have good efficacy in lowering atinine and homocysteine in both short-term and long-term studies.
fasting TG levels as well as post-prandial TGs and TG-rich lipopro- The increase of serum creatinine by fibrate therapy seems to be fully
tein (TRL) remnant particles. The HDL-C raising effects of fibrates reversible when the drug is stopped. Data from meta-analyses sug-
are modest.263 gest that a reduction of calculated glomerular filtration rate (GFR)
does not reflect any adverse effects on kidney function.274 The
7.5.2 Efficacy in clinical trials increase in homocysteine by fibrates has been considered to be
The clinical effects of fibrates are primarily illustrated by five pro- relatively innocent with respect to CVD risk. However, the
spective RCTs: Helsinki Heart Study (HHS), Veterans Affairs High- fibrate-induced increase in homocysteine may blunt the increases
density lipoprotein Intervention Trial (VA-HIT), Bezafibrate Infarc- in both HDL-C and apoA1, and this may contribute to the smaller
tion Prevention (BIP) study, Fenofibrate Intervention and Event than estimated benefits of fenofibrate in the outcome para-
Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) and Action to Control Cardiovascular meters.275 High homocysteine also promotes thrombosis, and the
Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study, where fenofibrate was added to increased trend to deep vein thrombosis seen in the FIELD study
statin therapy.261,262,265 – 267 was associated with the baseline homocysteine levels, but no inter-
Although the Helsinki Heart Study reported a significant reduc- action was observed between the increase of homocysteine by
tion in CVD outcomes with gemfibrozil, neither the FIELD nor fibrate and venous thromboembolic events.276
the ACCORD study showed a reduction in total CVD outcomes.
Decreases in the rates of non-fatal MI were reported, although often 7.6 Nicotinic acid
as a result of post hoc analyses. The effect was most evident in sub- 7.6.1 Mechanism of action
jects with elevated TG/low HDL-C levels. However, the data on Nicotinic acid has been reported to decrease fatty acid influx to the
other outcome parameters have remained equivocal. Only one liver and the secretion of VLDL by the liver. This effect appears to be
study, ACCORD, has analysed the effect of a fibrate as an add-on mediated in part by the action on hormone-sensitive lipase in the
treatment to a statin. No overall benefit was reported in two recent adipose tissue. Nicotinic acid has key action sites in both liver and
meta-analyses.268,269 Results from other meta-analyses suggest re- adipose tissue. In the liver, nicotinic acid inhibits diacylglycerol
duced major CVD events in patients with high TGs and low acyltransferase-2 (DGAT-2), resulting in decreased secretion of
HDL-C in fibrate-treated patients, but no decrease in CVD or total VLDL particles from the liver, which is also reflected in reductions
mortality.270 – 272 Thus the overall efficacy of fibrates on CVD out- of both IDL and LDL particles.277 Nicotinic acid raises HDL-C and
comes is much less robust than that of statins. Overall, the possible apoA1 primarily by stimulating apoA1 production in the liver.277
benefits of fibrates require confirmation. The effects of nicotinic acid on lipolysis and fatty acid mobilization
in adipocytes are well established.
7.5.3 Adverse effects and interactions
Fibrates are generally well tolerated with mild adverse effects, 7.6.2 Efficacy in clinical trials
gastrointestinal disturbances being reported in ,5% of patients Nicotinic acid has multiple effects on serum lipids and lipopro-
and skin rashes in 2%.273 In general, myopathy, liver enzyme eleva- teins.277 Nicotinic acid effectively reduces not only TGs, but also
tions and cholelithiasis represent the most well-known adverse ef- LDL-C, reflecting its effect on all apoB-containing proteins. Nicoti-
fects associated with fibrate therapy.273 In the FIELD study, small nic acid increases apoA1-containing lipoproteins, reflected in in-
but significant increases in the incidence of pancreatitis (0.8% vs. creases of HDL-C and apoA1. At a daily dose of 2 g it reduces
0.5%) and pulmonary embolism (1.1% vs. 0.7%) and a non- TGs by 20 –40% and LDL-C by 15 –18% and increases HDL-C by
significant trend toward an increase in deep vein thrombosis 15 –35%.257,277,278 The favourable effect on angiographic measures
(1.4% vs. 1.0%) were seen in those taking fenofibrate compared has been reported in the Familial Atherosclerosis Treatment Study
with placebo; this is in line with data from other fibrate studies.261 (FATS) and in the HDL-Atherosclerosis Treatment Study
Elevations of both CK (.5 times above the ULN) and ALT (.3 (HATS).279
times above the ULN) were reported more frequently for patients Two large randomized clinical trials [the Atherothrombosis Inter-
on fenofibrate than on placebo, but the incidence of these abnor- vention in Metabolic Syndrome with Low HDL/High Triglycerides:
malities remained ,1% in both treatment groups. In the FIELD Impact on Global Health Outcomes (AIM-HIGH) and the Heart
Protection Study 2-Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of

Vascular Events (HPS2-THRIVE)] using, respectively, extended re- Table 19 Summary of the efficacy of drug
lease (ER) nicotinic acid vs. placebo in addition to simvastatin, and combinations for the management of mixed
ER nicotinic acid/laropiprant vs. placebo in patients treated with sim- dyslipidaemias
vastatin (plus, if indicated, ezetimibe), failed to report positive ben-
efits of the therapies on CV outcomes and have challenged the A combination of statins with fibrates can also be considered while
monitoring for myopathy, but the combination with gemfibrozil should
position and benefits of niacin in lipid management.251,252 Further- be avoided.
more, there was an increased frequency of severe adverse effects
If TG are not controlled by statins or fibrates, prescription of n-3 fatty
in the niacin groups. Since the EMA suspended ER nicotinic acid/lar- acids may be considered to decrease TG further, and these combina-
opiprant, this therapeutic option is unavailable in Europe. tions are safe and well tolerated.
TG ¼ triglycerides.

7.7 n-3 fatty acids
7.7.1 Mechanism of action
n-3 fatty acids [eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and DHA] are used at
pharmacological doses to lower TGs. n-3 fatty acids (2–4 g/day) af- 8. Drugs affecting high-density
fect serum lipids and lipoproteins, in particular VLDL concentration. lipoprotein cholesterol (Table 20)
The underlying mechanism is poorly understood, although it may be
Low levels of HDL-C constitute a strong, independent and inverse
related, at least in part, to their ability to interact with PPARs and to
predictor of the risk of premature development of atheroscler-
a decreased secretion of apoB.
osis.83 Moreover, the increase in CV risk relative to low HDL-C le-
vels is especially dramatic over the range of HDL-C from 0.65 to
7.7.2 Efficacy in clinical trials 1.17 mmol/L (25 to 45 mg/dL).260 Results from a meta-analysis of
n-3 fatty acids reduce TGs, but their effects on other lipoproteins four intervention trials, which involved the use of intravascular ultra-
are trivial. More detailed data on clinical outcomes are needed to sound to evaluate changes in coronary atheroma volume, indicated
justify the use of prescription n-3 fatty acids.280 The recommended that elevation ≥7.5% in HDL-C, together with a reduction in LDL-C
doses of total EPA and DHA to lower TGs have varied between 2 to a target of 2.0 mmol/L (,80 mg/dL), represented the minimum
and 4 g/day. Three recent studies in subjects with high TGs using requirement for plaque regression.290
EPA reported a significant reduction in serum TG levels of up to
45% in a dose-dependent manner.281 – 283 The efficacy of omega-3
fatty acids to lower serum TGs has also been reported in Table 20 Recommendations if drug treatment of low
meta-analyses.284 One meta-analysis included 63 030 subjects high-density lipoprotein cholesterol is considered
from 20 trials and reported no overall effect of omega-3 fatty acids
on composite CV events {relative risk [RR] 0.96 [95% confidence Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c
interval (CI) 0.90, 1.02]; P ¼ 0.24} or total mortality [RR 0.95 Statins and fibrates raise HDL-C
(95% Cl 0.86, 1.04); P ¼ 0.28]. A major side effect was gastrointes- with a similar magnitude and these IIb B 262, 292
tinal disturbances.285 The FDA has approved the use of n-3 fatty drugs may be considered.
acids (prescription products) as an adjunct to diet if TGs are The efficacy of fibrates to increase
.5.6 mmol/L (496 mg/dL). Although a recent Japanese study in pa- HDL-C may be attenuated in IIb B 261, 262
people with type 2 diabetes.
tients with hypercholesterolaemia reported a 19% reduction in
CVD outcome,286 the data remain inconclusive and their clinical ef-
ficacy appears to be related to non-lipid effects.287,288 Two rando- HDL-C ¼ high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
a
mized placebo-controlled trials [Reduction of Cardiovascular b
Level of evidence.
c
Events with EPA-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) and Outcomes Reference(s) supporting recommendations.
Study to Assess STatin Residual Risk Reduction with EpaNova in
HiGh CV Risk PatienTs with Hypertriglyceridemia (STRENGTH)]
to study the potential benefits of EPA on CVD outcomes in subjects Subjects with type 2 diabetes or those with mixed or combined
with elevated serum TGs are ongoing. REDUCE-IT aims to recruit dyslipidaemia, renal and hepatic insufficiency states or autoimmune
8000 subjects and STRENGTH 13 000 subjects. diseases often present with low plasma concentrations of HDL-C. In
addition to low HDL-C, these disease states feature a moderate or
marked degree of HTG. The intravascular metabolism of TG-rich li-
7.7.3 Safety and interactions
poproteins (principally VLDL) is intimately linked to that of HDL.
The administration of n-3 fatty acids appears to be safe and devoid of
Drug-induced elevation of HDL-C may lead to reductions in the
clinically significant interactions. However, the antithrombotic ef-
cholesterol content of both VLDL and LDL. The magnitude of re-
fects may increase the propensity to bleed, especially when given
duction in VLDL cholesterol (VLDL-C) and LDL-C under these cir-
in addition to aspirin/clopidogrel. Recently the data from one study
cumstances tends to differ markedly as a function of the specific
associated the risk of prostate cancer with high dietary intake of n-3
mechanism of action of the pharmacological agent concerned, as
PUFAs.289
well as the dose employed and the baseline lipid phenotype. Fur- torcetrapib was withdrawn following an excess of mortality in the
thermore, the percentage increase in HDL-C following treatment torcetrapib arm of the Investigation of Lipid Level Management to
tends to be greater in subjects with the lowest baseline levels. Understand its Impact in Atherosclerotic Events (ILLUMINATE)
The available options for elevating low HDL-C levels are relative- trial.294 The Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Trans-
ly few. While HDL-C levels may be increased by up to 10% by im- fer Protein Inhibition with Evacetrapib in Patients at a High-Risk for
plementing therapeutic lifestyle changes, including weight reduction, Vascular Outcomes (ACCELERATE) trial of evacetrapib in acute cor-
exercise, smoking cessation and moderate alcohol consumption, onary syndrome subjects on statins was terminated due to futility.
many patients will also require pharmacological intervention if an Retrospectively, it appears that the deleterious effects of torce-
HDL-C increase is sought. However, until now there has been no trapib arose primarily from off-target toxicity related to activation
clear direct evidence that raising HDL-C really results in CVD pre- of the renin–angiotensin –aldosterone system (RAAS). The results
vention. Recent studies aimed at testing this hypothesis have failed of the dalcetrapib trial (Dal-OUTCOMES) shows no effects in ACS
to show any beneficial effect [ILLUMINATE (torcetrapib), Dalcetra- patients. Phase III trials with anacetrapib (REVEAL) are ongoing.

pib Outcomes (dal-OUTCOMES), ACCELERATE (evacetrapib),
HPS2-THRIVE (nicotinic acid plus statin), AIM-HIGH (nicotinic 8.5 Future perspectives
acid on background statin)], although the population selection in Major developments in the search for efficacious agents to raise
the last two studies may not have been optimal. The ongoing study HDL-C and apoA1 with concomitant benefit in atherosclerosis and
with a cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitor, the Ran- CV events are on the horizon. Among them, major interest is focused
domized Evaluation of the Effects of Anacetrapib Through Lipid on apoA1 mimetic peptides, which are not only active in cellular chol-
modification (REVEAL), will provide more information. esterol efflux, but may also exert a vast array of biological activities in-
cluding anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating effects. However,
8.1 Statins the genetic studies suggesting that low HDL-C is not causative for
Statins produce modest elevations in HDL-C. In a meta-analysis291 CVD may cast doubt on the possibilities of these treatment options.
of several intervention studies in dyslipidaemic patients, elevations in
HDL-C varied with dose among the respective statins; such eleva-
tions were typically in the range of 5–10%. As a result of the marked 9. Management of dyslipidaemia in
reductions in atherogenic apoB-containing lipoproteins by statins, it different clinical settings
is difficult to assess the extent to which the effect on HDL-C levels
might contribute to the overall observed reductions in CV risk con- 9.1 Familial dyslipidaemias
sistently seen in statin intervention trials. Despite such an effect, Plasma lipid levels are to a very large extent determined by genetic
however, the elevated CV risk associated specifically with low factors. In its more extreme forms this is manifested as familial
HDL-C levels was only partially corrected by statin treatment in hyperlipidaemia. A number of monogenic lipid disorders have
the Treatment to New Targets (TNT) trial.292 been identified; among these, FH is most common and strongly re-
lated to CVD. In general in patients with dyslipidaemia, most com-
8.2 Fibrates monly the pattern of inheritance does not suggest that there is a
As a class, fibrates differ in their potential to modulate the athero- major single gene disorder (monogenic) causing the abnormality,
genic lipid profile by concomitantly lowering TG levels (up to 50%) but rather that it stems from inheriting more than one lipoprotein
and by raising those of HDL-C (up to 10–15% in short-term stud- gene variant that, on its own, might have relatively little effect, but
ies). However, the HDL-raising effect has been markedly less (5%) in combination with another or others has a greater influence on
in the long-term intervention trials in people with type 2 dia- TC, TGs or HDL-C. The pattern of inheritance is polygenic.295 It
betes261,262; such differences appear to reflect distinctions in their is common to find that high LDL-C, high TGs or low HDL-C affect
relative binding affinities for PPARs, and notably for PPAR-a.293 several family members.
9.1.1 Familial combined hyperlipidaemia

8.3 Nicotinic acid
Familial combined hyperlipidaemia (FCH) is a highly prevalent dys-
Nicotinic acid appears to increase HDL-C by partially reducing HDL
lipidaemia (1:100) and an important cause of premature CAD.
catabolism and by mainly increasing apoA1 synthesis by the liver.
FCH is characterized by elevated levels of LDL-C, TGs or both.
The latter effect is regarded as the most relevant for the HDL func-
The phenotype varies even among members of the same family.
tions.263 Itsefficacy in clinical trials and adverse effects and drug
FCH shares considerable phenotype overlap with type 2 diabetes
interactions are described in section 7.6.
and MetS. FCH is a complex disease and the phenotype is deter-
mined by interaction of multiple susceptibility genes and the envir-
8.4 Cholesteryl ester transfer protein onment. The phenotype even within a family shows high inter- and
inhibitors intraperson variability based on lipid values (TGs, LDL-C, HDL-C
To date, the most efficacious pharmacological approach to elevation and apoB). Therefore, the diagnosis is commonly missed in clinical
of low HDL-C levels has involved direct inhibition of CETP by small practice; the combination of apoB .120 mg/dL + TGs
molecule inhibitors, which may induce an increase in HDL-C by .1.5 mmol/L (133 mg/dL) with a family history of premature
≥100% on a dose-dependent basis. Of the three CETP inhibitors de- CVD can be used to identify subjects who most probably have
veloped originally (torcetrapib, dalcetrapib and anacetrapib), FCH.296 Currently, research is ongoing to define genetic markers;
hopefully this approach will facilitate diagnosis of this frequent gen- diagnosed early and properly treated, the risk for CAD may be dra-
etic dyslipidaemia. matically reduced, with some studies even suggesting a normal life
The concept of FCH is also valuable clinically in assessing CV risk. expectancy.
It emphasizes both the importance of considering family history in The frequency of HeFH in the population has earlier been esti-
deciding how rigorously to treat dyslipidaemia and that elevated mated at 1/500; however, recent studies from whole populations
LDL-C levels are riskier when HTG is also present. Statin treatment suggest that the frequency is higher, in some populations as high
decreases CV risk by the same relative amount in people with HTG as 1/137.297 Based on extrapolations from available data, the fre-
as in those without. Because the absolute risk is often greater in quency of HeFH can be estimated to be between 1/200 and
those with HTG, they may therefore benefit greatly from hypocho- 1/250, putting the total number of cases at between 14 and 34 mil-
lesterolaemic therapy. lion worldwide.121,298 Only a minor fraction of these are identified
and properly treated. The risk of CHD among individuals with def-
9.1.2 Familial hypercholesterolaemia
inite or probable HeFH is estimated to be increased at least 10-fold.
9.1.2.1 Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia

FH is a monogenic disease caused by loss of function mutations in
FH is a common monogenic dyslipidaemia causing premature CVD
the LDLR or apoB genes or a gain of function mutation in the PCSK9
due to lifelong elevation of plasma levels of LDL-C. If left untreated,
gene; 95% of FH is caused by mutations in LDLR. More than a thou-
men and women with heterozygous FH (HeFH) typically develop
sand different mutations have been identified in LDLR causing FH.
CAD before the ages of 55 and 60 years, respectively. However, if
The different mutations cause reduced function or complete loss
of function. Complete loss of receptor function is associated with
more severe disease. A total of 4–5% of FH is caused by mutations
Table 21 Dutch Lipid Clinic Network diagnostic
301 in apoB causing reduced binding to LDLR and 1% is caused by
criteria for familial hypercholesterolaemia
mutations in PCSK9 causing increased catabolism of LDLR.
Criteria Points The diagnosis of FH is in most cases based on the clinical picture.
Different criteria for the diagnosis have been developed. The com-
1) Family history
monly used criteria from the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN)
First-degree relative with known premature (men: <55 years; are shown in Table 21. Other criteria are the Simon Broome register
women: <60 years) coronary or vascular disease, or
or the WHO criteria.299,300
First-degree relative with known LDL-C above the 95th 1 The clinical diagnosis of HeFH is based on family history of hyper-
percentile
cholesterolaemia or premature CHD, clinical history of the patient
First-degree relative with tendinous xanthomata and/or arcus regarding CVD and clinical signs. Finally, the diagnosis can be verified
cornealis, or
by showing causative mutations in the three pathogenic genes. How-
children <18 years of age with LDL-C above the 95th 2
ever, in most studies the frequency of detectable mutations in pa-
percentile (see 9.1.2.3)
tients with a clinically definite or probable HeFH is only 60 – 70%.
2) Clinical history
This suggests that a considerable fraction of patients with FH have
Patient with premature (men: <55 years; women: <60 years) 2 either a polygenic cause of the disease or that other genes, not
coronary artery disease
yet identified, are involved.
Patient with premature (men: <55 years; women: <60 years) 1 Genetic testing and cascade screening. Probands (index
cerebral or peripheral vascular disease
cases) should be identified according to the following criteria:
a
3) Physical examination
Tendinous xanthomata 6 † plasma cholesterol ≥8 mmol/L (310 mg/dL) in an adult or adult
Arcus cornealis before age 45 years 4 family member (or .95th percentile by age and gender for
4) LDL-C levels
country),
† premature CHD in the subject or a family member,
LDL-C ≥ 8.5 mmol/L (325 mg/dL) 8
† tendon xanthomas in the subject or a family member or
LDL-C 6.5–8.4 mmol/L (251–325 mg/dL) 5 † sudden premature cardiac death in a family member
LDL-C 5.0–6.4 mmol/L (191–250 mg/dL) 3
The most effective way to identify new cases is to undertake cascade
LDL-C 4.0–4.9 mmol/L (155–190 mg/dL) 1
screening of family members of a known index case. Cascade
5) DNA analysis screening is best performed by a lipid clinic with trained nurses
Functional mutation in the LDLR, apoB or PCSK9 gene 8 and physicians. In most families the cases may be identified with
Choose only one score per group, the highest applicable TC or LDL-C analysis. However, when the causative mutation is
Diagnosis (diagnosis is based on the total number of points known, genetic testing is recommended since affected individuals
obtained) may present with TC below the clinical diagnostic criteria.
A ‘definite’ FH diagnosis requires >8 points Cholesterol-lowering treatment should be initiated as soon as pos-
A ‘probable’ FH diagnosis requires 6–8 points sible after the diagnosis has been made. To improve risk assessment,
A ‘possible’ FH diagnosis requires 3–5 points use of imaging techniques to detect asymptomatic atherosclerosis is
recommended. The concept of cumulative cholesterol burden illus-
FH ¼ familial hypercholesterolaemia; LDL-C ¼ low-density
trates the importance of early treatment (for children, see below).
lipoproteincholesterol. Treatment should be initiated with high-intensity statin treatment,
a
Exclusive of each other (i.e. maximum 6 points if both are present) in most cases in combination with ezetimibe. LDL-C goals are
,2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) or ,1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) if CVD is 9.1.2.2 Homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia
present. Homozygous FH (HoFH) is a rare and life-threatening disease.
PCSK9 antibodies have recently been registered for use in FH pa- The clinical picture is characterized by extensive xanthomas, marked
tients. The drugs very efficiently lower LDL-C by up to 60% on top premature and progressive CVD and total cholesterol .13 mmol/L
of the statin. Randomized controlled studies have yet to report clinical (500 mg/dL). Most patients develop CAD and aortic stenosis before
endpoints and therefore the use of these drugs should be limited. the age of 20 years and die before 30 years of age. The frequency of
PCSK9 inhibitors should be considered in patients with FH at very HoFH is estimated to be 1/160 000–1/300 000. The early identifica-
high risk due to the presence of CVD, a family history of CAD at a tion of these children and prompt referral to a specialized clinic is cru-
very young age or an LDL-C level far from goal even on maximal other cial. The patients should be treated with available cholesterol-
therapy. PCSK9 inhibitors should also be considered in HeFH patients lowering drugs and, when available, with lipoprotein apheresis. For
who cannot tolerate statins and in FH patients with high Lp(a). a more detailed discussion of HoFH, including the role of PCSK9
Recommendations for the detection and treatment of patients inhibitors and the microsomal triglyceride transfer protein (MTP) in-

with HeFH are shown in Table 22. hibitor lomitapide, see the EAS consensus paper on HoFH.302
9.1.2.3 Familial hypercholesterolaemia in children

FH is diagnosed in children based on phenotypic criteria including ele-
Table 22 Recommendations for the detection and
vated LDL-C plus a family history of elevated LDL-C, premature CAD
treatment of patients with heterozygous familial
and/or positive genetic testing.303 Testing during childhood is optimal
hypercholesterolaemia
to discriminate between FH and non-FH using LDL-C. LDL-C
≥5 mmol/L (190 mg/dL) is most probably FH. In children with a family
history of high cholesterol or premature CHD, the cut-off point may
FH is recommended to be suspected in patients be put at ≥4.0 mmol/L (160 mg/dL). If a parent has a known genetic
with CHD before the age of 55 years for men
and 60 years for women, in subjects with
defect, the diagnostic level for the child is ≥3.5 mmol/L (130 mg/dL).
relatives with premature fatal or non-fatal Although placebo-controlled trials are missing in children, there
CVD, in subjects with relatives having tendon I C are observational studies suggesting that early treatment can reduce
xanthomas, and in subjects with severely LDL-C burden, improve endothelial function, substantially attenuate
elevated LDL-C [in adults >5 mmol/L
(190 mg/dL), in children >4 mmol/L
development of atherosclerosis and improve coronary out-
(150 mg/dL)]. comes.303 Treatment of children with FH includes a healthy lifestyle
Diagnosis is recommended to be confirmed
and statin treatment. A heart-healthy diet should be adopted early in
with clinical criteria and, when available, with I C life and statin treatment should be considered at 8–10 years of age.
DNA analysis. Statin treatment should be started with low doses and the dose
Family cascade screening is recommended to should be increased to reach goals. The goal in children .10 years
be performed when an index case of FH is I C of age is an LDL-C ,3.5 mmol/L (135 mg/dL) and at younger ages at
diagnosed. least a 50% reduction of LDL-C.
FH patients are recommended to be treated
with intense-dose statin, often in combination I C 9.1.3 Familial dysbetalipoproteinaemia
with ezetimibe.
Familial dysbetalipoproteinaemia (i.e. type III hyperlipoproteinae-
Treatment should be considered to aim at
mia; remnant removal disease) is rare and is generally inherited as
reaching an LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) or
in the presence of CVD <1.8 mmol/L an autosomal recessive disorder with variable penetrance. It is
(70 mg/dL). If targets cannot be reached, IIa C rare for it to be expressed in women before menopause. The ma-
maximal reduction of LDL-C should be jority of cases are homozygous for the E2 isoform of apoE. ApoE is
considered using appropriate drug
important for hepatic clearance of chylomicron remnants and IDL.
combinations.
ApoE2 binds less readily than isoforms E3 or E4 to hepatic recep-
Treatment with a PCSK9 antibody should be
tors. However, without some coincidental cause of dyslipidaemia,
considered in FH patients with CVD or with
other factors putting them at very high-risk IIa C apoE2 homozygosity does not generally cause familial dysbetalipo-
for CHD, such as other CV risk factors, family proteinaemia syndrome. The syndrome often develops in the pres-
history, high Lp(a) or statin intolerance. ence of dyslipidaemia associated with HTG, diabetes mellitus,
In children, testing is recommended from age obesity or hypothyroidism.
I C
5 years, or earlier if homozygous FH is suspected. Familial dysbetalipoproteinaemia produces a characteristic clinic-
Children with FH should be educated to adopt al syndrome in which both TC and TGs are elevated before treat-
a proper diet and treated with statin from ment, usually both in the range of 7 – 10 mmol/L. In severe cases,
8–10 years of age. Targets for treatment should IIa C
be LDL-C <3.5 mmol/L (135 mg/dL) at
patients develop tuberoeruptive xanthomata, particularly over the
>10 years of age. elbows and knees, and palmar xanthomata in the skin creases of
the hands and wrists. The risk of CAD is very high, and accelerated
CHD ¼ coronary heart disease; CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease; FH ¼ familial atherosclerosis of the femoral and tibial arteries is also prevalent.
hypercholesterolaemia; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; Lp(a) ¼ The detection of apoE2 homozygosity in a dyslipidaemic patient is
lipoprotein(a). diagnostic and analysis of apoE isoforms is now available in most clin-
a
b
Level of evidence. ical laboratories. In older patients with xanthomata resembling
those of familial dysbetalipoproteinaemia, who prove not to be
homozygous for apoE2, a paraprotein should be sought. The treat- concentration is 5–10 mmol/L (440–880 mg/dL). Recent data from a
ment of familial dysbetalipoproteinaemia should be undertaken in a prospective cohort study (n ¼ 33 346) reported that the risk of acute
specialist clinic. Most cases respond well to treatment with a statin pancreatitis increased significantly over the quartiles of serum TGs,
or, if dominated by high TGs, a fibrate; often a combination of a sta- highlighting that serum TGs as a risk factor may have been underesti-
tin and a fibrate may be needed. mated.307 Any factor that increases VLDL production can aggravate the
risk of pancreatitis, with alcohol consumption being the most common
9.1.4 Genetic causes of hypertriglyceridaemia
contributing factor. The patient should be admitted to hospital if symp-
The genetic aetiology for HTG seems to be very complex, with effects
tomatic, or careful and close follow-up of the patient’s TG values
of both common and rare genetic variants.67,304 Moderate elevation of
should be undertaken. Restriction of calories and fat content (10–
TG levels (between 2.0–10.0 mmol/L) is caused by the polygenic effect
15% recommended) in the diet and alcohol abstinence are obligatory.
of multiple genes influencing both VLDL production and removal. In
Fibrate therapy (fenofibrate) should be initiated, with n-3 fatty acids
CVD prevention, polygenic moderate TG elevation is to be consid-
(2–4 g/day) as adjunct therapy or nicotinic acid. Lomitapide may also
ered. Monogenic severe HTG causes pancreatitis and lipid deposits.

be considered in severe cases.67 In patients with diabetes, insulin ther-
Thus far, mutations in six genes (LPL, apoC2, apoA5, LMF1, GPIHBP1
apy should be initiated to achieve good glycaemic control. In general, a
and GPD1) with monogenic effect have been recognized to lead to se-
sharp decrease of TG values is seen within 2–5 days. In the acute set-
vere elevation of serum TGs due to disruption of the chylomicron re-
ting, plasmapheresis is able to rapidly lower TG levels.308
moval pathways. These mutations are inherited as an autosomal
recessive trait and are rare. A profound defect in the catabolism of chy-
9.1.5 Other genetic disorders of lipoprotein metabolism
lomicrons and VLDL results in chylomicronaemia and TG levels
(Table 23)
.11.2 mmol/L (1000 mg/dL), with turbid and milky serum. Severe
Sometimes patients are encountered with extremely low levels of
HTG is seen in patients who are homozygous or compound heterozy-
LDL-C or HDL-C. The most common genetic hypolipidaemia is hy-
gous for mutations of the enzyme lipoprotein lipase (LPL) and in the
pobetalipoproteinaemia, which is dominantly inherited and often
other genes linked to catabolism of TG-rich lipoproteins. Recently,
due to truncation of apoB. Serum LDL-C is typically between 0.5
gene therapy for LPL deficiency has been developed and tested in clin-
and 1.5 mmol/L (20 –60 mg/dL). It is generally of no medical signifi-
ical trials305 and the alipogene tiparvovec was approved by the EMA in
cance. A more profound deficiency of apoB occurs in abetalipopro-
2013. A gain of function mutation in apoC3 leading to high apoC3 levels
teinaemia when steatorrhoea and neurological or other
can also cause severe HTG by the inhibition of LPL activity, whereas
complications require specialist treatment. Almost absent levels of
loss of function mutations are associated with a favourable lipid profile
HDL-C occur in Tangier disease (analphalipoproteinaemia) and
with low TG levels.306 These findings have raised the possibility of
very low levels of HDL-C occur in lecithin cholesterol acyltransfer-
apoC3 as a novel lipid drug target. In summary, the development of
ase (LCAT) deficiency. Both these conditions are associated with
new therapeutic options for this rare disease raises the need for aware-
distinct clinical syndromes and require specialist investigation.
ness and screening of these patients.
Very high levels of HDL-C are detected in patients with CETP defi-
9.1.4.1 Action to prevent acute pancreatitis in severe ciency. In the heterozygous form, typically levels of 2.0 –2.4 mmol/L
hypertriglyceridaemia (80 – 90 mg/dL) are observed, and levels ≥5 mmol/L (200 mg/dL)
The risk of pancreatitis is clinically significant if TGs exceed are observed in homozygotes. This is not associated with athero-
10 mmol/L (880 mg/dL), and actions to prevent acute pancreatitis sclerotic disease and may be associated with reduced risk.
are mandatory. Notably, HTG is the cause of 10% of all cases with Lysosomal acid lipase (LAL) deficiency or cholesterol ester stor-
pancreatitis, and patients can develop pancreatitis even when their TG age disease (in children with Wolman disease) is a rare cause
Table 23 Genetic disorders of lipoprotein metabolism
Disorder Prevalence Gene(s) Effect on lipoproteins

HeFH 1 in 200–250 LDLR ↑LDL-C
APO B
PCSK9
HoFH 1 in 160 000–320 000 LDLR ↑↑LDL-C
APO B
PCSK9
FCH 1 in 100/200 USF1 + modifying genes ↑LDL-C ↑VLDL-C ↑apoB
Familial dysbetalipoproteinaemia 1 in 5000 APO E ↑↑ IDL and chylomicron
remnants (βVLDL)
Familial lipoprotein lipase deficiency 1 in 106 LPL ↑↑ chylomicrons and VLDL-C
APO C2
Tangier disease (analphalipoproteinaemia) 1 in 106 ABCA1 ↓↓HDL-C
Familial LCAT deficiency 1 in 106 LCAT ↓HDL-C
apo ¼ apolipoprotein; FCH ¼ familial combined hyperlipidaemia; HeFH ¼ heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia; HoFH ¼ homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia;
HDL-C ¼ high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; IDL ¼ intermediate-density lipoprotein; LCAT ¼ lecithin cholesterol acyltransferase; LDL-C ¼ low-density
lipoproteincholesterol; VLDL ¼ very low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol.
(recessive transmission) of elevated LDL-C and low HDL-C accom- demonstrated. The meta-analysis of Walsh and Pignone314 reported
panied by hepatomegaly and microvesicular hepatosteatosis. Statin a 26% reduction of CV mortality, a 29% reduction of MI and a 20% re-
treatment does decrease LDL-C, and therefore could prevent CVD duction of total CAD events in a cohort of 8272 females with previous
in these patients, but it cannot stop the progression of liver damage. CVD mainly treated with statins. The CTT meta-analysis also indicates
Enzyme replacement therapy with sebelipase alfa might offer a treat- that the benefit overall is similar in men and women.65 Therefore, sec-
ment solution in the near future.309 ondary prevention of CV events in women should routinely include a
statin-based lipid-lowering regimen, with the same recommendations
9.2 Children and therapeutic goals that are applied to men.
Only children with FH should be considered for lipid-lowering drug
9.3.3 Non-statin lipid-lowering drugs
treatment. In other cases of dyslipidaemia in children, focus should
No definitive evidence of cardioprotective effects was available until
be on diet and treatment of underlying metabolic disorders. HoFH
recently. The IMPROVE-IT study63 included patients at least 50 years
patients should be treated with lipid-lowering drugs as early as pos-
of age who had been hospitalized within the preceding 10 days for an

sible, and the same is true for HeFH patents with extremely high
ACS (24% women). The combination of simvastatin–ezetimibe was
LDL-C, i.e. ≥400 mg/dL (10.3 mmol/L).310 In the case of other
compared with simvastatin monotherapy. The rate of the composite
HeFH children, statin treatment is generally withheld until sometime
endpoint of death from CV causes, MI or stroke was significantly low-
between the ages of 8 and 10 years. There is evidence from carotid
er, by 1.8 percentage points, in the combination group and the benefit
ultrasound measurements that increased CIMT in children with
of simvastatin–ezetimibe was consistent for women.63
HeFH compared with siblings who have not inherited HeFH can
The ACCORD lipid study showed less primary event reduction
be detected from the age of 6 years onwards, and that the progres-
with combination therapy in women, but the recent FIELD study
sion of increasing CIMT can be ameliorated with statin therapy and/
analysis showed consistent CV event reduction in women and
or apheresis.311 However, the exact age at which to start statin
men.315 Ezetimibe, or fibrates, alone or in combination with statins,
treatment is a matter of clinical judgement.
can be used, depending on the type of dyslipidaemia and adverse
9.3 Women effect profiles. Recent data with PCSK9 inhibitors indicate a similar
efficacy in reducing LDL-C in women vs. men.115,116
Among several studies that have evaluated the impact of
lipid-lowering therapy on primary and secondary prevention of 9.3.4 Hormone therapy
CAD, only a few have included women, usually in small numbers, Currently used third-generation low-dose oestrogen–progestin oral
and the results have often not been separately reported by gen- contraceptives do not appear to increase adverse coronary events316
der.312 The most recent CTT meta-analysis, however, indicates a and can be used, after baseline lipid profile assessment, in women
similar relative benefit in men and women.65 with acceptable TC levels. In contrast, alternative contraceptive mea-
sures should be recommended in women with hypercholesterol-
9.3.1 Primary prevention
aemia [LDL-C .4 mmol/L (160 mg/dL)] or with multiple risk
The benefit of statins in primary prevention is less well-established
factors and in those at high risk of thrombotic events.317 Oestrogen
in women than in men. This may be because of their lower baseline
replacement therapy, despite some favourable effects on the lipid
risk and their underrepresentation in trials, and points to the need
profile, has not been demonstrated to reduce CV risk and cannot
to include gender balance and sufficient numbers to detect modest
be recommended for CVD prevention in women.318 No
absolute treatment effects in future trials.
lipid-lowering drugs should be administered during pregnancy and
The 2013 Cochrane analysis showed reductions of all-cause mor-
the period of breastfeeding since data on possible adverse effects
tality, vascular events and revascularisations with statins in primary
are lacking. However, bile acid sequestrants may be considered.
prevention. Effects in women were similar to those in men.200 In
Box 10 lists the main measures in the management of dyslipidae-
postmenopausal women, plaque rupture was found to be a more
mia in women.
common cause of ACS than plaque erosion and is correlated with
TC levels.313
Box 10 Management of dyslipidaemia in women
A recent meta-analysis of statin trials in the CTT database com-
pared the effects of statin therapy between men and women.65 The
Statin treatment is recommended for primary prevention of CAD in
proportional (relative risk) reductions in major coronary events,
high-risk women. 64, 65
coronary revascularisations and stroke did not differ significantly
Statins are recommended for secondary prevention in women with the
by gender. All-cause mortality reductions were seen in both women same indications and targets as in men. 64, 65
and men, showing that statin therapy is of similar effectiveness. Sig-
Lipid-lowering drugs should not be given when pregnancy is planned,
nificant decreases in vascular events in primary prevention were during pregnancy or during the breastfeeding period. However, bile acid
seen in both women and men. Thus statin use should be considered sequestrants (which are not absorbed) may be considered.
for primary prevention in women at high CV risk with the same
indications as for men.
9.3.2 Secondary prevention 9.4 Older persons

More data coming from large RCTs of secondary prevention are avail- The proportion of older people in society is increasing and, as a con-
able for women. The results of these trials concordantly show that sequence, .80% of individuals who die from CVD are .65 years of
lipid-lowering therapy substantially reduces CV events in these pa- age. The proportion of patients with MI .85 years of age has in-
tients, although no reduction in total mortality risk could be creased several fold.319 Coronary care has also been improved for
older adults, with improving prognosis after the first MI.320 To target ,65, 65 –70 and .70 years.333 Similar results were found in sub-
the older population with risk reduction is important since CVD or group analyses of the Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Is-
subclinical atherosclerosis is common and dyslipidaemia is frequent. chemic Disease (LIPID),334 Cholesterol and Recurrent Events
Results from a meta-analysis on blood cholesterol and vascular (CARE)335 and TNT trials.336 From data in the LIPID trial the
mortality indicates that high TC is a significant risk factor for CAD authors calculated that per 1000 persons treated, 45 deaths and
mortality at all ages, but this association is attenuated in older adults; 47 major coronary events would be prevented in the older group
1 mmol/L (38.7 mg/dL) lower TC was associated with about one- over 6 years compared with 22 deaths and 32 major coronary
half [hazard ratio (HR) 0.44] lower CAD mortality in the age group events in younger patients over the same time period.
40 – 49 years compared with an HR of 0.85 in those 80 – 89 years In a CTT meta-analysis, rate ratios for the effects of statins on ma-
old.321,322 However, although a relative risk reduction is seen in jor vascular events were 0.78, 0.78 and 0.84 in age groups ,65, 65 –
the oldest subjects, the increased frequency of CAD means that 75 and .75 years, respectively.64 Results from an MI registry study
the absolute number of cases associated with cholesterol is highest in Sweden demonstrate that statin treatment is associated with low-

in this group. Evidence for treatment in this group, particularly for er CV mortality in very old post-MI patients without (which is
those .80 –85 years of age, is limited, and clinical judgement should important to stress) increasing the risk of cancer.337
guide decisions in the very old.
9.4.3 Adverse effects, interactions and adherence
9.4.1 Primary prevention The safety and adverse effects of statins are a matter of special concern
The most important way to prevent CVD in older adults is to pro- in older adults because they often have co-morbidities, take multiple
mote a healthy lifestyle and reduction of risk factors early in life. Sev- medications and have altered pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynam-
eral studies have shown that a healthy lifestyle early in life prevents ics. Statin–drug interactions are a concern primarily because of their
CVD in older age and reduces lifetime risk for CVD.53,323 – 325 Life- potential to increase muscle-related statin-associated adverse effects
time prevention includes no smoking, control of blood pressure, such as myalgia without CK elevation, myopathy with CK elevation
healthy eating habits, regular exercise and controlling body weight. and the rare but serious rhabdomyolysis. Statin treatment should be
No primary prevention study has specifically targeted the older started at a low dose to avoid adverse events and then titrated to
population.326 Available data are based on subgroup analyses from achieve optimal LDL-C levels with an appropriate dose.
controlled studies. In a recent meta-analysis, subjects .65 years of Older adults are less likely to be prescribed lipid-lowering medi-
age (n ¼ 24 674) from eight studies were included.327 Statin treat- cations, or adhere to statin therapy, than younger or middle-age
ment reduced MI (RR 0.61) and stroke (RR 0.76). The reduction subjects. Cost, adverse effects, coronary events occurring despite
in all-cause mortality was not significant (RR 0.94). In the Air being on lipid-lowering agents and the wrong perception that the
Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention (AFCAPS-TEX- drug is not beneficial are among the reasons for non-adherence. Im-
CAP) study, risk reduction was similar above and below the median proving patient understanding of CV risk, the medication regimen
age (57 years for men and 62 years for women).328 In the Justifica- and potential benefits of persistence with statin therapy may en-
tion for the Use of Statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evalu- hance adherence.
ating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER) trial a post hoc analysis of subjects
older and younger than 70 years showed that the relative risk reduc- Table 24 Recommendations for the treatment of
tion for a composite CVD endpoint was similar in the two groups. dyslipidaemia in older adults
The number needed to treat for 4 years to prevent one major event
was 24 in the older group and 36 in the younger age group.329 Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c
Treatment with statins is
9.4.2 Secondary prevention recommended for older adults with
I A 334, 337
Also in secondary prevention, very few studies have targeted the older established CVD in the same way as
population. The Prospective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk for younger patients.
(PROSPER) study included patients 70–82 years of age with CVD or Since older people often have
at high risk for CVD.330 Patients were treated with pravastatin 40 mg co-morbidities and have altered
pharmacokinetics, lipid-lowering
daily or placebo. The relative risk reduction for a combined CAD end- medication should be started at a
point was reduced by 15%, whereas no reduction was shown for IIa C
lower dose and then titrated with
stroke. In the Studies Assessing Goals in the Elderly (SAGE) trial, caution to achieve target lipid levels
893 patients 65–83 years of age with stable CAD were recruited to that are the same as in younger
subjects.
treatment with atorvastatin 80 mg or pravastatin 40 mg.331 The ator-
vastatin group had a lower all-cause mortality (HR 0.33) and a non- Statin therapy should be considered
in older adults free from CVD,
significant trend towards reduction in major CAD events. 62, 64,
particularly in the presence of IIa B
Subgroup analyses in randomized trials have been performed for 65
hypertension, smoking, diabetes
several studies. In the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) and dyslipidaemia.
trial, patients .65 years of age had a similar relative risk reduction
as younger patients.332 In the Heart Protection Study (HPS), 20 536 CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease.
a
individuals were allocated to simvastatin or placebo. After 5 years Class of recommendation.
b
Level of evidence.
the relative risk reduction was 18% for coronary death and 25% c
for coronary events. The reduction was similar in age groups
Table 24 lists the recommendations for treatment of dyslipidae-

mia in older adults. Table 25 Summary of dyslipidaemia in metabolic
syndrome and in type 2 diabetes
9.5 Diabetes and metabolic syndrome
Dyslipidaemia in MetS represents a cluster of lipid and lipoprotein
Diabetes seems to be the fastest increasing disease in the world and abnormalities including elevation of both fasting and postprandial TG,
it is estimated that the number of people with diabetes will increase apoB, and small dense LDL and low HDL-C and apoA1.
from 350 million today up to 550 million by 2030.338 Despite sig- Non-HDL-C or apoB are good surrogate markers of TRLs and remnants
nificant advantages in the management strategies that lessen CVD and are a secondary objective of therapy. Non-HDL-C <3.4 mmol/L
risk factors, CVD has remained the leading cause of morbidity and (<130 mg/dL) or apoB <100 mg/dL is desirable in those at high-risk,
and <2.6 mmol/L (<100 mg/dL) and <80 mg/dL, respectively, in those at
mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). It has
very high-risk.
been estimated that the years of life lost for a 50-year-old person
Increased waist circumference and elevation of TG seems to be a simple
with diabetes averages at 6 years and 58% of this difference is
tool to capture the high-risk subjects with MetS.

due to excess vascular disease.339 Diabetes itself is an independent
Atherogenic dyslipidaemia is one of the major risk factors for CVD in
risk factor for CVD and is associated with a higher risk of CVD, even people with type 2 diabetes.
more so in women. Although the difference in CVD risk between
individuals with and without diabetes has narrowed substantially
apoB ¼ apolipoprotein B; CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease; HDL-C ¼ high-density
over the last decades, there are strong associations between diabetes lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; MetS ¼
and vascular outcomes.340,341 Recent data indicate that diabetes per se metabolic syndrome; TG ¼ triglycerides; TRLs ¼ triglyceride-rich lipoproteins.
increases CVD risk about two-fold on average, but the risk is subject
to wide variation depending on the population.342 Importantly, those
with diabetes and CAD are at substantially higher CVD risk for future including chylomicrons, VLDL and their remnants, carry a single
events. Hypertension, dyslipidaemia and abdominal obesity commonly apoB molecule, also like LDL particles. Therefore the malignant na-
co-exist with T2DM and further aggravate the risk, which is highest in ture of diabetic dyslipidaemia is not always revealed by the lipid mea-
people with T2DM and features of MetS.343,344 Importantly, diabetes sures used in clinical practice, as LDL-C may remain within the
confers excess mortality risk following ACS despite modern therapies, normal range. It may be better revealed by non-HDL-C. Elevation
highlighting the poor prognosis of coronary patients with T2DM and of TGs or low HDL-C is seen in about half of subjects with
the need for intensive therapy.345 T2DM.351 The abnormal features of the lipid profile precede the on-
Even more frequent are conditions predisposing to diabetes, such set of T2DM by several years and are common in subjects with cen-
as the so-called metabolic syndrome. The term MetS refers to the tral obesity, MetS and T2DM.
clustering of different cardiometabolic risk factors: central obesity,
raised serum TGs, reduced HDL-C, glucose intolerance and high 9.5.2 Evidence for lipid-lowering therapy
blood pressure.346,347 Scoring systems that dichotomize these vari- 9.5.2.1 Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
ables may miss some of the associated risk; a practical approach is LDL-C is stipulated to be the primary target of lipid-lowering ther-
that if one component is identified, a systematic search should be apy in diabetes. Trials specifically performed in subjects with T2DM
made for others. as well as subsets of individuals with diabetes in major statin trials
MetS identifies people at a higher risk of CVD than the general have consistently demonstrated significant benefits of statin therapy
population. Data from recent meta-analyses indicate that people on CVD events in people with T2DM.64 Statin therapy reduces the
with MetS have a two-fold increase in CV outcomes and a 5-year incidence of major CVD events by 23% per 1 mmol/L reduc-
1.5-fold increase in all-cause mortality.348 How to capture the extra tion in LDL-C, regardless of the initial LDL-C or other baseline char-
risk beyond the traditional risk factors in clinical practice is a debated acteristics based on meta-analysis.64 The CTT meta-analysis further
issue. A combination of large waist circumference and elevation indicates that subjects with T2DM will have a relative risk reduction
of TGs is a simple and inexpensive screening tool to discriminate that is comparable to that seen in non-diabetic patients, but being at
people with MetS at high CVD risk for global risk evaluation.180 higher absolute risk, the absolute benefit will be greater, resulting in
a lower number needed to treat (NNT). Recent studies have sug-
9.5.1 Specific features of dyslipidaemia in insulin resistance gested an increased incidence of diabetes in patients treated with
and type 2 diabetes (Table 25) statins.225 This effect must not lessen our attention to the treatment
Diabetic dyslipidaemia is a cluster of plasma lipid and lipoprotein ab- of patients, as the overall benefit in CV events reduction remains.
normalities that are metabolically interrelated. The increase in large
VLDL particles in T2DM initiates a sequence of events that gener- 9.5.2.2 Triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol
ates atherogenic remnants, small dense LDL and small TG-rich Clinical benefits achieved by the treatment of atherogenic dyslipidae-
dense HDL particles.349 These components are not isolated abnor- mia (high TGs and low HDL-C) are still a matter of discussion. Al-
malities but are closely linked to each other. Both LDL and HDL though the Helsinki Heart Study reported a significant reduction in
particles show variable compositional changes that are reflected CVD outcomes with gemfibrozil, neither the FIELD nor the ACCORD
in their functions. Notably apoCIII levels are increased in subjects study showed a reduction in total CVD outcomes.261,262,265 The
with T2DM.350 Together, TRL remnants, small dense LDL and small FIELD trial failed to reduce significantly the primary endpoint of
dense HDL comprise the atherogenic lipid profile, which is also CAD events (CAD death or non-fatal MI). CVD events were re-
characterized by an increase in apoB concentration due to an induced significantly by 11%. In a post hoc analysis of the FIELD study,
creased number of apoB-containing particles. Importantly, TRLs, fenofibrate reduced CVD events by 27% in those with elevated TGs
[.2.3 mmol/L (204 mg/dL)] and reduced HDL-C (NNT ¼ evidence from outcome studies is limited.354 Patients with T2DM
23).351 The ACCORD trial confirmed this: patients who had both ,40 years of age, with a short duration of therapy, without other
TG levels in the higher third [≥2.3 mmol/L (204 mg/dL)] and an risk factors, without complications and with an LDL-C level
HDL-C level in the lower third [≤0.88 mmol/L (34 mg/dL)], repre- ,2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/ dL) may not need lipid-lowering drugs.
senting 17% of all participants, appeared to benefit from adding fe-
nofibrate to simvastatin.262
A post hoc analysis of patients with low HDL-C [,1 mmol/L 9.5.4 Type 1 diabetes
(40 mg/dL)] and elevated TGs [.1.80 mmol/L (160 mg/dL)] in Type 1 diabetes is associated with high CVD risk, in particular in pa-
the 4S trial demonstrated a relative risk for major coronary events of tients with microalbuminuria and renal disease.355 Conclusive evi-
0.48 with simvastatin. The respective relative risk for overall mortality dence supports the proposition that hyperglycaemia accelerates
was 0.44.352 Consistent with these findings, a meta-analysis of fibrates atherosclerosis. Emerging evidence highlights the frequent coexist-
in the prevention of CVD in 11 590 people with T2DM showed that ence of MetS with type 1 diabetes, resulting in this so-called double
diabetes increasing CVD risk.356

fibrates significantly reduced the risk of non-fatal MI by 21%, but had
no effect on the risk of overall mortality or coronary mortality.353 The lipid profile in type 1 diabetic subjects with good glycaemic
The concept of raising HDL-C seems attractive based on the control is ‘supernormal’ and characterized by subnormal TGs and
strength of the relationship between low HDL-C and increased LDL-C, whereas HDL-C is usually within the upper normal range
CVD risk in observational studies. Evidence for a beneficial clinical or slightly elevated. This is explained by subcutaneous administra-
effect of raising HDL-C is lacking, with lifestyle modification provid- tion of insulin that increases LPL activity in adipose tissue and skel-
ing the first option due to its multifaceted effects. etal muscle and consequently the turnover rate of VLDL particles.
However, there are potentially atherogenic changes in the compos-
9.5.3 Treatment strategies for subjects with type 2 ition of both HDL and LDL particles. In all patients with type 1 dia-
diabetes and metabolic syndrome betes and in the presence of microalbuminuria and renal disease,
Lifestyle therapy to improve the atherogenic lipid profile should be re- LDL-C lowering (at least 30%) with statins as the first choice
commended to all subjects with T2DM and MetS (see section 5). Diet- (drug combination may be considered if needed) is recommended
ary advice should be tailored according to the individual’s needs. If irrespective of the basal LDL-C concentration.
LDL-C goals are not achieved on maximally tolerated doses of statins, Recommendations for the treatment of dyslipidaemia in diabetes
drug combinations may offer additional lowering of LDL-C, but the are shown in Table 26.
Table 26 Recommendations for the treatment of dyslipidaemia in diabetes

In all patients with type I diabetes and in the presence of microalbuminuria and/or renal disease, LDL-C lowering (at least
I C 64, 357
50%) with statins as the first choice is recommended irrespective of the baseline LDL-C concentration.
In patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD or CKD, and in those without CVD who are >40 years of age with one or more
other CVD risk factors or markers of target organ damage, the recommended goal for LDL-C is <1.8 mmol/L (<70 mg/dL) I B 62, 64
and the secondary goal for non-HDL-C is <2.6 mmol/L (<100 mg/dL) and for apoB is <80 mg/dL.
In all patients with type 2 diabetes and no additional risk factors and/or evidence of target organ damage, LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L
I B 62, 64
(<100 mg/dL) is the primary goal. Non-HDL-C <3.4 mmol/L (<130 mg/dL) and apoB <100 mg/dL are the secondary goals.
apoB ¼ apolipoprotein B; CKD ¼ chronic kidney disease; CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease; HDL-C ¼ high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ low-density
lipoproteincholesterol; MetS ¼ metabolic syndrome; TG ¼ triglycerides.
a
b
Level of evidence.
c
9.6 Patients with acute coronary 9.6.1 Specific lipid management issues in acute coronary
syndrome
syndrome and patients undergoing
Data from specific trials358 – 360 and meta-analysis support routine
percutaneous coronary intervention early use of prompt, intensive and prolonged statin therapy. Thus
Patients who have presented recently with ACS are at high risk of we recommend that high-intensity statin therapy be initiated during
experiencing further CV events. In these patients, lipid manage- the first 1–4 days of hospitalization for the index ACS; the dose should
ment should be undertaken in the context of a comprehensive glo- aim at reaching the LDL-C goal of ,1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) or a
bal risk management strategy that includes lifestyle adaptations, 50% reduction of LDL-C as indicated in Table 11 on treatment goals.
management of risk factors and the use of cardioprotective drugs The use of lower-intensity statin therapy should be considered in pa-
in certain subgroups. Ideally, this can be well coordinated through tients at increased risk of adverse effects with high-intensity statins (e.g.
participation in a multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation the elderly, hepatic impairment, renal impairment or potential for
programme. interaction with essential concomitant therapy). Ezetimibe further
reduced LDL-C and offered additional benefit (6.4% relative risk re- with high-dose statin (ranging from .2 weeks to a single dose)
duction in composite clinical endpoint) in association with simvastatin in statin-naı̈ve patients (11 studies) or loading of a high-dose statin
in post-ACS patients.63 Results in studies with PCSK9 inhibitors that in patients receiving chronic statin therapy decreased periproce-
included post-ACS/very high-risk patients were promising115,116 and dural MI and 30-day adverse events in patients undergoing percu-
definitive outcome studies are awaited. taneous coronary intervention (PCI).363 – 365 In all but one study,
Lipids should be re-evaluated 4–6 weeks after ACS to determine PCI was performed in the setting of stable angina, or in a
whether lipid goals have been reached and whether there are any non-emergent fashion in non-ST elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS). In
safety issues; the therapeutic regimen can then be adapted accordingly. one study in the setting of primary PCI that was included in the
Supplementation with highly purified n-3 PUFAs reduced mortality meta-analysis, coronary flow was improved. 366 Thus a strategy
in survivors of MI in one study (Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della of routine short pretreatment or loading (on the background of
Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto Miocardico (GISSI)], but failed to affect clin- chronic therapy) with high-dose statin before PCI should be con-
ical outcomes in two more recent trials using modern evidence-based sidered in elective PCI or in NSTE-ACS (class IIa, level of evidence

prevention therapies (most patients were on statins), and therefore A).363 – 365 High-dose statin pretreatment or loading before pri-
cannot be recommended in routine practice.361 Furthermore, in pa- mary or delayed PCI for ST elevation MI (STEMI) requires further
tients who had experienced a recent ACS, the CETP inhibitor dalce- study. Statin pretreatment is also effective in reducing the risk of
trapib did not reduce the risk of recurrent CV events.362 contrast-induced acute kidney injury after coronary angiography
or intervention.367
9.6.2 Lipid management issues in patients undergoing Recommendations for lipid-lowering therapy in patients
percutaneous coronary intervention with ACS and patients undergoing PCI are shown in
In an individual patient meta-analysis of 13 randomized studies that Table 27.
included 3341 patients, it was shown that either pretreatment
Table 27 Recommendations for lipid-lowering therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome and patients
undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

It is recommended to initiate or continue high dose statins early after admission in all ACS patients without contra- 64,
I A
indication or history of intolerance, regardless of initial LDL-C values. 358–360
If the LDL-C target is not reached with the highest tolerable statin dose, ezetimibe should be considered in combination
IIa B 63
with statins in post-ACS patients.
If the LDL-C target is not reached with the highest tolerable statin dose and/or ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors may be
considered on top of lipid-lowering therapy; or alone or in combination with ezetimibe in statin intolerant patients or in IIb C 115, 116
whom a statin is contra-indicated.
Lipids should be re-evaluated 4–6 weeks after ACS to determine whether target levels of LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L
(<70 mg/dL) or a reduction of at least 50% if the baseline is between 1.8 and 3.5 mmol/L (70 and 135 mg/dL) have been IIa C
reached and whether there are any safety issues. The therapy dose should then be adapted accordingly.
Routine short pretreatment or loading (on the background of chronic therapy) with high-dose statins before PCI should be
IIa A 363–365
considered in elective PCI or in NSTE-ACS.
ACS ¼ acute coronary syndrome; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; NSTE-ACS ¼ non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome; PCI ¼ percutaneous coronary
intervention; PCSK9 ¼ proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9.
a
b
Level of evidence.
c
9.7 Heart failure and valvular diseases 9.7.2 Chronic heart failure
9.7.1 Prevention of incident heart failure in coronary HF patients have lower TC and LDL-C than patients without HF. In
artery disease patients contrast to patients without HF, low TC portends a poor prognosis
The onset of heart failure (HF) increases the risk of mortality and in HF. Routine administration of statins in patients with HF is not ad-
morbidity three to four times compared with patients without HF. vised. In two large RCTs373,374 there was no benefit on hard end-
Pooling of results from RCTs suggested that cholesterol lowering points, such as CV mortality and non-fatal MI and stroke, in spite
with statin treatment reduced incident HF by 9 – 45% in patients of a decrease in hospitalizations373,375 and a marked reduction of
with CAD.368,369 Four key prospective RCTs compared more inten- LDL-C and hs-CRP in patients with mainly systolic heart failure. In
sive vs. less intensive drug regimens. The more intense approach re- any case, there is no evidence for harm in patients on statin treat-
duced the incidence of hospitalization due to HF by an average of ment after the occurrence of HF, and therefore there is no need
27% in patients with acute and stable CAD without previous for discontinuation if patients are already on this medication. n-3
HF.358,370 – 372 However, there is no evidence that statins can pre- PUFAs may have a small benefit. In the GISSI-HF RCT, a significant
vent HF of non-ischaemic origin. effect on primary endpoints (all-cause death and hospitalization for
HF) was found in HF patients with New York Heart Association 9.8 Autoimmune diseases
(NYHA) classifications II –IV.376 Autoimmune diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, SLE, psoriasis
and anti-phospholipid syndrome, are characterized by enhanced
9.7.3 Valvular disease atherosclerosis and consequently higher CV morbidity and mortal-
Aortic stenosis increases the risk of CV events and mortality. Sugges- ity rates compared with the general population.383 – 385 The immune
tions for an association between aortic stenosis, LDL-C and Lp(a), as system is believed to be involved in the pathogenesis of atheroscler-
well as between cholesterol and increased risk for calcification of osis. Inflammatory components of the immune response as well as
bioprosthetic valves, were matched with early observational non- autoimmune elements (e.g. autoantibodies, autoantigens and auto-
controlled trials that showed beneficial effects of aggressive lipid low- reactive lymphocytes) are involved in these processes. These dis-
ering in slowing the progression of aortic stenosis. However, this was eases are characterized by inflammatory vasculitis and endothelial
not confirmed in RCTs.243,377,378 The Scottish Aortic Stenosis and dysfunction. Therefore particular attention should be paid to con-
Lipid Lowering Trial, Impact on Regression (SALTIRE; 155 patients, ventional CVD risk factor treatment, including dyslipidaemia, in

80 mg atorvastatin or placebo), the SEAS (1873 patients, simvastatin these patients. Statins are effective in reducing disease activity, CV
40 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg or placebo) and the Aortic Stenosis Pro- events and mortality (particularly in primary prevention) in this set-
gression Observation: Measuring Effects of Rosuvastatin (ASTRON- ting, while their discontinuation increases MI and mortality.386 How-
OMER; 269 patients, rosuvastatin 40 mg or placebo) trials failed to ever, there is no firm indication to use lipid-lowering therapy only on
show a reduction in the progression of aortic stenosis or related the basis of the presence of the disease (Table 29). Furthermore, no
events in patients with mild to moderate aortic stenosis. Notably, is- specific LDL-C goal beyond that indicated by individual total risk has
chaemic events were reduced by 21% in the SEAS trial. Furthermore, been set for such patients.
in a post hoc analysis of the RCTs Incremental Decrease In End-
points Through Aggressive Lipid-lowering Trial (IDEAL) and Stroke Table 29 Recommendation for the treatment of
Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels dyslipidaemia in autoimmune diseases
(SPARCL), high-dose versus usual-dose statin therapy or placebo
did not impact the incidence of aortic valve stenosis among patients
Recommendation Class a Level b
without known aortic valve stenosis.379 Aortic valve sclerosis (calci-
fication of the aortic leaflets without impairment in leaflet excursion The universal use of lipid-lowering drugs is
III C
not recommended
or a significant transvalvular pressure gradient) is associated with an
increased risk of CAD even in the absence of increased risk profiles. a
In such patients, statins, acting at an earlier disease stage, may be use- b
Level of evidence.
ful both for aortic valve disease and CAD progression; however, this
warrants further investigation.380 Regarding rheumatic mitral sten-
osis and bioprosthetic valves, small observational studies suggest a
benefit of statin treatment.381,382
9.9 Chronic kidney disease
Recommendations for lipid-lowering therapy in patients with HF CKD is defined as abnormalities of kidney structure or function,
and valvular diseases are shown in Table 28. present for .3 months, with implications for health. CKD can be
classified on the basis of the GFR into five categories.387 In the adult
population, a decreasing GFR is associated with an increased CVD
Table 28 Recommendations for the treatment of
risk, independent of other CV risk factors.388 – 391 The CV mortality
dyslipidaemia in heart failure or valvular disease
in patients with stage 3 and stage 4 CKD is two-fold and three-fold
higher, respectively, when compared with patients with normal renal
function.391 Patients with CKD and established CVD have a much
Cholesterol-lowering therapy with higher mortality rate compared with patients with CVD and normal
statins is not recommended (but is
renal function.392 Therefore patients with CKD are considered high
not harmful either) in patients with III A 373, 374
heart failure in the absence of other risk (stage 3 CKD) or very high risk (stage 4–5 CKD or on dialysis)
indications for their use. and there is no need to use risk estimation models in these patients.
n-3 PUFAs 1 g/day may be
considered for addition to optimal 9.9.1 Lipoprotein profile in chronic kidney disease
IIb B 376
treatment in patients with heart The lipid profile shows both quantitative and qualitative abnormalities
failure.
that worsen with declining GFR, being most pronounced in subjects
Cholesterol-lowering treatment is with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In the initial stages of CKD,
not recommended in patients with
243, TGs are specifically elevated and HDL-C lowered; the elevation of
aortic valvular stenosis without III A
377, 378 TGs is caused by both increased production and impaired removal
CAD in the absence of other
indications for their use. of TRLs due to changes in regulatory enzymes and proteins. Conse-
quently, non-HDL-C and apoB levels are clearly increased. LDL sub-
CAD ¼ coronary artery disease; PUFAs ¼ polyunsaturated fatty acids. classes display a shift to an excess of small dense LDL particles. In
a
Class of recommendation. patients with ESRD, the catabolic rate of LDL is markedly prolonged,
b
Level of evidence.
c
Reference(s) supporting recommendations. resulting in clear elevation of both TC and LDL-C levels. Plasma Lp(a)
levels also start to increase early due to the prolonged residence times
of these particles in the circulation. Altogether, most patients with and due to increased blood concentration of the compound. Prefer-
stage 3–5 CKD have mixed dyslipidaemia and the lipid profile is highly ence should be given to regimens and doses that have been shown
atherogenic, with adverse changes in all lipoproteins. to be beneficial in RCTs conducted specifically in such patients.399
Prevention of coronary events has been documented with fluvasta-
9.9.2 Evidence for lipid management in patients with
tin 80 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, rosuvastatin 10 mg, simvastatin/ezeti-
chronic kidney disease
mibe 20/10 mg, pravastatin 40 mg and simvastatin 40 mg. Lower
In a systematic review of 50 studies including 45 285 participants, the
doses than those used in the trials may be appropriate in Asian
benefits and harms of statins were evaluated in comparison with pla-
countries and in patients on polypharmacy and with co-morbidities.
cebo or no treatment (47 studies) or another statin (3 studies) in
Furthermore, statins that are eliminated mainly by the hepatic route
adults with CKD and no CVD at baseline.393 Statins consistently
may be preferred (fluvastatin, atorvastatin, pitavastatin). Statins me-
lowered the death rate and major coronary events by 20%; statin-
tabolized via CYP3A4 may result in adverse effects due to drug –
related effects on stroke and kidney function were found to be un-
drug interactions, and special caution is required.
certain. These results are in line with those from a meta-analysis of

11 RCTs including 21 293 patients with CKD, of whom 6857 were 9.9.4 Recommendations of lipid management for patients
receiving dialysis.394 In patients with CKD not on dialysis, treatment with chronic kidney disease
with statins reduced all-cause mortality by 34%, CV mortality by Based on the evidence for lipid management in patients with CKD,
31%, CV events by 45% and stroke by 34%. In patients receiving dia- the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) organ-
lysis, treatment with statins had no effect on all-cause mortality and ization developed an updated clinical practice guideline for lipid
stroke, but reduced CV mortality by 21% and CV events by 19%. management in CKD.399 In line with this, but with a focus on those
Stage 5 CKD (or on dialysis) is indeed a very high-risk condition patients at high or very high risk for developing CVD, recommenda-
in which different factors influence outcome; results from RCTs tions are summarized in Table 30.
of lipid-altering therapies have not provided convincing evidence
of reduced CVD events in such patients.
In the 4D trial (Die Deutsche Diabetes Dialyse studie) involving a Table 30 Recommendations for lipid management in
cohort of 1200 patients with diabetes on haemodialysis, atorvastatin patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease
had no positive effect on the primary composite endpoint of
CVD.395 The results from AURORA (A study to evaluate the Use Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c
of Rosuvastatin in subjects On Regular haemodialysis: an Assess- Patients with stage 3–5 CKD have
ment of survival and cardiovascular events), involving 2776 patients to be considered at high or very I A 388–392
on haemodialysis, show that rosuvastatin lowered LDL-C as ex- high CV risk.
pected but had no significant effect on the composite CVD end- The use of statins or statin/
point. 396 The neutral results question the benefits of statins in ezetimibe combination is indicated
I A
393,
these very high-risk patients with poor outcomes. in patients with non-dialysis- 394, 397
dependent CKD.
In the SHARP study397 simvastatin and ezetimibe combination
therapy was associated with lower risk for major atherosclerotic In patients with dialysis-dependent
CKD and free of atherosclerotic
events (coronary death, MI, non-haemorrhagic stroke or any revas- III A 395, 396
CVD, statins should not be
cularization) compared with placebo in persons with CKD stage initiated.
3A – 5. The trial did not have sufficient power to assess the effects In patients already on statins,
in the primary outcome separately in dialysis and non-dialysis pa- ezetimibe or a statin/ezetimibe
tients, but there was no good statistical evidence that the propor- combination at the time of dialysis
IIa C
initiation, these drugs should be
tional effects in dialysis patients differed from those seen in
continued, particularly in patients
patients not on dialysis; in general, CV risk was much lower in the with CVD.
patients in the SHARP trial compared with those of the AURORA
In adult kidney transplant recipients
and 4D trials, reflected in the lower event and mortality rates. treatment with statins may be IIb C
A cost-effectiveness analysis of statins for primary CVD preven- considered.
tion in CKD398 showed that statins reduced absolute CVD risk in
patients with CKD but that the increased risk for rhabdomyolysis, CKD ¼ chronic kidney disease; CV ¼ cardiovascular.
a
and competing risks associated with progressive CKD, partly offset Class of recommendation.
b
Level of evidence.
these gains. A systematic review of the benefits and harms of statins c
in patients with a functioning kidney transplant included 3465 pa-
tients, free of CHD, from 22 studies. The authors concluded that
statins may reduce CV events, although treatment effects were im-
precise; due to heterogeneity, different statin regimens could not be 9.10 Transplantation (Table 31)
compared and additional studies are recommended.228
Lipid abnormalities are common in patients who have undergone
9.9.3 Safety of lipid management in patients with chronic solid organ transplantation and predispose patients to the develop-
kidney disease ment of both atherosclerotic disease and transplant arterial vasculo-
Safety issues and dose adjustment are important in advanced stages pathy, resulting in major vascular events. Common general causes of
of CKD (stages 3 –5), as adverse events are commonly dose related dyslipidaemia in these patients are diabetes, obesity, MetS and CKD.
Immunosuppressive drug regimens also have important adverse careful up-titration and caution regarding potential drug–drug interac-
effects on lipid metabolism. Glucocorticoid therapy causes weight tions. Initiation of therapy with low-dose pravastatin or fluvastatin is
gain and exacerbates insulin resistance, leading to increases in TC, recommended for those on ciclosporin. For patients with dyslipidae-
VLDL and TGs and in the size and density of LDL particles. Calci- mia who are unable to take statins, ezetimibe could be considered as
neurin inhibitors increase the activity of hepatic lipase, decrease an alternative in those with high LDL-C.404 No outcome data are avail-
LPL and bind LDLR, resulting in reduced clearance of atherogenic able for this drug, which should generally be reserved for second-line
lipoproteins. A greater adverse impact on lipid profiles is seen use. Care is required with the use of fibrates, as they can decrease ci-
with ciclosporin than with tacrolimus. Sirolimus, a structural ana- closporin levels and have the potential to cause myopathy. Extreme
logue of tacrolimus, causes dyslipidaemia in almost half of the pa- caution is required if fibrate therapy is planned in combination with
tients receiving it. Patients should receive healthy lifestyle advice a statin. Cholestyramine is not effective as monotherapy in heart
as recommended for patients at increased risk of CVD. transplant patients and has the potential to reduce absorption of im-
Statins have a similar effect on lipids in transplant recipients as in the munosuppressants, minimized by separate administration.

general population. Although randomized trial data have shown that
statins have the potential to improve outcomes in heart transplant pa- 9.11 Peripheral arterial disease
tients400 – 402 and renal transplant patients,403 the amounts of out- The term PAD encompasses all vascular sites, including carotid, ver-
come data are not extensive. A recent systematic review tebral, upper extremity, mesenteric, renal and lower extremity arter-
demonstrated a strong trend towards reduced CVD events and mor- ies. The aorta is often included in the term.405 PAD is a common
tality with statins in renal transplant patients.403 Several potential drug manifestation of atherosclerosis, and such patients are at elevated
interactions must also be considered, especially with ciclosporin risk of coronary events, with PAD representing an independent risk
which is metabolized through CYP3A4 and may increase systemic sta- factor for MI and CV death.405,406 Elevated CV risk has led to inclusion
tin exposure and the risk of myopathy. Fluvastatin, pravastatin, pitavas- of PAD among the list of ‘risk equivalent’ conditions, and therapeutic
tatin and rosuvastatin have less potential for interaction.402 Tacrolimus strategies of secondary prevention should be implemented. Yet, des-
is also metabolized by CYP3A4, but appears to have less potential for pite the high CV morbidity and mortality risk, PAD patients are usu-
harmful interaction with statins than ciclosporin. Other drugs that in- ally inadequately managed compared with CAD patients.406
fluence CYP3A4 activity should be avoided if possible and used with
extreme caution in patients receiving both calcineurin inhibitors and 9.11.1 Lower extremities arterial disease
statins. Statins are recommended as the first-line agents for lipid low- A low ABI (,0.90) is diagnostic for lower extremities arterial disease
ering in transplant patients. Initiation should be at low doses with (LEAD). Either a low (,0.90) or a high (.1.40, related to stiffened
arteries) ABI is predictive of CV morbidity and mortality. Cholesterol-
lowering therapy reduces the risk of ischaemic CV events and worsen-
Table 31 Recommendations for the treatment of ing of claudication, while it also improves walking performance. As for
dyslipidaemia in transplant patients cardiac events, a systematic review of 18 trials including .10 000
patients, with cholesterol levels ranging from normal to elevated,
Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c reported that lipid-lowering therapy in subjects affected by atheroscler-
Global CV risk management osis of the lower limbs is associated with a 20% reduction in total CV
strategies have to be developed in I C events, together with a non-significant 14% reduction of all-cause
transplant patients. mortality.407 Regarding limb prognosis, in the Reduction of Athero-
Statins should be considered as thrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry, statin use was as-
the first-line agents in transplant sociated with an 18% lower rate of adverse limb outcomes.408 Even in
patients. Initiation should be at low the most advanced stages of the disease (critical limb ischaemia), statin
doses with careful up-titration and IIa B 402
with caution regarding potential therapy improved rates of 1-year mortality and major adverse CV
drug–drug interactions, particularly events and increased amputation-free survival.409
for those on ciclosporin.
In patients who are intolerant of 9.11.2 Carotid artery disease
statins or those with significant While there are currently no randomized studies that have assessed
dyslipidaemia and high residual whether lipid-lowering treatments reduce the incidence of CV
risk despite a maximally tolerated
statin dose, alternative or additional events in patients enrolled on the basis of carotid atherosclerotic
therapy may be considered: IIb C disease and without previous CV events, lipid-lowering therapy re-
ezetimibe for whose where high duced stroke in numerous studies. In a meta-analysis of RCTs enrol-
LDL-C is the principal abnormality; ling .90 000 patients, Amarenco et al.410 reported that statin
or; fibrates for those where
hypertriglyceridaemia and/or low therapy leads to a 21% reduction in the incidence of all strokes in
HDL-C is the principal abnormality. different populations and that this effect is mainly driven by the ex-
tent of LDL-C reduction. CIMT is reduced with statins in
CV ¼ cardiovascular; HDL ¼ high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; RCTs,410,411 yet the predictive role of this biomarker (but not of ca-
LDL ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol. rotid plaque) is somewhat compromised in light of recent data.60
a
Class of recommendation. Modest regression of carotid atherosclerosis with niacin in most
b
Level of evidence.
c
Reference(s) supporting recommendations. (but not all) imaging studies was not supported by clinical benefit
in the AIM-HIGH and HPS2-THRIVE trials.251,252
9.11.3 Retinal vascular disease vessel cerebrovascular disease and intracranial haemorrhage (in-
Atherosclerotic changes of retinal arteries correlate with TC, cluding intracerebral and subarachnoid haemorrhage). Dyslipidae-
LDL-C, TG and apoB levels and also with CAD.412 Fenofibrate re- mia may play a variable role in the pathogenesis of stroke
duces the progression of diabetic retinopathy.413,414 according to the particular aetiology. The relationship between dys-
lipidaemia and atherothrombotic events, including ischaemic stroke
9.11.4 Secondary prevention in patients with aortic and TIA, is well recognized, while the association of dyslipidaemia
abdominal aneurysm
with other types of stroke is uncertain. Notwithstanding, concomi-
The presence of an abdominal aortic aneurysm represents a
tant control of other aetiologic factors, such as hypertension, is of
risk-equivalent condition and is associated with age, male gender, per-
paramount importance.
sonal history of atherosclerotic CVD, smoking, hypertension and dys-
lipidaemia,415 while, in contrast, diabetic patients are at decreased risk. 9.12.1 Primary prevention of stroke
There are currently no available clinical trials on the reduction of CV The use of statin therapy in adults at high risk of CVD due to LDL-C or
risk with lipid-lowering therapy in patients affected by this condition. other CV risk factors, including arterial hypertension, as well as in the

Systematic reviews,416 mostly based on retrospective non-randomized setting of established CVD, reduces the risk of ischaemic stroke or
studies, have reported that there is still inconclusive evidence that statin TIA.64,69,128,330,422 – 426. Risk reduction for a first ischaemic stroke is
therapy reduces perioperative CV morbidity and mortality. In an RCT 21% per 1.0 mmol/L LDL-C reduction,64 and it is similar between
comparing atorvastatin 20 mg with placebo, the composite endpoint men and women.65 Beneficial effects are retained over long-term
of cardiac death, MI, stroke and unstable angina was significantly re- follow-up.427 A recent meta-analysis of RCTs in subjects .65 years
duced in 100 patients undergoing vascular non-cardiac surgery, includ- of age at high CV risk without established CV disease showed that sta-
ing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.417 In another double-blind tins significantly reduce the incidence of MI and stroke, but do not sig-
placebo-controlled trial in 497 patients undergoing vascular surgery, nificantly prolong survival in the short-term.327 More intensive lipid
perioperative fluvastatin therapy (80 mg/day) was associated with an lowering with statins is associated with a lower risk of stroke compared
improvement in postoperative cardiac outcome.418 with less intensive regimens.64,65,128,422 Concerns for increased risk of
Based on a recent meta-analysis, statin therapy is likely effective in haemorrhagic stroke with statin treatment do not appear to be justi-
the prevention of growth of small (,55 mm in diameter) abdominal fied.423 The addition of ezetimibe to simvastatin in post-ACS patients
aortic aneurysms.419 had an incremental beneficial effect for ischaemic stroke or all strokes
(marginal statistical significance for the latter).63 Niacin did not reduce
9.11.5 Renovascular atherosclerosis stroke over long-term follow-up in patients with CVD in the AIM-HIGH
Although lipid-lowering therapy has never been tested in an RCT and HPS2-THRIVE trials.251,252 In fact, the increased rate of ischaemic
in patients affected by renovascular atherosclerosis, a recent stroke in the AIM-HIGH trial and the trend (P ¼ 0.08) for increased
population-based study showed that in patients .65 years of age haemorrhagic stroke in the HPS2-THRIVE trial raised concerns and
with atherosclerotic renovascular disease, the risk of a major cardior- contributed to halting of the AIM-HIGH trial before its planned conclu-
enal composite endpoint (MI, stroke, HF, acute renal failure, dialysis sion. Primary prevention of stroke contributes to the overall indication
and death) was significantly lower in statin users than in non-users.420 for starting treatment with statins in all patients with established athero-
The recommendations for lipid-lowering drugs in patients with sclerotic disease and in patients at high risk for developing CVD, in ac-
PAD are shown in Table 32. cordance with the recommendations given in Table 33.
Table 32 Recommendations for lipid-lowering drugs

in patients with peripheral arterial disease (including Table 33 Recommendations for lipid-lowering drugs
carotid artery disease) for primary and secondary prevention of stroke
Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c Recommendations Class a Level b Ref c

PAD is a very-high-risk condition Statin therapy to reach established
and lipid-lowering therapy (mostly treatment goals is recommended in 64, 65,
I A 407, 421 I A
statins) is recommended in these patients at high or very high CV risk 422, 426
patients. for primary prevention of stroke.
Statin therapy should be considered Lipid-lowering therapy is
to prevent the progression of IIa B 419 recommended in patients with 63–65,
I A
abdominal aortic aneurysm. other manifestations of CVD for 422, 426
primary prevention of stroke.
PAD ¼ peripheral arterial disease. Intensive statin therapy is
a
Class of recommendation. recommended in patients with
b
Level of evidence. a history of non-cardioembolic I A 422, 428
c
Reference(s) supporting recommendations. ischaemic stroke or TIA for
secondary prevention of stroke
9.12 Stroke CVD ¼ cardiovascular disease; TIA ¼ transient ischaemic attack.

a
Stroke has a heterogeneous aetiology, including cardiac thrombo- Class of recommendation.
b
Level of evidence.
embolism (often associated with atrial fibrillation), carotid artery c
and proximal aortic atherosclerosis and thromboembolism, small
9.12.2 Secondary prevention of stroke acid sequestrants is not recommended because they increase TGs
Following stroke or TIA, patients are at risk not only of recurrent and their effects on the absorption of antiretroviral drugs have not
cerebrovascular events, but also of other major CV events, including been studied.
MI. Secondary prevention therapy with statins reduces the risk of re- There are no data on the effects of statins, ezetimibe or fibrates
current stroke (by 12%), MI and vascular death.422,428 Statin pre- on CV events in dyslipidaemic HIV-infected patients.
treatment at TIA onset was associated with reduced recurrent The recommendations for lipid-lowering drugs in HIV patients
early stroke risk in patients with carotid stenosis in a pooled data are shown in Table 34.
analysis, supporting an as-early-as-possible initiation of statins after
stroke.429 However, the aetiology of stroke may influence the re- Table 34 Recommendation for lipid-lowering drugs in
sponse to statins, and those patients with evidence of atherothrom- human immunodeficiency virus patients
bosis underlying their cerebrovascular events appear to benefit
most, while those with haemorrhagic stroke may not benefit.422 Recommendation Class a Level b

Lipid lowering therapy (mostly statins)
9.13 Human immunodeficiency virus should be considered in HIV patients with
IIa C
dyslipidaemia to achieve the LDL-C goal as
patients defined for high-risk subjects
HIV-infected patients typically have low TC and LDL-C, as well as
low HDL-C and increased TGs. 430,431 Antiretroviral treatment HIV ¼ human immunodeficiency virus; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoproteincholesterol.
a
(ART) or highly active antiretroviral treatment (HAART; when Class of recommendation.
b
Level of evidence.
drugs are used in combination) causes marked increases in TC,
LDL-C and TGs and a predominance of small dense LDL particles,
while HDL-C remains low. The extent of lipid changes differs be-
tween and within antiretroviral drug classes. Newer protease inhibi- 9.14 Mental disorders
tors, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) or The presence of a major mental illness such as schizophrenia or bi-
integrase inhibitors affect lipoprotein metabolism to a lesser extent. polar disorder has deleterious effects on the risk of developing
ART also reduces insulin sensitivity and promotes hypertension and CVD. This is related to an unhealthy lifestyle in the majority of
body fat redistribution (lipodystrophy that involves lipoatrophy, these patients (sedentary behaviour, unbalanced diet, smoking),
which refers to a loss of fat in the face, buttocks and limbs, and/or but also to drug treatment. Some antipsychotics, antidepressants,
lipohypertrophy, in which there is an accumulation of fat in anxiolytics and mood stabilizers are associated with weight gain
the breasts, neck, back or stomach region) that additionally contrib- and cardiometabolic disturbances, including dyslipidaemia and
ute to CVD risk. HIV-infected patients have a higher risk for CVD dysglycaemia.
when compared with HIV-uninfected individuals [RR 1.61 (95% CI In patients with first-episode schizophrenia spectrum disor-
1.43, 1.83)], while ART (and especially older protease inhibitors) ders, cardiometabolic risk factors were present early in the ill-
further increases this risk, up to two-fold [RR 2.00 (95% CI 1.70, ness; this was related to the underlying disorder, unhealthy
2.37)].431 – 433 CVD risk remains high even after adjusting for trad- lifestyle and antipsychotic medications, which interact with
itional risk factors.434 ART may particularly accelerate the onset each other.437 All this explains the higher prevalence of obesity,
of CAD-related events in young male heavy smokers with dyslipi- MetS, diabetes and dyslipidaemia in patients with these psychi-
daemia. Nevertheless, absolute CVD risk increase with ART is mod- atric diseases.438 It also results in a greater incidence of CVD
erate and should be put into perspective with the benefits of HIV and in more CV deaths in psychiatric patients suffering from
treatment. these disorders.
Dietary changes and regular physical activity, as well as switching In a Finnish cohort of patients with schizophrenia, life expectancy
to another ART regimen, may act favourably on dyslipidaemia, but was about 2 decades less than in persons of similar age from the gen-
most patients still need pharmacological therapy to reach lipid goals. eral population.439 In patients with bipolar disorder there was a re-
Statins are effective, but drug interactions with ART need to be con- duction in life expectancy of 12 –14 years.440 Among 654 patients
sidered. Statins metabolized in the liver via the CYP3A4 or CYP2C9 with bipolar disorder in the Fondamental Advanced Centers of Ex-
are susceptible to drug interactions with protease inhibitors and pertise in Bipolar Disorders (FACE-BD) cohort, 18.5% met the cri-
the NNRTI efavirenz. Pravastatin is not significantly metabolized via teria for MetS; only 11% and 28% of the patients with
the CYP isoenzyme system and is therefore a preferred statin in hypercholesterolaemia and high fasting glycaemia, respectively,
HIV-infected individuals. Preferred statins include atorvastatin, were treated for these conditions.441 Patients with the aforemen-
fluvastatin, pitavastatin and rosuvastatin, although caution should be tioned psychiatric diseases are in general less compliant with chronic
exercised. Combination of simvastatin or lovastatin with any protease drug treatments and therefore have their CV risk factors less well
inhibitor or efavirenz is not recommended. The HIV drug interac- controlled.
tion database of the University of Liverpool (http://www. CVD accounts for much of the excess mortality in psychiatric pa-
hiv-druginteractions.org) is a very helpful tool for checking drug inter- tients.442 CVD develops more than a decade earlier in patients with
actions (Supplementary Figure B). For patients who cannot tolerate bipolar disorders than in controls.443 Therefore it could be recom-
statin treatment, ezetimibe could be an option.435 Fibrates and fish mended to start primary prevention earlier rather than later in these
oil may be prescribed when HTG is predominant.436 Use of bile patients. This is well summarized in a position paper of the European
Lipid-Lowering Treatment Selector

Charts revised August 2013. Full information available at www.hiv-druginteractions.org and www.hiv-druginteractionslite.org
ATV/r DRV/r FPV/r IDV/r LPV/r SQV/r EFV ETV NVP RPV MVC EVG/c RAL ABC FTC 3TC TDF ZDV
Atorvastatin ↑ ↑ ↑153% ↑ ↑490% ↑ ↓43% ↓37% ↓ ↔ ↔ ↑ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Fluvastatin ↔ ↔ ↔ ↑ ↔ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Lovastatin ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↔ ↔ ↑ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Statins
Pravastatin ↔ ↑81% ↔ ↑ ↔ ↓50% ↓44% ↓ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Rosuvastatin ↑213% ↑48% ↑8% ↑ ↑107% ↑ ↔ ↑ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↑48% ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔

Simvastatin ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↓68% ↓ ↓ ↔ ↔ ↑ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Bezafibrate ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Fibrates
Clofibrate ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↑⇑ ↔
Fenofibrate ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Gemfibrozil ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓41% ↓ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↑ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Ezetimibe ↑a ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔ ↔
Colour Legend
No clinically significant interaction expected.
These drugs should not be coadministered.
Potential interaction which may require a dosage adjustment or close monitoring.
Potential interaction predicted to be of weak intensity (<2 fold ↑AUC or <50% ↓AUC). No a priori dosage adjustment is recommended.
Text Legend
↑ Potential increased exposure of the lipid-lowering drug
↓ Potential decreased exposure of the lipid-lowering drug
↔ No signficant effect
⇑ Potential increased exposure of HIV drug
⇓ Potential decreased exposure of HIV drug
a
Unboosted atazanavir
Numbers refer to increased or decreased AUC of the lipid-lowering drug as observed in drug-drug interaction studies.
Supplementary ﬁgure B HIV-drug interaction database of the University of Liverpool.
Psychiatric Association supported by the European Association for

Table 35 Recommendations for lipid-lowering
the Study of Diabetes and by the ESC.444
pharmacological treatment in patients with mental
Statins are equally effective in lowering LDL-C in psychiatric pa-
disorders
tients treated with second-generation antipsychotics445; however,
in only a limited number of these patients are preventive actions ta-
ken both in regard to lifestyle and to the use of cardioprotective
drugs. The odds of the use of statins was approximately halved in Major psychiatric disorders are modifiers for
I C
patients with schizophrenia compared with controls.446 estimating total CV risk.
Unfortunately, no RCTs with ‘hard’ CV outcome measures have The management of total CV risk in patients
so far been conducted in patients with these major mental dis- with a psychiatric disorder is not different
I C
from what is recommended in patients at
eases. It is reasonable to expect that the favourable metabolic ef- high/very high CV risk.
fects of treatment that have been demonstrated result in the
In patients with psychiatric disorders
prevention of CV events in the long term. However, several ques- particular attention has to be paid to
I C
tions remain that need to be addressed in further studies in pa- adherence to lifestyle changes and compliance
tients with these major mental disorders, regarding long-term with drug treatment.
safety of statins in association with antipsychotics that also predis-
pose to diabetes and prevention of premature CV mortality and CV ¼ cardiovascular.
a
incidence. b
Level of evidence.
Table 35 lists the recommendations for the lipid-lowering drug c
treatment of patients with mental disorders.
10. Monitoring of lipids and 11. Strategies to encourage

enzymes in patients on adoption of healthy lifestyle
lipid-lowering therapy (Table 36) changes and adherence to
Evidence from trials for what tests should be carried out to moni- lipid-modifying therapies
tor lipids in patients on treatment is limited. Similar limited evi-
Terminology to describe the way patients follow their medica-
dence applies to tests of possible toxicity, such as ALT and CK.
tion regimens and sustain behavioural changes has evolved
Recommendations stem from consensus rather than evidence-
over the years to include terms such as compliance, adherence
based medicine.
and concordance. Compliance (http://medical-dictionary.
Response to therapy can be assessed at 6 – 8 weeks from ini-
thefreedictionary.com/Compliance) is defined as a ‘willingness
tiation of therapy, but response to lifestyle may take longer.
to follow a prescribed course of treatment’, but also has conno-
Standard practice for subsequent follow-up monitoring is 6 –

tations of obeying orders in a subservient way. Adherence (http://
12 months, but such monitoring intervals are arbitrary. As a apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js4883e/6.html) is defined as
minimum, LDL-C should be assessed whenever available, but ‘the extent to which a person’s behaviour—taking medication,
better management decisions will probably occur if a full lipid following a diet, and/or executing lifestyle changes—corre-
profile is performed, including HDL-C and TGs. Non-HDL-C sponds with agreed recommendations from a healthcare pro-
or apoB should also be analysed, and used as a secondary treat- vider’ and is literally defined as sticking to something. Finally,
ment target. A separate issue is the impact of regular lipid mon- concordance (http://www.drugs.com/dict/concordance.html) is
itoring in promoting patient adherence to lifestyle changes or defined as ‘a negotiated, shared agreement between clinician
drug regimens that impact positively on their health, as found and patient concerning treatment regimen(s), outcomes, and
in a range of studies. It is unclear whether only the process of behaviours; a more cooperative relationship than those based
monitoring is critical in achieving this or whether a combination on issues of compliance and noncompliance’.
of education, regular contact and adherence assessment is While the terms adherence and concordance are today consid-
required. ered more acceptable than compliance, for the purposes of this
Where lipid-lowering therapy is implemented, safety blood guideline, the term adherence will be used, as it is most commonly
tests are advised, including ALT and CK at baseline, to identify used in practice and research today.
the limited number of patients where treatment is contraindi-
cated. CK should be checked in patients with high risk for myop-
athy, such as the very elderly with co-morbidities, patients with
earlier muscle symptoms or patients on interacting drugs. A sys- 11.1 Achieving and adhering to healthy
tematic review found that the incidence of drug-induced hepato- lifestyle changes
toxicity in patients taking statins is unknown, with very few cases Behavioural strategies to promote the adoption of healthy lifestyle
occurring in large-scale RCTs.212,214 Recent reviews are encour- habits are covered in brief in this section; however, more detail is
aging about the safety of long-term statin therapy.221,222 ALT is available in the ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention
recommended 8 – 12 weeks after the start of lipid-lowering ther- in clinical practice.6
apy or dose change, but routine control of ALT during treatment No smoking, healthy eating and being physically active are the
is not recommended and should be performed, if indicated, foundations of preventive cardiology because of their favourable im-
based on clinical observations. In patients whose liver function pact on CV risk, including modification of the lipid profile. Healthy
tests rise above three times the ULN, explanations such as alco- lifestyle habits will also enhance effectiveness and reduce the need
hol ingestion or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease should be for drug therapy.
sought and the levels monitored. If levels remain elevated then Helping patients to change to healthier lifestyle habits is most ef-
lipid-lowering therapy should be stopped, but may be cautiously fectively achieved through formal programmes of preventive care,
reintroduced under monitoring after levels have returned to possibly because of the intensive follow-up and multidisciplinary ex-
normal. pertise they provide.447 However, in everyday care, adherence to
There is no predictive value of routine repeat CK testing both healthy lifestyle changes and medication regimens is a challenge
for rhabdomyolysis since the level can increase for many to both professionals and patients.
reasons, including muscle injury or excess muscular exercise. A comprehensive patient- and family-centred approach lo-
However, CK must be assessed immediately in patients, espe- cated in one healthcare setting is recommended rather than ad-
cially the elderly, presenting with muscle pain and weakness, dressing single risk factors with more than one intervention in
and treatment stopped if .10 times the ULN. Strategies to different locations. Drawing on expertise from different disci-
handle CK elevations are given in Table 35 and in the supple- plines in smoking cessation, dietetics, physical activity, exercise
mentary material. Due to the increased frequency of diabetes and health psychology is also essential, regardless of whether
during statin treatment, regular checks of HbA1C should be these experts have direct involvement with patients as dedi-
considered in patients at high risk of developing diabetes, cated members of a team or whether this expertise is achieved
such as the elderly or those with MetS, obesity or signs of insu- by the provision of training to doctors and nurses delivering
lin resistance. care.447
Table 36 Summary of recommendations for monitoring lipids and enzymes in patients on lipid-lowering therapy
Testing lipids
How often should lipids be tested?
• Before starting lipid-lowering drug treatment, at least two measurements should be made, with an interval of 1–12 weeks, with the exception of conditions
where concomitant drug treatment is suggested such as ACS and very high-risk patients.
How often should a patient’s lipids be tested after starting lipid-lowering treatment?
• 8 (±4) weeks after starting treatment.
• 8 (±4) weeks after adjustment of treatment until within the target range.
How often should lipids be tested once a patient has reached the target or optimal lipid level?
• Annually (unless there is adherence problems or other specific reasons for more frequent reviews).
Monitoring liver and muscle enzymes

How often should liver enzymes (ALT) be routinely measured in patients on lipid-lowering drugs?
• Before treatment.
• Once 8–12 weeks after starting a drug treatment or after dose increase.
• Routine control of ALT thereafter is not recommended during lipid-lowering treatment.
What if liver enzymes become elevated in a person taking lipid-lowering drugs?
If ALT <3x ULN:

• Continue therapy.
• Recheck liver enzymes in 4–6 weeks.
If value rises to ≥3x ULN

• Stop lipid-lowering therapy or reduce dose and recheck liver enzymes within 4–6 weeks.
• Cautious reintroduction of therapy may be considered after ALT has returned to normal.
• If ALT remains elevated check for the other reasons.
How often should CK be measured in patients taking lipid-lowering drugs?
Pre-treatment
• Before starting therapy.
• If baseline CK is 4x ULN, do not start drug therapy; recheck.
Monitoring:
• Routine monitoring of CK is not necessary.
• Check CK if patient develops myalgia.
Be alert regarding myopathy and CK elevation in patients at risk such as: elderly patients, concomitant interfering therapy, multiple medications, liver or renal
disease or sport athletes.
What if CK becomes elevated in a person taking lipid-lowering drugs?
Re-evaluate indication for statin treatment.
If ≥4 x ULN:
• If CK >10x ULN: stop treatment, check renal function and monitor CK every 2 weeks.
• If CK <10x ULN: if no symptoms, continue lipid-lowering therapy while monitoring CK.
• If CK <10x ULN: if symptoms present, stop statin and monitor normalization of CK, before re-challenge with a lower statin dose.
• Consider the possibility of transient CK elevation for other reasons such as exertion.
• Consider myopathy if CK remains elevated.
• Consider combination therapy or an alternative drug.
If <4 x ULN:
• If no muscle symptoms, continue statin (patient should be alerted to report symptoms; check CK).
• If muscle symptoms, monitor symptoms and CK regularly.
• If symptoms persist, stop statin and re-evaluate symptoms after 6 weeks; re-evaluate indication for statin treatment.
• Consider re-challenge with the same or another statin.
• Consider low-dose statin, alternate day or once/twice weekly dosing regimen or combination therapy.
For details on CK elevation and treatment of muscular symptoms during statin treatment see algorithm in supplementary figure C.
ACS ¼ acute coronary syndrome; ALT ¼ alanine aminotransferase; CK ¼ creatine kinase; ULN ¼ upper limit of normal.
The adoption of effective strategies to help patients to change beha- developed a system of standardized labelling of behavioural strategies,
viours is now made easier with the development of a hierarchical tax- which allows a clear description of complex interventions449 in research
onomy of behaviour change strategies.448 The taxonomy has reports and their subsequent translation into clinical practice initiatives.
Consider if statin-attributed muscle symptoms favour statin continuation / reinitiation
Symptomatic & CK <4 X ULN CK ≥4 X ULN +/- rhabdomyolisis

6 weeks washout of statin until normalisation
2–4 weeks washout of statin
of CK: creatinine and symptoms
Symptoms improve:
Symptoms persist:
second statin at usual or
statin re-challenge
starting dose
Symptom-free:
Symptoms re-occur
continue statin
1) Low-dose third efficacious 1) Low-dose second efficaciousa

(potent)a statin; statin;
2) Efficaciousa statin with 2) Efficaciousa statin with
alternate day or once/twice alternate day or once/twice
weekly dosing regimen weekly dosing regimen
Aim: achieve LDL-C goal* with maximally tolerated dose of statin
Ezetimibe
A + bile acid absorption inhibitor B + fibrate (not gemfibrozil) A+B
If still not at goal: consider additional (future) novel therapies: PCSK9 monoclonal antibody therapy, CETP inhibitor
CETP = cholesteryl ester transfer protein; CK = creatine kinase; LDL-C= low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; PCKS9 = propotein onvertase subtilisin/kesin type 9; ULN = upper limit
of the normal range.
aEfficacious statin such as atorvastatin or rosuvastatin.
*Reiner Z et al. (2011).
Web Figure C Algorithm for treatment of muscular symptoms during statin treatment.211.
Box 11 includes some useful techniques when counselling pa- with the additional controversy generated by Abramson et al.464,465
tients for behavioural change. regarding their analysis of the adverse effects of statins, which was
subsequently corrected, it is not surprising that GPs, in particular,
Box 11 Hints to aid adherence to lifestyle changes have a certain degree of reluctance to proceed with the NICE strat-
egy. If there is a lack of local consensus on the prescription of statins
1. Explore motivation and identify ambivalence. Weigh pros and cons in primary prevention, then GPs may be less inclined to prescribe
for change, assess and build self-efficacy and confidence, avoid circular them, let alone encourage patients to adhere to their statin therapy,
discussion. even in the face of minor adverse effects.
2. Offer support and establish an alliance with the patient and his/her Various empirical models of health behaviour and behaviour
family. change theory have been shown to predict adherence, including
3. Involve the partner, other household members or caregiver who may the Theory of Planned Behaviour466 and the Health Belief Model.467
be influential in the lifestyle of the patient.
Studies that investigated adherence to medications in long-term

4. Use the OARS method (Open-ended questions, Affirmation, conditions identified factors such as high susceptibility, severity of
Reflective listening, Summarising; http://www.smartrecovery.org/
the condition, strong intentions and high self-efficacy as being
resources/UsingMIinSR.pdf) when discussing behaviour changes.
associated with good adherence, while poor lifestyle habits and
5. Tailor advice to an individual patient’s culture, habits and situation.
low perceived behavioural control were associated with poor
6. Use SMART goal setting–negotiate goals for change that are adherence.468,469 However, these theoretical models are limited in
Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timely. Follow up on
goals and record progress on a shared record.
that they do not take into account important social, economic, health
system and therapy-related factors. Most recently, the COM-B
(Capability, Opportunity and Motivation) theoretical model,470 de-
veloped by Michie et al.,471 which takes a broader look at factors
In addition, it is important to be aware of the following barriers to influencing adherence, proposed a framework for assessing and ad-
change: dressing adherence, taking the interaction between capability (de-
fined as both the psychological and physical capacity of an individual
† Healthy choices are not always easy choices.
to engage in a behaviour), opportunities (defined as factors outside
† Socio-economic status and cultural and environmental factors
the control of an individual) and their motivation to do so.
influence behaviour change.
Predictors of non-adherence with statins have been identi-
† Your agenda for change as a health professional may conflict with
fied450,472 – 474 and include their use in individuals for primary pre-
that of the person you are trying to help.
vention as compared with their use in patients with disease or
† Helping people to change requires dedicated time from the
with multiple risk factors, lower income, being elderly, complex
health professional to provide support and follow-up.
polypharmacy, cost and forgetfulness due to a lack of symptoms
† People may have feelings of ambivalence towards changing
and psychological co-morbidities. In addition, reasons for reluctance
behaviour that need exploring.
to collect a first prescription of statin medication were investigated
11.2 Adhering to medications in a cross-sectional telephone survey conducted in California from
recruits to an RCT.475 The most commonly reported reasons in-
Despite a wealth of evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of
cluded general concerns about the medication, wanting to try life-
statins in both primary and secondary prevention, adherence
style measures first and fear of adverse effects; however, a
remains a consistent barrier, with rates of ,50% demonstrated
significant proportion reported financial hardship, a lack of under-
in several studies. Adherence declines over the duration of
standing of why they needed to take the medication and what the
treatment450 – 454; however, this is truer in patients treated for pri-
medication was for (indicating a need to address the patient– pro-
mary compared with secondary prevention of CVD, with reported
fessional relationship and poor health literacy). Health literacy is de-
rates of up to 77% discontinuing their statins within 2 years. Adher-
fined as ‘the degree to which individuals have the capacity to obtain,
ence is better in patients recruited to clinical trials compared with
process and understand basic health info and services needed to
those treated in the real world.455,456 Not surprisingly, this non-
make appropriate health decisions’ (http://nnlm.gov/outreach/
adherence has an impact on healthcare costs, morbidity, hospital
consumer/hlthlit.html).
readmissions and mortality.457 – 461 Poor adherence rates are not
Poor health literacy is of particular concern in regard to medica-
only limited to statins but are also true of other lipid-lowering drugs
tion adherence.475 Elderly patients and those with low socio-
and all medications used to prevent CVD, as demonstrated in a sys-
economic status and chronic health conditions may be especially
tematic review and meta-analysis.462
vulnerable. These patients may get confused, especially when their
The reasons for non-adherence are complex and include miscon-
regimens are complex and include many drugs (polypharmacy) that
ceptions about tolerability on the part of both patients and profes-
need to be taken on more than one occasion per day. Important
sionals alike. These barriers prevent patients from gaining the
steps to empower patients to get more benefit from health inter-
maximum benefit from their treatment.
ventions include the following476:
In the UK in 2014, controversy was sparked among general prac-
titioners (GPs) and other physicians463 in relation to the recent up- 1. Use good interpersonal skills (good eye contact, warm manner)
dated recommendation from NICE to offer atorvastatin 20 mg for and an empathetic, non-judgmental attitude.
the primary prevention of CVD to people who have an estimated 2. Provide clear and simple instructions on a drug regimen backed up
≥10% absolute 10-year risk of developing CVD using the QRISK2 with written instructions, which can also be seen by a spouse or
assessment tool (http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg181). Together caregiver.
3. Speak slowly in plain language and avoid medical jargon when

giving instructions.
4. Limit the number of instructions to no more than three key
Need to know and do
e.g. Important information about diagnosis, points—principle of ‘need to know’ (Figure 8).
key treatment and management of prescribed medications 5. Use ‘teachback’ to confirm understanding; e.g. ‘I want to make sure
that I explained things clearly. Let’s review what we discussed. What
Nice to know and do are the three strategies that will help keep your cholesterol down?’
Information that may be covered but can wait for 6. Use supplemental materials, e.g. images, videos and audio sources,
a second consultation to improve recall (Figure 9).
7. Encourage questions and discussion—enlist the family or others
Not necessary now, do later important to the individual.
e.g. Provide information, using leaflets, booklets or 8. Motivational interviewing skills may be helpful in communicating
web-based resources, about additional services

with patients who are ambivalent or seem against starting or
that can be provided
continuing with medications:37,477
(a) Counsel patients using the OARS method (Box 11).
Figure 8 Prioritising information when educating patients. (b) Use the ‘elicit –provide –elicit’ model to tailor the information
you give (elicit what the patient wants to know, provide that
Names of pills What it's for
Morning/Breakfast Afternoon/Lunch Evening/Dinner Night/Bedtime
Blood pressure
Lisinopril
20 mg
1 pill once a day 20
Cholesterol
Simvastatin
40 mg 40
1 pill at bedtime
Diabetes
Metformin
500 mg 500 500
2 pills twice a day
Nerve pain
Gabapentin
300 mg
1 pill 300 300 300
every 8 hours
Heart
Aspirin EC
81 mg
1 pill once a day
Figure 9 Images to improve recall.

information, elicit from the patient how they can use this new RCT482 compared an FDC containing aspirin, statin and two blood
knowledge to their benefit). pressure–lowering agents with usual care in both primary and sec-
(c) Acknowledge and reflect your patient’s resistance. ondary prevention in 2004 randomized patients in India and Europe.
(d) Support your patient’s autonomy to make their own decisions At 15 months, statistically significant differences between intervention
about their health and treatment. and usual care were seen in self-reported adherence and changes in
(e) Explore your patient’s ambivalence to adhere to their systolic blood pressure and LDL-C. The Fixed-Dose Combination
treatment. Drug for Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention (FOCUS) study483
(f) Develop a plan of action together and share decision-making. had a cross-sectional first phase, which identified factors contributing
9. Build self-efficacy and confidence, drawing on social learning to non-adherence after MI in 2118 patients from five countries in
theory.478 South America and Europe. In the second phase, 695 patients from
the first phase were randomized to receive either a polypill containing
Being able to identify patients with low health literacy is import- aspirin, statin and ramipril in varying doses or were given the three

ant. Indicators may include seeking help when an illness is already drugs separately. Adherence was measured with the self-reported
advanced, inarticulacy in explaining concerns, making excuses like Morisky–Green questionnaire and pill counts and was statistically sig-
‘I forgot my glasses’ to cover for the shame associated with illiteracy, nificantly superior in the intervention group compared with usual
being passive or aggressive and missing appointments. care at 9 months. In phase 1, factors associated with non-adherence
Interventions to improve adherence have been reviewed in a Co- were younger age, depression, complex regimen, poorer health insur-
chrane review from 2010,479 which looked at interventions to im- ance coverage and low social support.
prove adherence to all forms of lipid-lowering therapy, including Given the benefits for adherence demonstrated with simplified
reminders, simplification of drug regimens and provision of informa- dosing reported in a Cochrane overview of interventions to im-
tion and education. Most effective was reminders, such as setting prove safe and effective medicines use by consumers,484 it makes
alarms, connecting medication-taking to other tasks to trigger mem- sense that a pill that contains multiple medications in one tablet
ory and phone reminders from nurses. Reminder systems have the will enhance adherence. This overview also found that the use of
potential to be developed with the help of innovations in technol- self-management or self-monitoring programmes, as well as a regu-
ogy, like the use of text messaging, the Internet and applications lar pharmacy review of prescribed medications with a view to taking
for mobile phones or tablets to assist in self-monitoring and man- out unnecessary medications, was helpful.
agement. Adherence research is weak in this area, mainly because Many of the studies included in the Cochrane review of interven-
it has not kept abreast of the rapid developments in technology;480 tions to improve medication adherence480 drew on the support of
however, these methods may come into their own in the future with allied professionals such as nurses and pharmacists to deliver com-
a stronger knowledge base. plex interventions, which may include telephone follow-up, interim
Prescription of a statin should include a shared decision-making ap- appointments and monitoring of repeat prescriptions. The reviewed
proach481 that engages the patient in a discussion before initiating interventions may be difficult to replicate in everyday clinical care
treatment, especially when it is being considered for primary preven- due to the cost and the availability of personnel. Drawing on the
tion of CVD. This discussion should be based on risk estimation and support of non-professional people within the social context of
adequate communication of this risk to patients. Involving the patient the patient, such as spouses, other family members, caregivers or
in such a way is likely to be empowering and motivate adherence. This other key figures, as well as lay groups in the community, may prove
discussion is not exclusively about the prescription of a statin to man- to be a cost-effective way to improve adherence.
age lipids; a comprehensive approach includes addressing all lifestyle Box 12 lists a number of tips to use when prescribing multiple
and other biomedical factors that contribute to CV risk. medications to patients in order to help them adhere.
Once treatment has been prescribed, communication should fo-
cus on conveying achievements in reaching goals, assessment of ad- Box 12 Tips to aid adherence to multiple drug
herence and possible reasons for non-adherence, such as adverse therapies
effects. In relation to lipid-lowering medications, and statins in par-
ticular, misconceptions and misleading media reports are in abun- 1. ‘Agree’ on rather than ‘dictate’ a drug regimen to your patient and
dance. Many patients report adverse effects of statins to their GPs tailor it to his/her personal lifestyle and needs.
and this may be because of an increased likelihood to anticipate 2. Back up verbal instructions with clear written instructions.
them. However, a recent large review of RCTs213 found that in 83
3. Simplify the dosing regimen and consider a fixed dose combination pill
880 patients receiving blinded placebo-controlled statin therapy, where available.
few reported adverse effects were actually due to the drug. This 4. Perform a regular review of medicines to minimize polypharmacy (or
study calculated the PSN, defined as the proportion of symptoms ask the pharmacist to assist).
not attributable to its pharmacological action, in order to provide
5. Encourage self-monitoring and use cues and technologies to act as
GPs with a clear metric to use in advising their patients on whether reminders.
reported symptoms are genuinely likely to be pharmacologically
6. Provide information on common side effects and discuss management
caused by the statin or not. strategies.
Recently, promising results for improving adherence have been
7. Involve the partner, other family members or the caregiver in the
demonstrated in the use of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) drug patient’s treatment.
or ‘polypill’ in both primary and secondary prevention. The Use
of a Multidrug Pill In Reducing cardiovascular Events (UMPIRE)
12. To do and not to do messages from the Guidelines
Recommendations for risk estimation

Total risk estimation using a risk estimation system such as SCORE is recommended for asymptomatic adults >40 years of age
I C
without evidence of CVD, diabetes, CKD or familial hypercholesterolaemia.
High and very high-risk individuals can be detected on the basis of documented CVD, diabetes mellitus, moderate to severe renal
disease, very high levels of individual risk factors , familial hypercholesterolaemia or a high SCORE risk and are a high priority for I C
intensive advice with regard to all risk factors.

Recommendations for lipid analyses in cardiovascular disease risk estimation
TC is to be used for the estimation of total CV risk by means of the SCORE system. I C
LDL-C is recommended to be used as the primary lipid analysis for screening, risk estimation, diagnosis and management. HDL-C is
I C
a strong independent risk factor and is recommended to be used in the HeartScore algorithm.
Non-HDL-C is a strong independent risk factor and should be considered as a risk marker, especially in subjects with high TG. I C
Recommendations for lipid analyses for characterization of dyslipidaemias before treatment
LDL-C has to be used as the primary lipid analysis. I C
It is recommended to analyse HDL-C before treatment. I C
TG adds information about risk, and is indicated for diagnosis and choice of treatment. I C
Non-HDL-C is recommended to be calculated, especially in subjects with high TG. I C
Recommendations for lipid analyses as treatment targets in the prevention of cardiovascular disease
LDL-C is recommended as the primary target for treatment. I A
HDL-C is not recommended as a target for treatment. III A
The ratios apoB/apoA1 and non-HDL-C/HDL-C are not recommended as targets for treatment. III B
Recommendations for treatment goals for low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol
In patients at VERY HIGH CV riskc, an LDL-C goal of <1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL), or a reduction of at least 50% if the baseline LDL-Cd is
I B
between 1.8 and 3.5 mmol/L (70 and 135 mg/dL) is recommended.
In patients at HIGH CV riskc, an LDL-C goal of <2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL), or a reduction of at least 50% if the baseline LDL-Cd is
I B
between 2.6 and 5.2 mmol/L (100 and 200 mg/dL) is recommended.
Recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of hypercholesterolaemia
Prescribe statin up to the highest recommended dose or highest tolerable dose to reach the goal. I A
Recommendations for the detection and treatment of patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia
FH is recommended to be suspected in patients with CHD before the age of 55 years for men and 60 years for women, in subjects
with relatives with premature fatal or non-fatal CVD, in subjects with relatives having tendon xanthomas, and in subjects with I C
severely elevated LDL-C [in adults >5 mmol/L (190 mg/dL), in children >4 mmol/L (150 mg/dL)].
Family cascade screening is recommended to be performed when an index case of FH is diagnosed. I C
FH patients are recommended to be treated with intense-dose statin, often in combination with ezetimibe. I C
In children, testing is recommended from age 5 years, or earlier if homozygous FH is suspected. I C
Recommendations for the treatment of dyslipidaemia in older adults
Treatment with statins is recommended for older adults with established CVD in the same way as for younger patients. I A
Recommendations for the treatment of dyslipidaemia in diabetes
In all patients with type I diabetes and in the presence of microalbuminuria and/or renal disease, LDL-C lowering (at least 50%) with
statins as the first choice is recommended irrespective of the baseline LDL-C concentration. I C
In patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD or CKD, and in those without CVD who are >40 years of age with one or more other
CVD risk factors or markers of target organ damage, the recommended goal for LDL-C is <1.8 mmol/L (< 70 mg/dL) and I B
the secondary goal for non-HDL-C is <2.6 mmol/L (< 100 mg/dL) and for apoB is <80 mg/dL.
In all patients with type 2 diabetes and no additional risk factors and/or evidence of target organ damage, LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L
I B
(<100 mg/dL) is the primary goal. Non-HDL-C <3.4 mmol/L (<130 mg/dL) and apoB <100 mg/dL are the secondary goals.
Recommendation for lipid-lowering therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome and patients undergoing percutaneous
coronary intervention
It is recommended to initiate or continue high dose statins early after admission in all ACS patients without contra-indication or
I A
history of intolerance, regardless of initial LDL-C values.
continued
To do or not to do lipid guidelines (continued)
Recommendations for the treatment of dyslipidaemia in heart failure or valvular disease

Cholesterol lowering therapy with statins is not recommended (but is not harmful either) in patients with heart failure in the
III A
absence of other indications for their use.
Cholesterol-lowering treatment is not recommended in patients with aortic valvular stenosis without CAD in the absence of other
III A
indications for their use.
Recommendations for the treatment of dyslipidaemia in autoimmune diseases
The universal use of lipid-lowering drugs is not recommended. III C

Recommendations for lipid management in patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease
Patients with stage 3–5 CKD have to be considered at high or very high CV risk. I A
The use of statins or statin/ezetimibe combination is indicated in patients with non-dialysis-dependent CKD. I A
In patients with dialysis-dependent CKD and free of atherosclerotic CVD, statins should not be initiated. III A
Recommendations for lipid-lowering drugs in patients with peripheral arterial disease (including carotid artery disease)
PAD is a very high-risk condition and lipid-lowering therapy (mostly statins) is recommended in these patients. I A
Recommendations for lipid-lowering drugs for primary and secondary prevention of stroke
Statin therapy to reach established treatment goals is recommended in patients at high or very high CV risk for primary prevention
I A
of stroke.
Lipid-lowering therapy is recommended in patients with other manifestations of CVD for primary prevention of stroke. I A
Intensive statin therapy is recommended in patients with a history of non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or TIA for secondary
I A
prevention of stroke.
a
b
Level of evidence.
13. Appendix Society of Cardiology, Arman Postadzhiyan; Croatia: Croatian

Cardiac Society, Davor Miličić; Cyprus: Cyprus Society of Cardi-
ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG): Jose Luis ology, George C. Georgiou; Czech Republic: Czech Society of
Zamorano (Chairperson) (Spain), Victor Aboyans (France), Stephan Cardiology, Hana Rosolova; Denmark: Danish Society of Cardi-
Achenbach (Germany), Stefan Agewall (Norway), Lina Badimon ology, Christian Klausen; Estonia: Estonian Society of Cardiology,
(Spain), Gonzalo Barón-Esquivias (Spain), Helmut Baumgartner Margus Viigimaa; Finland: Finnish Cardiac Society, Kari Kervinen;
(Germany), Jeroen J. Bax (The Netherlands), Héctor Bueno (Spain), Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Macedonian FYR
Scipione Carerj (Italy), Veronica Dean (France), Çetin Erol (Turkey), Society of Cardiology, Sasko Kedev; France: French Society of Car-
Donna Fitzsimons (UK), Oliver Gaemperli (Switzerland), Paulus diology, Jean Ferrières; Georgia: Georgian Society of Cardiology,
Kirchhof (UK/Germany), Philippe Kolh (Belgium), Patrizio Lancellot- Shalva Petriashvili; Germany: German Cardiac Society, Ulrich
ti (Belgium), Gregory Y. H. Lip (UK), Petros Nihoyannopoulos (UK), Kintscher; Greece: Hellenic Cardiological Society, Loukianos Ralli-
Massimo F. Piepoli (Italy), Piotr Ponikowski (Poland), Marco Roffi dis; Hungary: Hungarian Society of Cardiology, Róbert Gábor Kiss;
(Switzerland), Adam Torbicki (Poland), António Vaz Carneiro Iceland: Icelandic Society of Cardiology, Thorarinn Guðnason;
(Portugal), Stephan Windecker (Switzerland). Ireland: Irish Cardiac Society, Vincent Maher; Israel: Israel Heart
ESC National Cardiac Societies actively involved in the re- Society, Yaakov Henkin; Italy: Italian Federation of Cardiology, Gian
view process of the 2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management Francesco Mureddu; Kazakhstan: Association of Cardiologists of
of dyslipidaemias: Kazakhstan, Aisulu Mussagaliyeva; Kosovo: Kosovo Society of
Armenia: Armenian Cardiologists Association, Parounak Cardiology, Pranvera Ibrahimi; Kyrgyzstan: Kyrgyz Society of
H. Zelveian; Austria: Austrian Society of Cardiology, Peter Siostr- Cardiology, Erkin Mirrakhimov; Latvia: Latvian Society of Cardi-
zonek; Azerbaijan: Azerbaijan Society of Cardiology, Firdovsi Ibra- ology, Gustavs Latkovskis; Libya: Libyan Cardiac Society, Hisham
himov; Belarus: Belorussian Scientific Society of Cardiologists, Ben Lamin; Lithuania: Lithuanian Society of Cardiology, Rimvydas
Volha Sujayeva; Belgium: Belgian Society of Cardiology, Marc Slapikas; Luxembourg: Luxembourg Society of Cardiology,
J. Claeys; Bosnia and Herzegovina: Association of Cardiologists Laurent Visser; Malta: Maltese Cardiac Society, Philip Dingli;
of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Belma Pojskić; Bulgaria: Bulgarian Moldova: Moldavian Society of Cardiology, Victoria Ivanov;
The Netherlands: Netherlands Society of Cardiology, Janneke the Icelandic population aged 25 – 74 between the years 1981 and 2006. PLoS
One 2010;5:e13957.
Wittekoek; Norway: Norwegian Society of Cardiology, Anders
15. Pereira M, Azevedo A, Lunet N, Carreira H, O’Flaherty M, Capewell S, Bennett K.
Hovland; Poland: Polish Cardiac Society, Andrzej Rynkiewicz; Explaining the decline in coronary heart disease mortality in Portugal between
Portugal: Portuguese Society of Cardiology, Quiteria Rato; Russian 1995 and 2008. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2013;6:634 – 642.
Federation: Russian Society of Cardiology, Marat Ezhov; San 16. Unal B, Sozmen K, Arik H, Gerceklioglu G, Altun DU, Simsek H, Doganay S,
Demiral Y, Aslan Ö, Bennett K, O’Flaherty M, Capewell S, Critchley J. Explaining
Marino: San Marino Society of Cardiology, Marco Zavatta; Serbia: the decline in coronary heart disease mortality in Turkey between 1995 and 2008.
Cardiology Society of Serbia, Milan A. Nedeljkovic; Slovakia: Slovak BMC Public Health 2013;13:1135.
Society of Cardiology, Daniel Pella; Slovenia: Slovenian Society of Car- 17. Roth GA, Forouzanfar MH, Moran AE, Barber R, Nguyen G, Feigin VL, Naghavi M,
Mensah GA, Murray CJ. Demographic and epidemiologic drivers of global cardio-
diology, Zlatko Fras; Spain: Spanish Society of Cardiology, Domingo vascular mortality. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1333 –1341.
Marzal; Sweden: Swedish Society of Cardiology, Lennart Nilsson; 18. Cobiac LJ, Magnus A, Lim S, Barendregt JJ, Carter R, Vos T. Which interventions
Switzerland: Swiss Society of Cardiology, Francois Mach; Tunisia: offer best value for money in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease? PLoS
One 2012;7:e41842.
Tunisian Society of Cardiology and Cardio-Vascular Surgery, Faouzi Ad-
19. Collins M, Mason H, O’Flaherty M, Guzman-Castillo M, Critchley J, Capewell S. An

dad; Turkey: Turkish Society of Cardiology, Meral Kayıkcıoglu; economic evaluation of salt reduction policies to reduce coronary heart disease in
Ukraine: Ukrainian Association of Cardiology, Olena Mitchenko; England: a policy modeling study. Value Health 2014;17:517–524.
United Kingdom: British Cardiovascular Society, David Wald. 20. Mason H, Shoaibi A, Ghandour R, O’Flaherty M, Capewell S, Khatib R, Jabr S,
Unal B, Sözmen K, Arfa C, Aissi W, Ben Romdhane H, Fouad F, Al-Ali R,
Husseini A. A cost effectiveness analysis of salt reduction policies to reduce cor-
onary heart disease in four Eastern Mediterranean countries. PLoS One 2014;9:
14. References e84445.
1. Townsend N, Nichols M, Scarborough P, Rayner M. Cardiovascular disease in 21. O’Keeffe C, Kabir Z, O’Flaherty M, Walton J, Capewell S, Perry IJ. Modelling the
Europe—epidemiological update 2015. Eur Heart J 2015;36:2696 – 705. impact of specific food policy options on coronary heart disease and stroke
2. Cooney MT, Dudina A, Whincup P, Capewell S, Menotti A, Jousilahti P, Njølstad I, deaths in Ireland. BMJ Open 2013;3. pii: e002837.
Oganov R, Thomsen T, Tverdal A, Wedel H, Wilhelmsen L, Graham I. Re- 22. Moreira PV, Baraldi LG, Moubarac JC, Monteiro CA, Newton A, Capewell S,
evaluating the Rose approach: comparative benefits of the population and high- O’Flaherty M. Comparing different policy scenarios to reduce the consumption
risk preventive strategies. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2009;16:541 –549. of ultra-processed foods in UK: impact on cardiovascular disease mortality using
3. Liu K, Daviglus ML, Loria CM, Colangelo LA, Spring B, Moller AC, a modelling approach. PLoS One 2015;10:e0118353.
Lloyd-Jones DM. Healthy lifestyle through young adulthood and the presence 23. Neyt M, De Laet C, Van Brabandt H, Franco O, Ramaekers D. Cost-effectiveness
of low cardiovascular disease risk profile in middle age: the Coronary Artery of statins in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review
Risk Development in (Young) Adults (CARDIA) study. Circulation 2012;125: and economic analysis for Belgium. Acta Cardiol 2009;64:1 –10.
996 –1004. 24. Peura P, Martikainen J, Soini E, Hallinen T, Niskanen L. Cost-effectiveness of statins
4. Ezzati M, Lopez AD, Rodgers A, Murray CJL. Comparative quantification of health in the prevention of coronary heart disease events in middle-aged Finnish men.
risks: global and regional burden of disease attributable to selected major risk fac- Curr Med Res Opin 2008;24:1823 –1832.
tors. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2004. 25. Ito MK, Nanchen D, Rodondi N, Paccaud F, Waeber G, Vollenweider P,
5. World Health Organization. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases Marques-Vidal P. Statins for cardiovascular prevention according to different
2010. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2011. strategies: a cost analysis. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2011;11:33 –44.
6. Perk J, De Backer G, Gohlke H, Graham I, Reiner Z, Verschuren M, Albus C, 26. Stevanovic J, O’Prinsen AC, Verheggen BG, Schuiling-Veninga N, Postma MJ,
Benlian P, Boysen G, Cifkova R, Deaton C, Ebrahim S, Fisher M, Germano G, Pechlivanoglou P. Economic evaluation of primary prevention of cardiovascular
Hobbs R, Hoes A, Karadeniz S, Mezzani A, Prescott E, Ryden L, Scherer M, diseases in mild hypertension: a scenario analysis for the Netherlands. Clin Ther
Syvänne M, Scholte op Reimer WJ, Vrints C, Wood D, Zamorano JL, Zannad F. 2014;36:368 – 384.e5.
European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice 27. Wisloff T, Selmer RM, Halvorsen S, Fretheim A, Norheim OF, Kristiansen IS.
(version 2012). The Fifth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology Choice of generic antihypertensive drugs for the primary prevention of cardiovas-
and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice cular disease—a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2012;12:26.
(constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts). Eur Heart 28. Banegas JR, Lopez-Garcia E, Dallongeville J, Guallar E, Halcox JP, Borghi C,
J 2012;33:1635 –1701. Massó-González EL, Jiménez FJ, Perk J, Steg PG, De Backer G,
7. Mistry H, Morris S, Dyer M, Kotseva K, Wood D, Buxton M. Cost-effectiveness of Rodrı́guez-Artalejo F. Achievement of treatment goals for primary prevention
a European preventive cardiology programme in primary care: a Markov model- of cardiovascular disease in clinical practice across Europe: the EURIKA study.
ling approach. BMJ Open 2012 Oct 11;2. pii: e001029.
Eur Heart J 2011;32:2143 –2152.
8. Nichols M, Townsend N, Luengo-Fernandez R, Leal J, Gray A, Scarborough P,
29. Kotseva K, Wood D, De Backer G, De Bacquer D, Pyorala K, Reiner Z, Keil U.
Rayner M. European Cardiovascular Disease Statistics, 2012. Brussels: European
EUROASPIRE III. Management of cardiovascular risk factors in asymptomatic
Heart Network, 2012.
high-risk patients in general practice: cross-sectional survey in 12 European coun-
9. Heidenreich PA, Trogdon JG, Khavjou OA, Butler J, Dracup K, Ezekowitz MD,
tries. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2010;17:530 – 540.
Finkelstein EA, Hong Y, Johnston SC, Khera A, Lloyd-Jones DM, Nelson SA,
30. Cherry SB, Benner JS, Hussein MA, Tang SS, Nichol MB. The clinical and economic
Nichol G, Orenstein D, Wilson PW, Woo YJ. Forecasting the future of cardiovas-
burden of nonadherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy in
cular disease in the United States: a policy statement from the American Heart
hypertensive patients. Value Health 2009;12:489 – 497.
Association. Circulation 2011;123:933 – 944.
10. McConnachie A, Walker A, Robertson M, Marchbank L, Peacock J, Packard CJ, 31. Corrao G, Scotti L, Zambon A, Baio G, Nicotra F, Conti V, Capri S, Tragni E,
Cobbe SM, Ford I. Long-term impact on healthcare resource utilization of statin Merlino L, Catapano AL, Mancia G. Cost-effectiveness of enhancing adherence
treatment, and its cost effectiveness in the primary prevention of cardiovascular to therapy with statins in the setting of primary cardiovascular prevention. Evi-
disease: a record linkage study. Eur Heart J 2014;35:290 – 298. dence from an empirical approach based on administrative databases. Atheroscler-
11. Ward S, Lloyd Jones M, Pandor A, Holmes M, Ara R, Ryan A, Yeo W, Payne N. A osis 2011;217:479 –485.
systematic review and economic evaluation of statins for the prevention of coron- 32. Dragomir A, Cote R, Roy L, Blais L, Lalonde L, Berard A, Perreault S. Impact of
ary events. Health Technol Assess 2007;11:1–160, iii –iv. adherence to antihypertensive agents on clinical outcomes and hospitalization
12. Plans-Rubio P. The cost effectiveness of statin therapies in Spain in 2010, after the costs. Med Care 2010;48:418 – 425.
introduction of generics and reference prices. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2010;10: 33. Wald NJ, Law MR. A strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease by more than 80%.
369– 382. BMJ 2003;326:1419.
13. Bjorck L, Rosengren A, Bennett K, Lappas G, Capewell S. Modelling the decreasing 34. Gaziano TA, Opie LH, Weinstein MC. Cardiovascular disease prevention with a
coronary heart disease mortality in Sweden between 1986 and 2002. Eur Heart J multidrug regimen in the developing world: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet
2009;30:1046 –1056. 2006:368:679 – 686.
14. Aspelund T, Gudnason V, Magnusdottir BT, Andersen K, Sigurdsson G, 35. van Gils PF, Over EA, Hamberg-van Reenen HH, de Wit GA, van den Berg M,
Thorsson B, Steingrimsdottir L, Critchley J, Bennett K, O’Flaherty M, Schuit AJ, Engelfriet PM. The polypill in the primary prevention of cardiovascular
Capewell S. Analysing the large decline in coronary heart disease mortality in disease: cost-effectiveness in the Dutch population. BMJ Open 2011;1:e000363.
36. Frieden TR. A framework for public health action: the health impact pyramid. does HDL cholesterol add to risk estimation? A report from the SCORE Investi-
Am J Public Health 2010;100:590 – 595. gators. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2009;16:304–314.
37. Brown MT, Bussell JK. Medication adherence: WHO cares? Mayo Clin Proc 2011; 57. Mortensen MB, Afzal S, Nordestgaard BG, Falk E. The high-density
86:304 –314. lipoprotein-adjusted SCORE model worsens SCORE-based risk classification in
38. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE Public Health Guidance a contemporary population of 30,824 Europeans: the Copenhagen General Popu-
25. June 2010. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ph25. lation Study. Eur Heart J 2015;36:2446 –2453.
39. Capewell S, Ford ES, Croft JB, Critchley JA, Greenlund KJ, Labarthe DR. Cardio- 58. Kavousi M, Elias-Smale S, Rutten JH, Leening MJ, Vliegenthart R, Verwoert GC,
vascular risk factor trends and potential for reducing coronary heart disease mor- Krestin GP, Oudkerk M, de Maat MP, Leebeek FW, Mattace-Raso FU,
tality in the United States of America. Bull World Health Org 2010;88:120 –130. Lindemans J, Hofman A, Steyerberg EW, van der Lugt A, van den
40. Mozaffarian D, Capewell S. United Nations’ dietary policies to prevent cardiovas- Meiracker AH, Witteman JC. Evaluation of newer risk markers for coronary heart
cular disease. BMJ 2011;343:d5747. disease risk classification: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:438 –444.
41. D’Agostino RB Sr, Vasan RS, Pencina MJ, Wolf PA, Cobain M, Massaro JM, 59. Yeboah J, McClelland RL, Polonsky TS, Burke GL, Sibley CT, O’Leary D, Carr JJ,
Kannel WB. General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Goff DC, Greenland P, Herrington DM. Comparison of novel risk markers for im-
Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 2008;117:743 – 753. provement in cardiovascular risk assessment in intermediate-risk individuals.
42. Conroy RM, Pyorala K, Fitzgerald AP, Sans S, Menotti A, De Backer G, De JAMA 2012;308:788 – 795.
Bacquer D, Ducimetière P, Jousilahti P, Keil U, Njølstad I, Oganov RG, 60. Vlachopoulos C, Xaplanteris P, Aboyans V, Brodmann M, Cifkova R, Cosentino F,

Thomsen T, Tunstall-Pedoe H, Tverdal A, Wedel H, Whincup P, Wilhelmsen L, De Carlo M, Gallino A, Landmesser U, Laurent S, Lekakis J, Mikhailidis DP,
Graham IM. Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: Naka KK, Protogerou AD, Rizzoni D, Schmidt-Trucksäss A, Van Bortel L,
the SCORE project. Eur Heart J 2003;24:987 – 1003. Weber T, Yamashina A, Zimlichman R, Boutouyrie P, Cockcroft J, O’Rourke M,
43. Woodward M, Brindle P, Tunstall-Pedoe H. Adding social deprivation and family Park JB, Schillaci G, Sillesen H, Townsend RR. The role of vascular biomarkers
history to cardiovascular risk assessment: the ASSIGN score from the Scottish for primary and secondary prevention. A position paper from the European So-
Heart Health Extended Cohort (SHHEC). Heart 2007;93:172 –176. ciety of Cardiology Working Group on peripheral circulation: endorsed by the
44. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Vinogradova Y, Robson J, Minhas R, Sheikh A, Association for Research into Arterial Structure and Physiology (ARTERY) Soci-
Brindle P. Predicting cardiovascular risk in England and Wales: prospective deriv- ety. Atherosclerosis 2015;241:507–532.
ation and validation of QRISK2. BMJ 2008;336:1475 –1482. 61. Boekholdt SM, Hovingh GK, Mora S, Arsenault BJ, Amarenco P, Pedersen TR,
45. Assmann G, Cullen P, Schulte H. Simple scoring scheme for calculating the risk of LaRosa JC, Waters DD, DeMicco DA, Simes RJ, Keech AC, Colquhoun D,
acute coronary events based on the 10-year follow-up of the prospective cardio- Hitman GA, Betteridge DJ, Clearfield MB, Downs JR, Colhoun HM, Gotto AM
vascular Munster (PROCAM) study. Circulation 2002;105:310 –315. Jr, Ridker PM, Grundy SM, Kastelein JJ. Very low levels of atherogenic lipoproteins
46. Ridker PM, Paynter NP, Rifai N, Gaziano JM, Cook NR. C-reactive protein and and the risk for cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis of statin trials. J Am Coll Car-
parental history improve global cardiovascular risk prediction: the Reynolds diol 2014;64:485 –494.
Risk Score for men. Circulation 2008;118:2243 –2251. 62. Brugts JJ, Yetgin T, Hoeks SE, Gotto AM, Shepherd J, Westendorp RG, de
47. Ridker PM, Buring JE, Rifai N, Cook NR. Development and validation of improved Craen AJ, Knopp RH, Nakamura H, Ridker P, van Domburg R, Deckers JW.
algorithms for the assessment of global cardiovascular risk in women: the The benefits of statins in people without established cardiovascular disease but
Reynolds Risk Score. JAMA 2007;297:611–619. with cardiovascular risk factors: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
48. Ferrario M, Chiodini P, Chambless LE, Cesana G, Vanuzzo D, Panico S, Sega R, BMJ 2009;338:b2376.
Pilotto L, Palmieri L, Giampaoli S. Prediction of coronary events in a low incidence 63. Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Giugliano RP, McCagg A, White JA, Theroux P, Darius H,
population. Assessing accuracy of the CUORE Cohort Study prediction equation. Lewis BS, Ophuis TO, Jukema JW, De Ferrari GM, Ruzyllo W, De Lucca P, Im K,
Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:413 –421. Bohula EA, Reist C, Wiviott SD, Tershakovec AM, Musliner TA, Braunwald E,
49. Goff DC Jr, Lloyd-Jones DM, Bennett G, Coady S, D’Agostino RB, Gibbons R, Califf RM. Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes. N
Greenland P, Lackland DT, Levy D, O’Donnell CJ, Robinson JG, Schwartz JS, Engl J Med 2015;372:2387 – 2397.
Shero ST, Smith SC Jr, Sorlie P, Stone NJ, Wilson PW, Jordan HS, Nevo L, 64. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration, Baigent C, Blackwell L,
Wnek J, Anderson JL, Halperin JL, Albert NM, Bozkurt B, Brindis RG, Emberson J, Holland LE, Reith C, Bhala N, Peto R, Barnes EH, Keech A, Simes J,
Curtis LH, DeMets D, Hochman JS, Kovacs RJ, Ohman EM, Pressler SJ, Collins R. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a
Sellke FW, Shen WK, Smith SC Jr, Tomaselli GF. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet
on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College 2010;376:1670 – 1681.
of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. 65. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration, Fulcher J, O’Connell R,
Circulation 2014;129(25 Suppl 2):S49 –S73. Voysey M, Emberson J, Blackwell L, Mihaylova B, Simes J, Collins R, Kirby A,
50. Hajifathalian K, Ueda P, Lu Y, Woodward M, Ahmadvand A, Aguilar-Salinas CA, Colhoun H, Braunwald E, La Rosa J, Pedersen TR, Tonkin A, Davis B, Sleight P,
Azizi F, Cifkova R, Di Cesare M, Eriksen L, Farzadfar F, Ikeda N, Khalili D, Franzosi MG, Baigent C, Keech A. Efficacy and safety of LDL-lowering therapy
Khang YH, Lanska V, León-Muñoz L, Magliano D, Msyamboza KP, Oh K, among men and women: meta-analysis of individual data from 174,000 partici-
Rodrı́guez-Artalejo F, Rojas-Martinez R, Shaw JE, Stevens GA, Tolstrup J, pants in 27 randomised trials. Lancet 2015;385:1397 –1405.
Zhou B, Salomon JA, Ezzati M, Danaei G. A novel risk score to predict cardiovas- 66. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaborators, Mihaylova B, Emberson J,
cular disease risk in national populations (Globorisk): a pooled analysis of pro- Blackwell L, Keech A, Simes J, Barnes EH, Voysey M, Gray A, Collins R, Baigent C.
spective cohorts and health examination surveys. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of
2015;3:339 –355. vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised trials. Lancet
51. Cooney MT, Dudina AL, Graham IM. Value and limitations of existing scores for 2012;380:581 –590.
the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a review for clinicians. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 67. Hegele RA, Ginsberg HN, Chapman MJ, Nordestgaard BG, Kuivenhoven JA,
54:1209 – 1227. Averna M, Borén J, Bruckert E, Catapano AL, Descamps OS, Hovingh GK,
52. Cooney MT, Dudina A, D’Agostino R, Graham IM. Cardiovascular risk-estimation Humphries SE, Kovanen PT, Masana L, Pajukanta P, Parhofer KG, Raal FJ,
systems in primary prevention: do they differ? Do they make a difference? Can we Ray KK, Santos RD, Stalenhoef AF, Stroes E, Taskinen MR, Tybjærg-Hansen A,
see the future? Circulation 2010;122:300 –310. Watts GF, Wiklund O. The polygenic nature of hypertriglyceridaemia: implica-
53. Lloyd-Jones DM, Leip EP, Larson MG, D’Agostino RB, Beiser A, Wilson PW, tions for definition, diagnosis, and management. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014;
Wolf PA, Levy D. Prediction of lifetime risk for cardiovascular disease by risk 2:655 –666.
factor burden at 50 years of age. Circulation 2006;113:791 –798. 68. Mills EJ, Rachlis B, Wu P, Devereaux PJ, Arora P, Perri D. Primary prevention of
54. Cooney MT, Selmer R, Lindman A, Tverdal A, Menotti A, Thomsen T, cardiovascular mortality and events with statin treatments: a network
DeBacker G, De Bacquer D, Tell GS, Njolstad I, Graham IM. Cardiovascular meta-analysis involving more than 65,000 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:
risk estimation in older persons: SCORE O.P. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2016;23: 1769 –1781.
1093–1103. 69. Pedersen TR, Faergeman O, Kastelein JJ, Olsson AG, Tikkanen MJ, Holme I,
55. Cooney MT, Dudina A, De Bacquer D, Wilhelmsen L, Sans S, Menotti A, De Larsen ML, Bendiksen FS, Lindahl C, Szarek M, Tsai J. High-dose atorvastatin vs
Backer G, Jousilahti P, Keil U, Thomsen T, Whincup P, Graham IM. HDL choles- usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the
terol protects against cardiovascular disease in both genders, at all ages and at all IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005;294:2437 –2445.
levels of risk. Atherosclerosis 2009;206:611 – 616. 70. SPRINT Research Group, Wright JT Jr, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, Snyder JK,
56. Cooney MT, Dudina A, De Bacquer D, Fitzgerald A, Conroy R, Sans S, Menotti A, Sink KM, Rocco MV, Reboussin DM, Rahman M, Oparil S, Lewis CE,
De Backer G, Jousilahti P, Keil U, Thomsen T, Whincup P, Graham I. How much Kimmel PL, Johnson KC, Goff DC Jr, Fine LJ, Cutler JA, Cushman WC,
ESC/EAS Guidelines 3058a
Cheung AK, Ambrosius WT. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard 85. Robinson JG, Wang S, Jacobson TA. Meta-analysis of comparison of effectiveness
blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med 2015;373:2103 –2116. of lowering apolipoprotein B versus low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and
71. Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, Bairey Merz CN, Blum CB, Eckel RH, nonhigh-density lipoprotein cholesterol for cardiovascular risk reduction in ran-
Goldberg AC, Gordon D, Levy D, Lloyd-Jones DM, McBride P, Schwartz JS, domized trials. Am J Cardiol 2012;110:1468 –1476.
Shero ST, Smith SC Jr, Watson K, Wilson PW, Eddleman KM, Jarrett NM, 86. Varbo A, Benn M, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Jorgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R,
LaBresh K, Nevo L, Wnek J, Anderson JL, Halperin JL, Albert NM, Bozkurt B, Nordestgaard BG. Remnant cholesterol as a causal risk factor for ischemic heart
Brindis RG, Curtis LH, DeMets D, Hochman JS, Kovacs RJ, Ohman EM, disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:427 –436.
Pressler SJ, Sellke FW, Shen WK, Smith SC Jr, Tomaselli GF. 2013 ACC/AHA 87. Triglyceride Coronary Disease Genetics, Consortium and Emerging Risk Factors
guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardio- Collaboration, Sarwar N, Sandhu MS, Ricketts SL, Butterworth AS, Di
vascular risk in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Angelantonio E, Boekholdt SM, Ouwehand W, Watkins H, Samani NJ,
Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2014;129(25 Saleheen D, Lawlor D, Reilly MP, Hingorani AD, Talmud PJ, Danesh J. Triglyceride-
Suppl 2):S1 –S45. mediated pathways and coronary disease: collaborative analysis of 101 studies.
72. Langlois MR, Descamps OS, van der Laarse A, Weykamp C, Baum H, Pulkki K, von Lancet 2010;375:1634 –1639.
Eckardstein A, De Bacquer D, Borén J, Wiklund O, Laitinen P, Oosterhuis WP, 88. Do R, Willer CJ, Schmidt EM, Sengupta S, Gao C, Peloso GM, Gustafsson S,
Cobbaert C. Clinical impact of direct HDLc and LDLc method bias in hypertrigly- Kanoni S, Ganna A, Chen J, Buchkovich ML, Mora S, Beckmann JS,
ceridemia. A simulation study of the EAS-EFLM Collaborative Project Group. Ath- Bragg-Gresham JL, Chang HY, Demirkan A, Den Hertog HM, Donnelly LA,

erosclerosis 2014;233:83–90. Ehret GB, Esko T, Feitosa MF, Ferreira T, Fischer K, Fontanillas P, Fraser RM,
73. Kolovou GD, Mikhailidis DP, Kovar J, Lairon D, Nordestgaard BG, Ooi TC, Freitag DF, Gurdasani D, Heikkilä K, Hyppönen E, Isaacs A, Jackson AU,
Perez-Martinez P, Bilianou H, Anagnostopoulou K, Panotopoulos G. Assessment Johansson A, Johnson T, Kaakinen M, Kettunen J, Kleber ME, Li X, Luan J,
and clinical relevance of non-fasting and postprandial triglycerides: an expert pa- Lyytikäinen LP, Magnusson PK, Mangino M, Mihailov E, Montasser ME,
nel statement. Curr Vasc Pharmacol 2011;9:258 –270. Müller-Nurasyid M, Nolte IM, O’Connell JR, Palmer CD, Perola M,
74. Mihas C, Kolovou GD, Mikhailidis DP, Kovar J, Lairon D, Nordestgaard BG, Petersen AK, Sanna S, Saxena R, Service SK, Shah S, Shungin D, Sidore C,
Ooi TC, Perez-Martinez P, Bilianou H, Anagnostopoulou K, Panotopoulos G. Song C, Strawbridge RJ, Surakka I, Tanaka T, Teslovich TM, Thorleifsson G, Van
Diagnostic value of postprandial triglyceride testing in healthy subjects: a den Herik EG, Voight BF, Volcik KA, Waite LL, Wong A, Wu Y, Zhang W,
meta-analysis. Curr Vasc Pharmacol 2011;9:271 –280. Absher D, Asiki G, Barroso I, Been LF, Bolton JL, Bonnycastle LL, Brambilla P,
75. Nordestgaard BG, Varbo A. Triglycerides and cardiovascular disease. Lancet 2014; Burnett MS, Cesana G, Dimitriou M, Doney AS, Döring A, Elliott P, Epstein SE,
384:626 –635. Eyjolfsson GI, Gigante B, Goodarzi MO, Grallert H, Gravito ML, Groves CJ,
76. Jorgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, West AS, Grande P, Nordestgaard BG, Hallmans G, Hartikainen AL, Hayward C, Hernandez D, Hicks AA, Holm H,
Tybjaerg-Hansen A. Genetically elevated non-fasting triglycerides and calculated Hung YJ, Illig T, Jones MR, Kaleebu P, Kastelein JJ, Khaw KT, Kim E, Klopp N,
remnant cholesterol as causal risk factors for myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J Komulainen P, Kumari M, Langenberg C, Lehtimäki T, Lin SY, Lindström J,
2013;34:1826 –1833. Loos RJ, Mach F, McArdle WL, Meisinger C, Mitchell BD, Müller G, Nagaraja R,
77. Langsted A, Nordestgaard BG. Nonfasting lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipopro- Narisu N, Nieminen TV, Nsubuga RN, Olafsson I, Ong KK, Palotie A,
teins in individuals with and without diabetes: 58 434 individuals from the Copen- Papamarkou T, Pomilla C, Pouta A, Rader DJ, Reilly MP, Ridker PM,
hagen General Population Study. Clin Chem 2011;57:482 –489. Rivadeneira F, Rudan I, Ruokonen A, Samani N, Scharnagl H, Seeley J,
78. Marti-Soler H, Gubelmann C, Aeschbacher S, Alves L, Bobak M, Bongard V, Silander K, Stančáková A, Stirrups K, Swift AJ, Tiret L, Uitterlinden AG, van
Clays E, de Gaetano G, Di Castelnuovo A, Elosua R, Ferrieres J, Guessous I, Pelt LJ, Vedantam S, Wainwright N, Wijmenga C, Wild SH, Willemsen G,
Igland J, Jørgensen T, Nikitin Y, O’Doherty MG, Palmieri L, Ramos R, Simons J, Wilsgaard T, Wilson JF, Young EH, Zhao JH, Adair LS, Arveiler D, Assimes TL,
Sulo G, Vanuzzo D, Vila J, Barros H, Borglykke A, Conen D, De Bacquer D, Bandinelli S, Bennett F, Bochud M, Boehm BO, Boomsma DI, Borecki IB,
Donfrancesco C, Gaspoz JM, Giampaoli S, Giles GG, Iacoviello L, Kee F, Bornstein SR, Bovet P, Burnier M, Campbell H, Chakravarti A, Chambers JC,
Kubinova R, Malyutina S, Marrugat J, Prescott E, Ruidavets JB, Scragg R, Chen YD, Collins FS, Cooper RS, Danesh J, Dedoussis G, de Faire U,
Simons LA, Tamosiunas A, Tell GS, Vollenweider P, Marques-Vidal P. Seasonality Feranil AB, Ferrières J, Ferrucci L, Freimer NB, Gieger C, Groop LC,
of cardiovascular risk factors: an analysis including over 230 000 participants in 15 Gudnason V, Gyllensten U, Hamsten A, Harris TB, Hingorani A, Hirschhorn JN,
countries. Heart 2014;100:1517 – 1523. Hofman A, Hovingh GK, Hsiung CA, Humphries SE, Hunt SC, Hveem K,
79. Rabar S, Harker M, O’Flynn N, Wierzbicki AS, Guideline Development Group. Iribarren C, Järvelin MR, Jula A, Kähönen M, Kaprio J, Kesäniemi A, Kivimaki M,
Lipid modification and cardiovascular risk assessment for the primary and second- Kooner JS, Koudstaal PJ, Krauss RM, Kuh D, Kuusisto J, Kyvik KO, Laakso M,
ary prevention of cardiovascular disease: summary of updated NICE guidance. Lakka TA, Lind L, Lindgren CM, Martin NG, März W, McCarthy MI,
BMJ 2014;349:g4356. McKenzie CA, Meneton P, Metspalu A, Moilanen L, Morris AD, Munroe PB,
80. JBS3. Joint British Societies’ consensus recommendations for the prevention of Njølstad I, Pedersen NL, Power C, Pramstaller PP, Price JF, Psaty BM,
cardiovascular disease (JBS3). Heart 2014;100(Suppl 2):ii1 –ii67. Quertermous T, Rauramaa R, Saleheen D, Salomaa V, Sanghera DK, Saramies J,
81. Knopfholz J, Disserol CC, Pierin AJ, Schirr FL, Streisky L, Takito LL, Massucheto Schwarz PE, Sheu WH, Shuldiner AR, Siegbahn A, Spector TD, Stefansson K,
Ledesma P, Faria-Neto JR, Olandoski M, da Cunha CL, Bandeira AM. Validation of Strachan DP, Tayo BO, Tremoli E, Tuomilehto J, Uusitupa M, van Duijn CM,
the Friedewald formula in patients with metabolic syndrome. Cholesterol 2014; Vollenweider P, Wallentin L, Wareham NJ, Whitfield JB, Wolffenbuttel BH,
2014:261878. Altshuler D, Ordovas JM, Boerwinkle E, Palmer CN, Thorsteinsdottir U,
82. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Lipid modification: cardiovas- Chasman DI, Rotter JI, Franks PW, Ripatti S, Cupples LA, Sandhu MS, Rich SS,
cular risk assessment and the modification of blood lipids for the primary and sec- Boehnke M, Deloukas P, Mohlke KL, Ingelsson E, Abecasis GR, Daly MJ,
ondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. London: National Institute for Neale BM, Kathiresan S. Common variants associated with plasma triglycerides
Health and Care Excellence, 2014. and risk for coronary artery disease. Nat Genet 2013;45:1345 – 1352.
83. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Di Angelantonio E, Gao P, Pennells L, 89. Holmes MV, Asselbergs FW, Palmer TM, Drenos F, Lanktree MB, Nelson CP,
Kaptoge S, Caslake M, Thompson A, Butterworth AS, Sarwar N, Wormser D, Dale CE, Padmanabhan S, Finan C, Swerdlow DI, Tragante V, van Iperen EP,
Saleheen D, Ballantyne CM, Psaty BM, Sundström J, Ridker PM, Nagel D, Sivapalaratnam S, Shah S, Elbers CC, Shah T, Engmann J, Giambartolomei C,
Gillum RF, Ford I, Ducimetiere P, Kiechl S, Koenig W, Dullaart RP, Assmann G, White J, Zabaneh D, Sofat R, McLachlanS; UCLEB consortium, Doevendans PA,
D’Agostino RB Sr, Dagenais GR, Cooper JA, Kromhout D, Onat A, Balmforth AJ, Hall AS, North KE, Almoguera B, Hoogeveen RC, Cushman M,
Tipping RW, Gómez-de-la-Cámara A, Rosengren A, Sutherland SE, Gallacher J, Fornage M, Patel SR, Redline S, Siscovick DS, Tsai MY, Karczewski KJ,
Fowkes FG, Casiglia E, Hofman A, Salomaa V, Barrett-Connor E, Clarke R, Hofker MH, Verschuren WM, Bots ML, van der Schouw YT, Melander O,
Brunner E, Jukema JW, Simons LA, Sandhu M, Wareham NJ, Khaw KT, Dominiczak AF, Morris R, Ben-Shlomo Y, Price J, Kumari M, Baumert J,
Kauhanen J, Salonen JT, Howard WJ, Nordestgaard BG, Wood AM, Thompson Peters A, Thorand B, Koenig W, Gaunt TR, Humphries SE, Clarke R,
SG, Boekholdt SM, Sattar N, Packard C, Gudnason V, Danesh J. Lipid-related Watkins H, Farrall M, Wilson JG, Rich SS, de Bakker PI, Lange LA, Davey
markers and cardiovascular disease prediction. JAMA 2012;307:2499 –2506. Smith G, Reiner AP, Talmud PJ, Kivimäki M, Lawlor DA, Dudbridge F,
84. Boekholdt SM, Arsenault BJ, Mora S, Pedersen TR, LaRosa JC, Nestel PJ, Simes RJ, Samani NJ, Keating BJ, Hingorani AD, Casas JP. Mendelian randomization of blood
Durrington P, Hitman GA, Welch KM, DeMicco DA, Zwinderman AH, lipids for coronary heart disease. Eur Heart J 2015;36:539 –550.
Clearfield MB, Downs JR, Tonkin AM, Colhoun HM, Gotto AM Jr, Ridker PM, 90. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Di Angelantonio E, Sarwar N, Perry P,
Kastelein JJ. Association of LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and apolipo- Kaptoge S, Ray KK, Thompson A, Wood AM, Lewington S, Sattar N,
protein B levels with risk of cardiovascular events among patients treated with Packard CJ, Collins R, Thompson SG, Danesh J. Major lipids, apolipoproteins,
statins: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2012;307:1302 –1309. and risk of vascular disease. JAMA 2009;302:1993 –2000.
3058b ESC/EAS Guidelines
91. Haase CL, Tybjærg-Hansen A, Grande P, Frikke-Schmidt R. Genetically elevated 106. TG and HDL Working Group of the Exome Sequencing Project, National Heart,
apolipoprotein A-I, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and risk of ische- Lung, and Blood Institute, Crosby J, Peloso GM, Auer PL, Crosslin DR, Stitziel NO,
mic heart disease. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2010;95:E500 –510. Lange LA, Lu Y, Tang ZZ, Zhang H, Hindy G, Masca N, Stirrups K, Kanoni S, Do R,
92. Voight BF, Peloso GM, Orho-Melander M, Frikke-Schmidt R, Barbalic M, Jun G, Hu Y, Kang HM, Xue C, Goel A, Farrall M, Duga S, Merlini PA, Asselta R,
Jensen MK, Hindy G, Hólm H, Ding EL, Johnson T, Schunkert H, Samani NJ, Girelli D, Olivieri O, Martinelli N, Yin W, Reilly D, Speliotes E, Fox CS, Hveem K,
Clarke R, Hopewell JC, Thompson JF, Li M, Thorleifsson G, Newton-Cheh C, Holmen OL, Nikpay M, Farlow DN, Assimes TL, Franceschini N, Robinson J,
Musunuru K, Pirruccello JP, Saleheen D, Chen L, Stewart A, Schillert A, North KE, Martin LW, DePristo M, Gupta N, Escher SA, Jansson JH, Van
Thorsteinsdottir U, Thorgeirsson G, Anand S, Engert JC, Morgan T, Spertus J, Zuydam N, Palmer CN, Wareham N, Koch W, Meitinger T, Peters A, Lieb W,
Stoll M, Berger K, Martinelli N, Girelli D, McKeown PP, Patterson CC, Erbel R, Konig IR, Kruppa J, Degenhardt F, Gottesman O, Bottinger EP,
Epstein SE, Devaney J, Burnett MS, Mooser V, Ripatti S, Surakka I, O’Donnell CJ, Psaty BM, Ballantyne CM, Abecasis G, Ordovas JM, Melander O,
Nieminen MS, Sinisalo J, Lokki ML, Perola M, Havulinna A, de Faire U, Watkins H, Orho-Melander M, Ardissino D, Loos RJ, McPherson R, Willer CJ,
Gigante B, Ingelsson E, Zeller T, Wild P, de Bakker PI, Klungel OH, Maitland-van Erdmann J, Hall AS, Samani NJ, Deloukas P, Schunkert H, Wilson JG,
der Zee AH, Peters BJ, de Boer A, Grobbee DE, Kamphuisen PW, Deneer VH, Kooperberg C, Rich SS, Tracy RP, Lin DY, Altshuler D, Gabriel S,
Elbers CC, Onland-Moret NC, Hofker MH, Wijmenga C, Verschuren WM, Nickerson DA, Jarvik GP, Cupples LA, Reiner AP, Boerwinkle E, Kathiresan S.
Boer JM, van der Schouw YT, Rasheed A, Frossard P, Demissie S, Willer C, Loss-of-function mutations in APOC3, triglycerides, and coronary disease. N
Do R, Ordovas JM, Abecasis GR, Boehnke M, Mohlke KL, Daly MJ, Guiducci C, Engl J Med 2014;371:22 –31.

Burtt NP, Surti A, Gonzalez E, Purcell S, Gabriel S, Marrugat J, Peden J, 107. Jorgensen AB, Frikke-Schmidt R, Nordestgaard BG, Tybjærg-Hansen A.
Erdmann J, Diemert P, Willenborg C, König IR, Fischer M, Hengstenberg C, Loss-of-function mutations in APOC3 and risk of ischemic vascular disease. N
Ziegler A, Buysschaert I, Lambrechts D, Van de Werf F, Fox KA, El Engl J Med 2014;371:32–41.
Mokhtari NE, Rubin D, Schrezenmeir J, Schreiber S, Schäfer A, Danesh J, 108. Graham MJ, Lee RG, Bell TA 3rd, Fu W, Mullick AE, Alexander VJ, Singleton W,
Blankenberg S, Roberts R, McPherson R, Watkins H, Hall AS, Overvad K, Viney N, Geary R, Su J, Baker BF, Burkey J, Crooke ST, Crooke RM. Antisense
Rimm E, Boerwinkle E, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Cupples LA, Reilly MP, oligonucleotide inhibition of apolipoprotein C-III reduces plasma triglycerides in
Melander O, Mannucci PM, Ardissino D, Siscovick D, Elosua R, Stefansson K, rodents, nonhuman primates, and humans. Circ Res 2013;112:1479 –1490.
O’Donnell CJ, Salomaa V, Rader DJ, Peltonen L, Schwartz SM, Altshuler D, 109. Nordestgaard BG, Chapman MJ, Ray K, Borén J, Andreotti F, Watts GF,
Kathiresan S. Plasma HDL cholesterol and risk of myocardial infarction: a Mendel- Ginsberg H, Amarenco P, Catapano A, Descamps OS, Fisher E, Kovanen PT,
ian randomisation study. Lancet 2012;380:572 –580. Kuivenhoven JA, Lesnik P, Masana L, Reiner Z, Taskinen MR, Tokgözoglu L,
93. Khera AV, Cuchel M, de la Llera-Moya M, Rodrigues A, Burke MF, Jafri K, Tybjærg-Hansen A. Lipoprotein(a) as a cardiovascular risk factor: current status.
French BC, Phillips JA, Mucksavage ML, Wilensky RL, Mohler ER, Rothblat GH, Eur Heart J 2010;31:2844 –2853.
Rader DJ. Cholesterol efflux capacity, high-density lipoprotein function, and ath- 110. Kamstrup PR, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Nordestgaard BG. Elevated lipoprotein(a) and
erosclerosis. N Engl J Med 2011;364:127 –135. risk of aortic valve stenosis in the general population. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:
94. Li XM, Tang WH, Mosior MK, Huang Y, Wu Y, Matter W, Gao V, Schmitt D, 470 –477.
Didonato JA, Fisher EA, Smith JD, Hazen SL. Paradoxical association of enhanced 111. Kronenberg F, Utermann G. Lipoprotein(a): resurrected by genetics. J Intern Med
cholesterol efflux with increased incident cardiovascular risks. Arterioscler Thromb 2013;273:6– 30.
Vasc Biol 2013;33:1696 –1705. 112. Marcovina SM, Koschinsky ML, Albers JJ, Skarlatos S. Report of the National
95. Rohatgi A, Khera A, Berry JD, Givens EG, Ayers CR, Wedin KE, Neeland IJ, Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop on Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular
Yuhanna IS, Rader DR, de Lemos JA, Shaul PW. HDL cholesterol efflux capacity Disease: recent advances and future directions. Clin Chem 2003;49:1785 –1796.
and incident cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2014;371:2383 –2393. 113. Willeit P, Kiechl S, Kronenberg F, Witztum JL, Santer P, Mayr M, Xu Q, Mayr A,
96. Sarwar N, Danesh J, Eiriksdottir G, Sigurdsson G, Wareham N, Bingham S, Willeit J, Tsimikas S. Discrimination and net reclassification of cardiovascular risk
Boekholdt SM, Khaw KT, Gudnason V. Triglycerides and the risk of coronary with lipoprotein(a): prospective 15-year outcomes in the Bruneck Study. J Am Coll
heart disease: 10,158 incident cases among 262,525 participants in 29 Western Cardiol 2014;64:851 –860.
prospective studies. Circulation 2007;115:450–458. 114. Kamstrup PR, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Nordestgaard BG. Extreme lipoprotein(a) le-
97. Hokanson JE, Austin MA. Plasma triglyceride level is a risk factor for cardiovascu- vels and improved cardiovascular risk prediction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:
lar disease independent of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level: a 1146 –1156.
meta-analysis of population-based prospective studies. J Cardiovasc Risk 1996;3: 115. Robinson JG, Farnier M, Krempf M, Bergeron J, Luc G, Averna M, Stroes ES,
213 –219. Langslet G, Raal FJ, El Shahawy M, Koren MJ, Lepor NE, Lorenzato C, Pordy R,
98. Bansal S, Buring JE, Rifai N, Mora S, Sacks FM, Ridker PM. Fasting compared with Chaudhari U, Kastelein JJ. Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in reducing lipids
nonfasting triglycerides and risk of cardiovascular events in women. JAMA 2007; and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1489 –1499.
298:309 –316. 116. Sabatine MS, Giugliano RP, Wiviott SD, Raal FJ, Blom DJ, Robinson J,
99. Nordestgaard BG, Benn M, Schnohr P, Tybjaerg-Hansen A. Nonfasting triglycer- Ballantyne CM, Somaratne R, Legg J, Wasserman SM, Scott R, Koren MJ,
ides and risk of myocardial infarction, ischemic heart disease, and death in men and Stein EA. Efficacy and safety of evolocumab in reducing lipids and cardiovascular
women. JAMA 2007;298:299 – 308. events. N Engl J Med 2015;727:1500 –1509.
100. Charlton-Menys V, Betteridge DJ, Colhoun H, Fuller J, France M, Hitman GA, 117. Seed M, O’Connor B, Perombelon N, O’Donnell M, Reaveley D, Knight BL. The
Livingstone SJ, Neil HA, Newman CB, Szarek M, DeMicco DA, Durrington PN. effect of nicotinic acid and acipimox on lipoprotein(a) concentration and turn-
Targets of statin therapy: LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and apolipopro- over. Atherosclerosis 1993;101:61– 68.
tein B in type 2 diabetes in the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study 118. Packard CJ. Small dense low-density lipoprotein and its role as an independent
(CARDS). Clin Chem 2009;55:473 –480. predictor of cardiovascular disease. Curr Opin Lipidol 2006;17:412 –417.
101. Ingelsson E, Schaefer EJ, Contois JH, McNamara JR, Sullivan L, Keyes MJ, 119. Mora S, Szklo M, Otvos JD, Greenland P, Psaty BM, Goff DC Jr, O’Leary DH,
Pencina MJ, Schoonmaker C, Wilson PW, D’Agostino RB, Vasan RS. Clinical utility Saad MF, Tsai MY, Sharrett AR. LDL particle subclasses, LDL particle size, and ca-
of different lipid measures for prediction of coronary heart disease in men and rotid atherosclerosis in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Athero-
women. JAMA 2007;298:776–785. sclerosis 2007;192:211 –217.
102. Taskinen MR, Barter PJ, Ehnholm C, Sullivan DR, Mann K, Simes J, Best JD, 120. Whitfield JB. Genetic insights into cardiometabolic risk factors. Clin Biochem Rev
Hamwood S, Keech AC. Ability of traditional lipid ratios and apolipoprotein ratios 2014;35:15 –36.
to predict cardiovascular risk in people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia 2010;53: 121. Nordestgaard BG, Chapman MJ, Humphries SE, Ginsberg HN, Masana L,
1846– 1855. Descamps OS, Wiklund O, Hegele RA, Raal FJ, Defesche JC, Wiegman A,
103. Sniderman AD, Williams K, Contois JH, Monroe HM, McQueen MJ, de Graaf J, Santos RD, Watts GF, Parhofer KG, Hovingh GK, Kovanen PT, Boileau C,
Furberg CD. A meta-analysis of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, Averna M, Borén J, Bruckert E, Catapano AL, Kuivenhoven JA, Pajukanta P,
non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B as markers of car- Ray K, Stalenhoef AF, Stroes E, Taskinen MR, Tybjærg-Hansen A. Familial hyper-
diovascular risk. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2011;4:337 –345. cholesterolaemia is underdiagnosed and undertreated in the general population:
104. Onat A, Hergenç G, Sansoy V, Fobker M, Ceyhan K, Toprak S, Assmann G. Apo- guidance for clinicians to prevent coronary heart disease: consensus statement of
lipoprotein C-III, a strong discriminant of coronary risk in men and a determinant the European Atherosclerosis Society. Eur Heart J 2013;34:3478 –3490a.
of the metabolic syndrome in both genders. Atherosclerosis 2003;168:81 –89. 122. Futema M, Shah S, Cooper JA, Li K, Whittall RA, Sharifi M, Goldberg O, Drogari E,
105. Sacks FM, Alaupovic P, Moye LA, Cole TG, Sussex B, Stampfer MJ, Pfeffer MA, Mollaki V, Wiegman A, Defesche J, D’Agostino MN, D’Angelo A, Rubba P,
Braunwald E. VLDL, apolipoproteins B, CIII, and E, and risk of recurrent coronary Fortunato G, Waluś-Miarka M, Hegele RA, Aderayo Bamimore M, Durst R,
events in the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) trial. Circulation 2000;102: Leitersdorf E, Mulder MT, Roeters van Lennep JE, Sijbrands EJ, Whittaker JC,
1886 –1892. Talmud PJ, Humphries SE. Refinement of variant selection for the LDL cholesterol
ESC/EAS Guidelines 3058c
genetic risk score in the diagnosis of the polygenic form of clinical familial hyper- 141. Hollaender PL, Ross AB, Kristensen M. Whole-grain and blood lipid changes in
cholesterolemia and replication in samples from 6 countries. Clin Chem 2015;61: apparently healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized
231– 238. controlled studies. Am J Clin Nutr 2015;102:556 – 572.
123. Soran H, Schofield JD, Durrington PN. Cholesterol, not just cardiovascular risk, is 142. Gylling H, Plat J, Turley S, Ginsberg HN, Ellegård L, Jessup W, Jones PJ,
important in deciding who should receive statin treatment. Eur Heart J 2015;36: Lütjohann D, Maerz W, Masana L, Silbernagel G, Staels B, Borén J,
2975–2983. Catapano AL, De Backer G, Deanfield J, Descamps OS, Kovanen PT,
124. Holme I, Cater NB, Faergeman O, Kastelein JJ, Olsson AG, Tikkanen MJ, Riccardi G, Tokgözoglu L, Chapman MJ. Plant sterols and plant stanols in the man-
Larsen ML, Lindahl C, Pedersen TR. Lipoprotein predictors of cardiovascular agement of dyslipidaemia and prevention of cardiovascular disease. Atherosclerosis
events in statin-treated patients with coronary heart disease. Insights from the In- 2014;232:346–360.
cremental Decrease In End-points Through Aggressive Lipid-lowering Trial 143. Musa-Veloso K, Poon TH, Elliot JA, Chung C. A comparison of the
(IDEAL). Ann Med 2008;40:456 –464. LDL-cholesterol lowering efficacy of plant stanols and plant sterols over a con-
125. European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation, Reiner Z, tinuous dose range: results of a meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled
Catapano AL, De Backer G, Graham I, Taskinen MR, Wiklund O, Agewall S, trials. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 2011;85:9–28.
Alegria E, Chapman MJ, Durrington P, Erdine S, Halcox J, Hobbs R, Kjekshus J, 144. Lu Z, Kou W, Du B, Wu Y, Zhao S, Brusco OA, Morgan JM, Capuzzi DM. Effect of
Filardi PP, Riccardi G, Storey RF, Wood D. ESC/EAS Guidelines for the manage- Xuezhikang, an extract from red yeast Chinese rice, on coronary events in a Chin-
ment of dyslipidaemias: the Task Force for the management of dyslipidaemias of ese population with previous myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:

the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis 1689 –1693.
Society (EAS). Eur Heart J 2011;32:1769 – 1818. 145. Gordon RY, Cooperman T, Obermeyer W, Becker DJ. Marked variability of mon-
126. Hsia J, MacFadyen JG, Monyak J, Ridker PM. Cardiovascular event reduction and acolin levels in commercial red yeast rice products: buyer beware. Arch Intern Med
adverse events among subjects attaining low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 2010;170:1722 –1727.
,50 mg/dl with rosuvastatin. The JUPITER trial (Justification for the Use of Statins 146. Li Y, Jiang L, Jia Z, Xin W, Yang S, Yang Q, Wand L. A meta-analysis of red yeast
in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin). J Am Coll Cardiol rice: an effective and relatively safe alternative approach for dyslipidemia. PLoS One
2011;57:1666 –1675. 2014;9:e98611.
127. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular com- 147. Dattilo AM, Kris-Etherton PM. Effects of weight reduction on blood lipids and li-
plications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. poproteins: a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 1992;56:320 –328.
BMJ 1998;317:703 –713. 148. Nordmann AJ, Nordmann A, Briel M, Keller U, Yancy WS Jr, Brehm BJ,
128. LaRosa JC, Grundy SM, Waters DD, Shear C, Barter P, Fruchart JC, Gotto AM, Bucher HC. Effects of low-carbohydrate vs low-fat diets on weight loss and
Greten H, Kastelein JJ, Shepherd J, Wenger NK. Intensive lipid lowering with ator- cardiovascular risk factors: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch
vastatin in patients with stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2005;352: Intern Med 2006;166:285 –293.
1425 –1435. 149. Keys A. Serum cholesterol response to dietary cholesterol. Am J Clin Nutr 1984;40:
351 –359.
129. LaRosa JC, He J, Vupputuri S. Effect of statins on risk of coronary disease: a
150. Shaw K, Gennat H, O’Rourke P, Del Mar C. Exercise for overweight or obesity.
meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1999;282:2340 –2346.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;4:CD003817.
130. Thompson A, Danesh J. Associations between apolipoprotein B, apolipoprotein
151. Dewell A, Hollenbeck PL, Hollenbeck CB. Clinical review: a critical evaluation of
AI, the apolipoprotein B/AI ratio and coronary heart disease: a literature-based
the role of soy protein and isoflavone supplementation in the control of plasma
meta-analysis of prospective studies. J Intern Med 2006;259:481 –492.
cholesterol concentrations. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:772 –780.
131. Robinson JG, Wang S, Smith BJ, Jacobson TA. Meta-analysis of the relationship be-
152. Rimm EB, Williams P, Fosher K, Criqui M, Stampfer MJ. Moderate alcohol intake
tween non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction and coronary heart dis-
and lower risk of coronary heart disease: meta-analysis of effects on lipids and
ease risk. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:316 –322.
haemostatic factors. BMJ 1999;319:1523 –1528.
132. Dalen JE, Devries S. Diets to prevent coronary heart disease 1957– 2013: what
153. Droste DW, Iliescu C, Vaillant M, Gantenbein M, De Bremaeker N, Lieunard C,
have we learned? Am J Med 2014;127:364 –369.
Velez T, Meyer M, Guth T, Kuemmerle A, Gilson G, Chioti A. A daily glass of red
133. Eckel RH, Jakicic JM, Ard JD, de Jesus JM, Houston Miller N, Hubbard VS, Lee IM,
wine associated with lifestyle changes independently improves blood lipids in pa-
Lichtenstein AH, Loria CM, Millen BE, Nonas CA, Sacks FM, Smith SC Jr,
tients with carotid arteriosclerosis: results from a randomized controlled trial.
Svetkey LP, Wadden TA, Yanovski SZ, Kendall KA, Morgan LC, Trisolini MG,
Nutr J 2013;12:147.
Velasco G, Wnek J, Anderson JL, Halperin JL, Albert NM, Bozkurt B,
154. Yu-Poth S, Zhao G, Etherton T, Naglak M, Jonnalagadda S, Kris-Etherton PM. Ef-
Brindis RG, Curtis LH, DeMets D, Hochman JS, Kovacs RJ, Ohman EM,
fects of the National Cholesterol Education Program’s Step I and Step II dietary
Pressler SJ, Sellke FW, Shen WK, Smith SC Jr, Tomaselli GF. 2013 AHA/ACC
intervention programs on cardiovascular disease risk factors: a meta-analysis.
guideline on lifestyle management to reduce cardiovascular risk: a report of the Am J Clin Nutr 1999;69:632 –646.
American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on 155. Santos FL, Esteves SS, da Costa Pereira A, Yancy WS Jr, Nunes JP. Systematic re-
Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2014;129(25 Suppl 2):S76–S99. view and meta-analysis of clinical trials of the effects of low carbohydrate diets on
134. Mente A, de Koning L, Shannon HS, Anand SS. A systematic review of the evi- cardiovascular risk factors. Obes Rev 2012;13:1048 –1066.
dence supporting a causal link between dietary factors and coronary heart dis- 156. Rivellese AA, Maffettone A, Vessby B, Uusitupa M, Hermansen K, Berglund L,
ease. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:659 –669. Louheranta A, Meyer BJ, Riccardi G. Effects of dietary saturated, monounsatu-
135. Chowdhury R, Warnakula S, Kunutsor S, Crowe F, Ward HA, Johnson L, rated and n-3 fatty acids on fasting lipoproteins, LDL size and post-prandial lipid
Franco OH, Butterworth AS, Forouhi NG, Thompson SG, Khaw KT, metabolism in healthy subjects. Atherosclerosis 2003;167:149–158.
Mozaffarian D, Danesh J, Di Angelantonio E. Association of dietary, circulating, 157. Harris WS. n-3 fatty acids and serum lipoproteins: human studies. Am J Clin Nutr
and supplement fatty acids with coronary risk: a systematic review and 1997;65(5 Suppl):1645S –1654S.
meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:398 –406. 158. Stanhope KL, Schwarz JM, Keim NL, Griffen SC, Bremer AA, Graham JL,
136. Mozaffarian D, Micha R, Wallace S. Effects on coronary heart disease of increasing Hatcher B, Cox CL, Dyachenko A, Zhang W, McGahan JP, Seibert A,
polyunsaturated fat in place of saturated fat: a systematic review and meta-analysis Krauss RM, Chiu S, Schaefer EJ, Ai M, Otokozawa S, Nakajima K, Nakano T,
of randomized controlled trials. PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000252. Beysen C, Hellerstein MK, Berglund L, Havel PJ. Consuming fructose-sweetened,
137. Estruch R, Ros E, Salas-Salvadó J, Covas MI, Corella D, Arós F, Gómez-Gracia E, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases visceral adiposity and lipids and de-
Ruiz-Gutiérrez V, Fiol M, Lapetra J, Lamuela-Raventos RM, Serra-Majem L, creases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese humans. J Clin Invest 2009;119:
Pintó X, Basora J, Muñoz MA, Sorlı́ JV, Martı́nez JA, Martı́nez-González MA. Pri- 1322–1334.
mary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet. N Engl J Med 159. Kelishadi R, Mansourian M, Heidari-Beni M. Association of fructose consumption
2013;368:1279 –1290. and components of metabolic syndrome in human studies: a systematic review
138. de Lorgeril M, Salen P, Martin JL, Monjaud I, Delaye J, Mamelle N. Mediterranean and meta-analysis. Nutrition 2014;30:503 –510.
diet, traditional risk factors, and the rate of cardiovascular complications after 160. Gayet-Boyer C, Tenenhaus-Aziza F, Prunet C, Marmonier C,
myocardial infarction: final report of the Lyon Diet Heart Study. Circulation Malpuech-Brugere C, Lamarche B, Chardigney JM. Is there a linear relationship
1999;99:779–785. between the dose of ruminant trans-fatty acids and cardiovascular risk markers
139. Mozaffarian D, Aro A, Willett WC. Health effects of trans-fatty acids: in healthy subjects: results from a systematic review and meta-regression of ran-
experimental and observational evidence. Eur J Clin Nutr 2009;63(Suppl 2): domised clinical trials. Br J Nutr 2014;112:1914 – 1922.
S5 –S21. 161. Kelley GA, Kelley KS. Impact of progressive resistance training on lipids and lipo-
140. Brown L, Rosner B, Willett WW, Sacks FM. Cholesterol-lowering effects of diet- proteins in adults: another look at a meta-analysis using prediction intervals. Prev
ary fiber: a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 1999;69:30 –42. Med 2009;49:473 –475.
3058d ESC/EAS Guidelines
162. Kastorini CM, Milionis HJ, Esposito K, Giugliano D, Goudevenos JA, 181. Puzziferri N, Roshek TB 3rd, Mayo HG, Gallagher R, Belle SH, Livingston EH.
Panagiotakos DB. The effect of Mediterranean diet on metabolic syndrome and Long-term follow-up after bariatric surgery: a systematic review. JAMA 2014;
its components: a meta-analysis of 50 studies and 534,906 individuals. J Am Coll 312:934 –942.
Cardiol 2011;57:1299 –1313. 182. Harris WS, Mozaffarian D, Rimm E, Kris-Etherton P, Rudel LL, Appel LJ,
163. Maeda K, Noguchi Y, Fukui T. The effects of cessation from cigarette smoking on Engler MM, Engler MB, Sacks F. Omega-6 fatty acids and risk for cardiovascular
the lipid and lipoprotein profiles: a meta-analysis. Prev Med 2003;37:283 –290. disease: a science advisory from the American Heart Association Nutrition Sub-
164. Poli A, Marangoni F, Paoletti R, Mannarino E, Lupattelli G, Notarbartolo A, committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism; Coun-
Aureli P, Bernini F, Cicero A, Gaddi A, Catapano A, Cricelli C, Gattone M, cil on Cardiovascular Nursing; and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention.
Marrocco W, Porrini M, Stella R, Vanotti A, Volpe M, Volpe R, Cannella C, Circulation 2009;119:902 – 907.
Pinto A, Del Toma E, La Vecchia C, Tavani A, Manzato E, Riccardi G, Sirtori C, 183. Mozaffarian D, Lemaitre RN, King IB, Song X, Huang H, Sacks FM, Rimm EB,
Zambon A. Non-pharmacological control of plasma cholesterol levels. Nutr Me- Wang M, Siscovick DS. Plasma phospholipid long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and
tab Cardiovasc Dis 2008;18:S1 –S16. total and cause-specific mortality in older adults: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med
165. Mensink RP, Zock PL, Kester AD, Katan MB. Effects of dietary fatty acids and car- 2013;158:515 –525.
bohydrates on the ratio of serum total to HDL cholesterol and on serum lipids 184. Sirtori CR, Galli C, Anderson JW, Arnoldi A. Nutritional and nutraceutical ap-
and apolipoproteins: a meta-analysis of 60 controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr 2003; proaches to dyslipidemia and atherosclerosis prevention: focus on dietary pro-
77:1146 – 1155. teins. Atherosclerosis 2009;203:8 –17.

166. Micha R, Khatibzadeh S, Shi P, Fahimi S, Lim S, Andrews KG, Engell RE, Powles J, 185. Lea LJ, Hepburn PA. Safety evaluation of phytosterol-esters. Part 9: results of a
Ezzati M, Mozaffarian D. Global, regional, and national consumption levels of diet- European post-launch monitoring programme. Food Chem Toxicol 2006;44:
ary fats and oils in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis including 266 country- 1213 –1222.
specific nutrition surveys. BMJ 2014;348:g2272. 186. AbuMweis SS, Jew S, Ames NP. b-glucan from barley and its lipid-lowering cap-
167. Griffin JD, Lichtenstein AH. Dietary cholesterol and plasma lipoprotein profiles: acity: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Eur J Clin Nutr 2010;64:
randomized-controlled trials. Curr Nutr Rep 2013;2:274 – 282. 1472 –1480.
168. Ordovas JM. Genetic influences on blood lipids and cardiovascular disease risk: 187. Wolever TM, Tosh SM, Gibbs AL, Brand-Miller J, Duncan AM, Hart V,
tools for primary prevention. Am J Clin Nutr 2009;89:1509S –1517S. Lamarche B, Thomson BA, Duss R, Wood PJ. Physicochemical properties of
169. Huffman KM, Hawk VH, Henes ST, Ocampo CI, Orenduff MC, Slentz CA, oat beta-glucan influence its ability to reduce serum LDL cholesterol in humans:
Johnson JL, Houmard JA, Samsa GP, Kraus WE, Bales CW. Exercise effects on li- a randomized clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr 2010;92:723 –732.
pids in persons with varying dietary patterns-does diet matter if they exercise? Re- 188. Más R, Castaño G, Illnait J, Fernández L, Fernández J, Alemán C, Pontigas V,
Lescay M. Effects of policosanol in patients with type II hypercholesterolemia
sponses in Studies of a Targeted Risk Reduction Intervention through Defined
and additional coronary risk factors. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1999;65:439 –447.
Exercise I. Am Heart J 2012;164:117–124.
189. Reiner Z, Tedeschi-Reiner E, Romic Z. Effects of rice policosanol on serum lipo-
170. Vessby B, Uusitupa M, Hermansen K, Riccardi G, Rivellese AA, Tapsell LC,
proteins, homocysteine, fibrinogen and C-reactive protein in hypercholesterolae-
Nälsén C, Berglund L, Louheranta A, Rasmussen BM, Calvert GD, Maffetone A,
mic patients. Clin Drug Investig 2005;25:701 – 707.
Pedersen E, Gustafsson IB, Storlien LH. Substituting dietary saturated for mono-
190. Lan J, Zhao Y, Dong F, Yan Z, Zheng W, Fan J, Sun G. Meta-analysis of the effect
unsaturated fat impairs insulin sensitivity in healthy men and women: the
and safety of berberine in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hyperlipemia
KANWU Study. Diabetologia 2001;44:312 –319.
and hypertension. J Ethnopharmacol 2015;161:69–81.
171. Rivellese AA, Giacco R, Annuzzi G, De Natale C, Patti L, Di Marino L, Minerva V,
191. Weng TC, Yang YH, Lin SJ, Tai SH. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the
Costabile G, Santangelo C, Masella R, Riccardi G. Effects of monounsaturated vs.
therapeutic equivalence of statins. J Clin Pharm Ther 2010;35:139 – 151.
saturated fat on postprandial lipemia and adipose tissue lipases in type 2 diabetes.
192. Chasman DI, Giulianini F, MacFadyen J, Barratt BJ, Nyberg F, Ridker PM. Genetic
Clin Nutr 2008;27:133–141.
determinants of statin-induced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction: the
172. Jacobson TA, Glickstein SB, Rowe JD, Soni PN. Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid
Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating
and docosahexaenoic acid on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and other li-
Rosuvastatin (JUPITER) trial. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 2012;5:257 – 264.
pids: a review. J Clin Lipidol 2012;6:5–18.
193. Reiner Z. Resistance and intolerance to statins. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2014;24:
173. Liu S, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, Holmes MD, Hu FB, Hankinson SE, Willett WC.
1057 –1066.
Dietary glycemic load assessed by food-frequency questionnaire in relation to
194. Gould AL, Rossouw JE, Santanello NC, Heyse JF, Furberg CD. Cholesterol reduc-
plasma high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol and fasting plasma triacylglycerols in
tion yields clinical benefit. A new look at old data. Circulation 1995;91:2274 – 2282.
postmenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr 2001;73:560 –566.
195. Gould AL, Rossouw JE, Santanello NC, Heyse JF, Furberg CD. Cholesterol reduc-
174. De Natale C, Annuzzi G, Bozzetto L, Mazzarella R, Costabile G, Ciano O, tion yields clinical benefit: impact of statin trials. Circulation 1998;97:946 – 952.
Riccardi G, Rivellese AA. Effects of a plant-based high-carbohydrate/high-fiber 196. Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM, Blackwell L, Buck G, Pollicino C, Kirby A,
diet versus high-monounsaturated fat/low-carbohydrate diet on postprandial Sourjina T, Peto R, Collins R, Simes R. Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering
lipids in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 2009;32:2168 –2173. treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 ran-
175. Stanhope KL, Medici V, Bremer AA, Lee V, Lam HD, Nunez MV, Chen GX, domised trials of statins. Lancet 2005;366:1267 – 1278.
Keim NL, Havel PJ. A dose-response study of consuming high-fructose corn 197. Genser B, Marz W. Low density lipoprotein cholesterol, statins and cardiovascu-
syrup-sweetened beverages on lipid/lipoprotein risk factors for cardiovascular lar events: a meta-analysis. Clin Res Cardiol 2006;95:393 –404.
disease in young adults. Am J Clin Nutr 2015;101:1144 –1154. 198. Mills EJ, Wu P, Chong G, Ghement I, Singh S, Akl EA, Eyawo O, Guyatt G,
176. Kraus WE, Houmard JA, Duscha BD, Knetzger KJ, Wharton MB, McCartney JS, Berwanger O, Briel M. Efficacy and safety of statin treatment for cardiovascular
Bales CW, Henes S, Samsa GP, Otvos JD, Kulkarni KR, Slentz CA. Effects of the disease: a network meta-analysis of 170,255 patients from 76 randomized trials.
amount and intensity of exercise on plasma lipoproteins. N Engl J Med 2002;347: QJM 2011;104:109 –124.
1483–1492. 199. Ray KK, Seshasai SR, Erqou S, Sever P, Jukema JW, Ford I, Sattar N. Statins and
177. Brien SE, Ronksley PE, Turner BJ, Mukamal KJ, Ghali WA. Effect of alcohol all-cause mortality in high-risk primary prevention: a meta-analysis of 11 rando-
consumption on biological markers associated with risk of coronary heart dis- mized controlled trials involving 65,229 participants. Arch Intern Med 2010;170:
ease: systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies. BMJ 2011; 1024 –1031.
342:d636. 200. Taylor F, Huffman MD, Macedo AF, Moore TH, Burke M, Davey Smith G, Ward K,
178. Goff LM, Cowland DE, Hooper L, Frost GS. Low glycaemic index diets and blood Ebrahim S. Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Cochrane
lipids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Nutr Database Syst Rev 2013;1:CD004816.
Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2013;23:1 –10. 201. Davignon J. Beneficial cardiovascular pleiotropic effects of statins. Circulation 2004;
179. Bazzano LA, Thompson AM, Tees MT, Nguyen CH, Winham DM. Non-soy leg- 109(23 Suppl 1):III-39 –III-43.
ume consumption lowers cholesterol levels: a meta-analysis of randomized con- 202. Zhou Q, Liao JK. Pleiotropic effects of statins. Basic research and clinical perspec-
trolled trials. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2011;21:94–103. tives. Circulation J 2010;74:818–826.
180. Alberti KG, Eckel RH, Grundy SM, Zimmet PZ, Cleeman JI, Donato KA, 203. Pedersen TR. Pleiotropic effects of statins: evidence against benefits beyond
Fruchart JC, James WP, Loria CM, Smith SC Jr. Harmonizing the metabolic syn- LDL-cholesterol lowering. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2010;10(Suppl 1):10–17.
drome: a joint interim statement of the International Diabetes Federation Task 204. McGuinness B, Craig D, Bullock R, Malouf R, Passmore P. Statins for the treatment
Force on Epidemiology and Prevention; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; of dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;7:CD007514.
American Heart Association; World Heart Federation; International Atheroscler- 205. Eslami L, Merat S, Malekzadeh R, Nasseri-Moghaddam S, Aramin H. Statins for
osis Society; and International Association for the Study of Obesity. Circulation non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Cochrane Data-
2009;120:1640 –1645. base Syst Rev 2013;12:CD008623.
ESC/EAS Guidelines 3058e
206. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration, Emberson JR, Kearney PM, 227. Waters DD, Ho JE, Boekholdt SM, DeMicco DA, Kastelein JJ, Messig M, Breazna A,
Blackwell L, Newman C, Reith C, Bhala N, Holland L, Peto R, Keech A, Collins R, Pedersen TR. Cardiovascular event reduction versus new-onset diabetes during
Simes J, Baigent C. Lack of effect of lowering LDL cholesterol on cancer: atorvastatin therapy: effect of baseline risk factors for diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol
meta-analysis of individual data from 175,000 people in 27 randomised trials of 2013;61:148 – 152.
statin therapy. PLoS One 2012;7:e29849. 228. Palmer SC, Navaneethan SD, Craig JC, Perkovic V, Johnson DW, Nigwekar SU,
207. Nielsen SF, Nordestgaard BG, Bojesen SE. Statin use and reduced cancer-related Hegbrant J, Strippoli GF. HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for kidney trans-
mortality. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1792 –1802. plant recipients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;1:CD005019.
208. Li L, Sun T, Zhang P, Tian J, Yang K. Statins for primary prevention of venous 229. Vidt DG. Statins and proteinuria. Curr Atheroscler Rep 2005;7:351 –357.
thromboembolism. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;12:CD008203. 230. Sidaway JE, Davidson RG, McTaggart F, Orton TC, Scott RC, Smith GJ,
209. Raval AD, Hunter T, Stuckey B, Hart RJ. Statins for women with polycystic ovary Brunskill NJ. Inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA reductase reduce
syndrome not actively trying to conceive. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;10: receptor-mediated endocytosis in opossum kidney cells. J Am Soc Nephrol 2004;
CD008565. 15:2258 –2265.
210. Gauthier JM, Massicotte A. Statins and their effect on cognition: let’s clear up the 231. Davidson MH. Rosuvastatin safety: lessons from the FDA review and post-
confusion. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2015;148:150–155. approval surveillance. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2004;3:547 –557.
211. Stroes ES, Thompson PD, Corsini A, Vladutiu GD, Raal FJ, Ray KK, Roden M, 232. Egan A, Colman E. Weighing the benefits of high-dose simvastatin against the risk
Stein E, Tokgözoğlu L, Nordestgaard BG, Bruckert E, De Backer G, Krauss RM, of myopathy. N Engl J Med 2011;365:285 –287.

Laufs U, Santos RD, Hegele RA, Hovingh GK, Leiter LA, Mach F, März W, 233. Wiklund O, Pirazzi C, Romeo S. Monitoring of lipids, enzymes, and creatine kinase
Newman CB, Wiklund O, Jacobson TA, Catapano AL, Chapman MJ, in patients on lipid-lowering drug therapy. Curr Cardiol Rep 2013;15:397.
Ginsberg HN; European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel. 234. Holoshitz N, Alsheikh-Ali AA, Karas RH. Relative safety of gemfibrozil and fenofi-
Statin-associated muscle symptoms: impact on statin therapy—European Athero- brate in the absence of concomitant cerivastatin use. Am J Cardiol 2008;101:
sclerosis Society Consensus Panel Statement on Assessment, Aetiology and Man- 95 –97.
agement. Eur Heart J 2015;36:1012 –1022. 235. Franssen R, Vergeer M, Stroes ES, Kastelein JJ. Combination statin-fibrate therapy:
212. Law M, Rudnicka AR. Statin safety: a systematic review. Am J Cardiol 2006;97(8A): safety aspects. Diabetes Obes Metab 2009;11:89 –94.
52C –60C. 236. Guyton JR, Bays HE. Safety considerations with niacin therapy. Am J Cardiol 2007;
213. Finegold JA, Francis DP. What proportion of symptomatic side-effects in patients 99(6A):22C– 31C.
taking statins are genuinely caused by the drug? A response to letters. Eur J Prev 237. Cziraky MJ, Willey VJ, McKenney JM, Kamat SA, Fisher MD, Guyton JR,
Cardiol 2015;22:1328 –1330. Jacobson TA, Davidson MH. Statin safety: an assessment using an administrative
214. Naci H, Brugts J, Ades T. Comparative tolerability and harms of individual statins: a claims database. Am J Cardiol 2006;97(8A):61C –68C.
study-level network meta-analysis of 246 955 participants from 135 randomized, 238. Ooi CP, Loke SC. Colesevelam for type 2 diabetes mellitus: an abridged Cochrane
controlled trials. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2013;6:390 –399. review. Diabet Med 2014;31:2 –14.
215. Bruckert E, Hayem G, Dejager S, Yau C, Bégaud B. Mild to moderate muscular 239. The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial
symptoms with high-dosage statin therapy in hyperlipidemic patients—the results. I. Reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease. JAMA 1984;251:
PRIMO study. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 2005;19:403 –414. 351– 364.
216. Davidson MH, Clark JA, Glass LM, Kanumalla A. Statin safety: an appraisal from the 240. Pre-entry characteristics of participants in the Lipid Research Clinics’ Coronary
adverse event reporting system. Am J Cardiol 2006;97(8A):32C – 43C. Primary Prevention Trial. J Chronic Dis 1983;36:467 – 479.
217. Parker BA, Capizzi JA, Grimaldi AS, Clarkson PM, Cole SM, Keadle J, Chipkin S, 241. The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial. Results of 6 years
Pescatello LS, Simpson K, White CM, Thompson PD. Effect of statins on skeletal of post-trial follow-up. The Lipid Research Clinics Investigators. Arch Intern Med
muscle function. Circulation 2013;127:96 –103. 1992;152:1399 –1410.
218. Moriarty PM, Jacobson TA, Bruckert E, Thompson PD, Guyton JR, 242. He L, Wickremasingha P, Lee J, Tao B, Mendell-Harary J, Walker J, Wight D. Lack
Baccara-Dinet MT, Gipe D. Efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a monoclonal anti- of effect of colesevelam HCl on the single-dose pharmacokinetics of aspirin, aten-
body to PCSK9, in statin-intolerant patients: design and rationale of ODYSSEY olol, enalapril, phenytoin, rosiglitazone, and sitagliptin. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2014;
ALTERNATIVE, a randomized phase 3 trial. J Clin Lipidol 2014;8:554 – 561. 104:401 –409.
219. Stroes E, Colquhoun D, Sullivan D, Civeira F, Rosenson RS, Watts GF, Bruckert E, 243. Rossebø AB, Pedersen TR, Boman K, Brudi P, Chambers JB, Egstrup K, Gerdts E,
Cho L, Dent R, Knusel B, Xue A, Scott R, Wasserman SM, Rocco M. Anti-PCSK9 Gohlke-Bärwolf C, Holme I, Kesäniemi YA, Malbecq W, Nienaber CA, Ray S,
antibody effectively lowers cholesterol in patients with statin intolerance: the Skjaerpe T, Wachtell K, Willenheimer R. Intensive lipid lowering with simvastatin
GAUSS-2 randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trial of evolocumab. and ezetimibe in aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1343 –1356.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:2541 –2548. 244. Sharp Collaborative Group. Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP): ran-
220. Keating AJ, Campbell KB, Guyton JR. Intermittent nondaily dosing strategies in pa- domized trial to assess the effects of lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
tients with previous statin-induced myopathy. Ann Pharmacother 2013;47: among 9,438 patients with chronic kidney disease. Am Heart J 2010;160:785 –794
398– 404. e10.
221. Marcum ZA, Vande Griend JP, Linnebur SA. FDA drug safety communications: a 245. Myocardial Infarction Genetics Consortium Investigators, Stitziel NO, Won HH,
narrative review and clinical considerations for older adults. Am J Geriatr Pharmac- Morrison AC, Peloso GM, Do R, Lange LA, Fontanillas P, Gupta N, Duga S,
other 2012;10:264 –271. Goel A, Farrall M, Saleheen D, Ferrario P, König I, Asselta R, Merlini PA,
222. Chalasani N, Aljadhey H, Kesterson J, Murray MD, Hall SD. Patients with elevated Marziliano N, Notarangelo MF, Schick U, Auer P, Assimes TL, Reilly M,
liver enzymes are not at higher risk for statin hepatotoxicity. Gastroenterology Wilensky R, Rader DJ, Hovingh GK, Meitinger T, Kessler T, Kastrati A,
2004;126:1287 –1292. Laugwitz KL, Siscovick D, Rotter JI, Hazen SL, Tracy R, Cresci S, Spertus J,
223. Vuppalanchi R, Teal E, Chalasani N. Patients with elevated baseline liver enzymes Jackson R, Schwartz SM, Natarajan P, Crosby J, Muzny D, Ballantyne C, Rich SS,
do not have higher frequency of hepatotoxicity from lovastatin than those with O’Donnell CJ, Abecasis G, Sunyaev S, Nickerson DA, Buring JE, Ridker PM,
normal baseline liver enzymes. Am J Med Sci 2005;329:62 –65. Chasman DI, Austin E, Ye Z, Kullo IJ, Weeke PE, Shaffer CM, Bastarache LA,
224. Dongiovanni P, Petta S, Mannisto V, Mancina RM, Pipitone R, Karja V, Maggioni M, Denny JC, Roden DM, Palmer C, Deloukas P, Lin DY, Tang ZZ, Erdmann J,
Kakela P, Wiklund O, Mozzi E, Grimaudo S, Kaminska D, Rametta R, Craxi A, Schunkert H, Danesh J, Marrugat J, Elosua R, Ardissino D, McPherson R,
Fargion S, Nobili V, Romeo S, Pihlajamaki J, Valenti L. Statin use and non-alcoholic Watkins H, Reiner AP, Wilson JG, Altshuler D, Gibbs RA, Lander ES,
steatohepatitis in at risk individuals. J Hepatol 2015;63:705 – 712. Boerwinkle E, Gabriel S, Kathiresan S. Inactivating mutations in NPC1L1 and pro-
225. Sattar N, Preiss D, Murray HM, Welsh P, Buckley BM, de Craen AJ, Seshasai SR, tection from coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 2014;371:2072 –2082.
McMurray JJ, Freeman DJ, Jukema JW, Macfarlane PW, Packard CJ, Stott DJ, 246. Tsujita K, Sugiyama S, Sumida H, Shimomura H, Yamashita T, Yamanaga K,
Westendorp RG, Shepherd J, Davis BR, Pressel SL, Marchioli R, Marfisi RM, Komura N, Sakamoto K, Oka H, Nakao K, Nakamura S, Ishihara M, Matsui K,
Maggioni AP, Tavazzi L, Tognoni G, Kjekshus J, Pedersen TR, Cook TJ, Sakaino N, Nakamura N, Yamamoto N, Koide S, Matsumura T, Fujimoto K,
Gotto AM, Clearfield MB, Downs JR, Nakamura H, Ohashi Y, Mizuno K, Tsunoda R, Morikami Y, Matsuyama K, Oshima S, Kaikita K, Hokimoto S,
Ray KK, Ford I. Statins and risk of incident diabetes: a collaborative meta-analysis Ogawa H. Impact of dual lipid-lowering strategy with ezetimibe and atorvastatin
of randomised statin trials. Lancet 2010;375:735 –742. on coronary plaque regression in patients with percutaneous coronary interven-
226. Preiss D, Seshasai SR, Welsh P, Murphy SA, Ho JE, Waters DD, DeMicco DA, tion: the multicenter randomized controlled PRECISE-IVUS trial. J Am Coll Cardiol
Barter P, Cannon CP, Sabatine MS, Braunwald E, Kastelein JJ, de Lemos JA, 2015;66:495–507.
Blazing MA, Pedersen TR, Tikkanen MJ, Sattar N, Ray KK. Risk of incident diabetes 247. Abifadel M, Varret M, Rabès JP, Allard D, Ouguerram K, Devillers M, Cruaud C,
with intensive-dose compared with moderate-dose statin therapy: a Benjannet S, Wickham L, Erlich D, Derré A, Villéger L, Farnier M, Beucler I,
meta-analysis. JAMA 2011;305:2556 –2564. Bruckert E, Chambaz J, Chanu B, Lecerf JM, Luc G, Moulin P, Weissenbach J,
3058f ESC/EAS Guidelines
Prat A, Krempf M, Junien C, Seidah NG, Boileau C. Mutations in PCSK9 cause lipoprotein cholesterol. Veterans Affairs High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol
autosomal dominant hypercholesterolemia. Nat Genet 2003;34:154 – 156. Intervention Trial Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999;341:410 –418.
248. Norata GD, Tibolla G, Catapano AL. Targeting PCSK9 for hypercholesterolemia. 267. Lipids and lipoproteins in symptomatic coronary heart disease. Distribution, inter-
Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2014;54:273 –293. correlations, and significance for risk classification in 6,700 men and 1,500 women.
249. Navarese EP, Kolodziejczak M, Kereiakes DJ, Tantry US, O’Connor C, Gurbel PA. The Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention (BIP) Study Group, Israel. Circulation 1992;
Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 monoclonal antibodies for acute 86:839 –848.
coronary syndrome: a narrative review. Ann Intern Med 2016;164:600 –607. 268. Keene D, Price C, Shun-Shin MJ, Francis DP. Effect on cardiovascular risk of high
250. Zhang XL, Zhu L, Wei ZH, Zhu QQ, Qiao JZ, Dai Q, Huang W, Li XH, Xie J, density lipoprotein targeted drug treatments niacin, fibrates, and CETP inhibitors:
Kang LN, Wang L, Xu B. Comparative efficacy and safety of everolimus-eluting meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials including 117,411 patients. BMJ
bioresorbable scaffold versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents: a systematic re- 2014;349:g4379.
view and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2016;164:752 –763. 269. Ip CK, Jin DM, Gao JJ, Meng Z, Meng J, Tan Z, Wang JF, Geng DF. Effects of add-on
251. AIM-HIGH Investigators, Boden WE, Probstfield JL, Anderson T, Chaitman BR, lipid-modifying therapy on top of background statin treatment on major cardio-
Desvignes-Nickens P, Koprowicz K, McBride R, Teo K, Weintraub W. Niacin in vascular events: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Cardiol
patients with low HDL cholesterol levels receiving intensive statin therapy. N 2015;191:138 –148.
Engl J Med 2011;365:2255 –2267. 270. Jun M, Foote C, Lv J, Neal B, Patel A, Nicholls SJ, Grobbee DE, Cass A, Chalmers J,
252. HPS2-THRIVE Collaborative Group, Landray MJ, Haynes R, Hopewell JC, Parish S, Perkovic V. Effects of fibrates on cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review

Aung T, Tomson J, Wallendszus K, Craig M, Jiang L, Collins R, Armitage J. Effects of and meta-analysis. Lancet 2010;375:1875 –1884.
extended-release niacin with laropiprant in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2014; 271. Lee M, Saver JL, Towfighi A, Chow J, Ovbiagele B. Efficacy of fibrates for cardio-
371:203 –212. vascular risk reduction in persons with atherogenic dyslipidemia: a meta-analysis.
253. Zhao XQ, Krasuski RA, Baer J, Whitney EJ, Neradilek B, Chait A, Marcovina S, Atherosclerosis 2011;217:492 –498.
Albers JJ, Brown BG. Effects of combination lipid therapy on coronary stenosis 272. Bruckert E, Labreuche J, Deplanque D, Touboul PJ, Amarenco P. Fibrates effect on
progression and clinical cardiovascular events in coronary disease patients with cardiovascular risk is greater in patients with high triglyceride levels or atherogen-
metabolic syndrome: a combined analysis of the Familial Atherosclerosis Treat- ic dyslipidemia profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Pharma-
ment Study (FATS), the HDL-Atherosclerosis Treatment Study (HATS), and col 2011;57:267 –272.
the Armed Forces Regression Study (AFREGS). Am J Cardiol 2009;104: 273. Davidson MH, Armani A, McKenney JM, Jacobson TA. Safety considerations with
1457 –1464. fibrate therapy. Am J Cardiol 2007;99(6A):3C –18C.
254. Jones MR, Nwose OM. Role of colesevelam in combination lipid-lowering ther- 274. Jun M, Zhu B, Tonelli M, Jardine MJ, Patel A, Neal B, Liyanage T, Keech A, Cass A,
apy. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2013;13:315 –323. Perkovic V. Effects of fibrates in kidney disease: a systematic review and
255. Abumweis SS, Barake R, Jones PJ. Plant sterols/stanols as cholesterol lowering meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:2061 –2071.
agents: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Food Nutr Res 2008;52.
275. Taskinen MR, Sullivan DR, Ehnholm C, Whiting M, Zannino D, Simes RJ,
ISSN 1654-661X. Available at http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index
Keech AC, Barter PJ. Relationships of HDL cholesterol, ApoA-I, and ApoA-II
.php/fnr/article/view/1811.
with homocysteine and creatinine in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with
256. Tyroler HA. Cholesterol and cardiovascular disease. An overview of Lipid Re-
fenofibrate. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2009;29:950 –955.
search Clinics (LRC) epidemiologic studies as background for the LRC Coronary
276. Herrmann M, Whiting MJ, Veillard AS, Ehnholm C, Sullivan DR, Keech AC. Plasma
Primary Prevention Trial. Am J Cardiol 1984;54:14C –19C.
homocysteine and the risk of venous thromboembolism: insights from the FIELD
257. Canner PL, Berge KG, Wenger NK, Stamler J, Friedman L, Prineas RJ,
study. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012;50:2213 –2219.
Friedewald W. Fifteen year mortality in Coronary Drug Project patients: long-
277. Kamanna VS, Kashyap ML. Mechanism of action of niacin. Am J Cardiol 2008;
term benefit with niacin. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986;8:1245 –1255.
101(8A):20B –26B.
258. Kotseva K, Wood D, De Backer G, De Bacquer D, Pyörälä K, Keil U. EUROAS-
278. Bruckert E, Labreuche J, Amarenco P. Meta-analysis of the effect of nicotinic acid
PIRE III: a survey on the lifestyle, risk factors and use of cardioprotective drug ther-
alone or in combination on cardiovascular events and atherosclerosis. Atheroscler-
apies in coronary patients from 22 European countries. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev
osis 2010;210:353 –361.
Rehabil 2009;16:121 –137.
279. Brown BG, Zhao XQ. Nicotinic acid, alone and in combinations, for reduction of
259. Berglund L, Brunzell JD, Goldberg AC, Goldberg IJ, Sacks F, Murad MH,
cardiovascular risk. Am J Cardiol 2008;101(8A):58B –62B.
Stalenhoef AF. Evaluation and treatment of hypertriglyceridemia: an Endocrine
280. Balk EM, Lichtenstein AH, Chung M, Kupelnick B, Chew P, Lau J. Effects of
Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012;97:2969 –2989.
260. Chapman MJ, Ginsberg HN, Amarenco P, Andreotti F, Borén J, Catapano AL, omega-3 fatty acids on serum markers of cardiovascular disease risk: a systematic
Descamps OS, Fisher E, Kovanen PT, Kuivenhoven JA, Lesnik P, Masana L, review. Atherosclerosis 2006;189:19–30.
Nordestgaard BG, Ray KK, Reiner Z, Taskinen MR, Tokgözoglu L, 281. Ballantyne CM, Bays HE, Kastelein JJ, Stein E, Isaacsohn JL, Braeckman RA,
Tybjærg-Hansen A, Watts GF. Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and high-density Soni PN. Efficacy and safety of eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester (AMR101)
lipoprotein cholesterol in patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease: evidence therapy in statin-treated patients with persistent high triglycerides (from the
and guidance for management. Eur Heart J 2011;32:1345 –1361. ANCHOR study). Am J Cardiol 2012;110:984 –992.
261. Keech A, Simes RJ, Barter P, Best J, Scott R, Taskinen MR, Forder P, Pillai A, 282. Bays HE, Ballantyne CM, Kastelein JJ, Isaacsohn JL, Braeckman RA, Soni PN. Eicosa-
Davis T, Glasziou P, Drury P, Kesäniemi YA, Sullivan D, Hunt D, Colman P, pentaenoic acid ethyl ester (AMR101) therapy in patients with very high triglycer-
d’Emden M, Whiting M, Ehnholm C, Laakso M. Effects of long-term fenofibrate ide levels (from the Multi-center, plAcebo-controlled, Randomized,
therapy on cardiovascular events in 9795 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus double-blINd, 12-week study with an open-label Extension [MARINE] trial).
(the FIELD study): randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005;366:1849 – 1861. Am J Cardiol 2011;108:682 – 690.
262. ACCORD Study Group, Ginsberg HN, Elam MB, Lovato LC, Crouse JR 3rd, 283. Kastelein JJ, Maki KC, Susekov A, Ezhov M, Nordestgaard BG, Machielse BN,
Leiter LA, Linz P, Friedewald WT, Buse JB, Gerstein HC, Probstfield J, Kling D, Davidson MH. Omega-3 free fatty acids for the treatment of severe hy-
Grimm RH, Ismail-Beigi F, Bigger JT, Goff DC Jr, Cushman WC, pertriglyceridemia: the EpanoVa fOr Lowering Very high triglyceridEs (EVOLVE)
Simons-Morton DG, Byington RP. Effects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 trial. J Clin Lipidol 2014;8:94 –106.
diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1563 –1574. 284. Wei MY, Jacobson TA. Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid versus docosahexaenoic
263. Chapman MJ, Redfern JS, McGovern ME, Giral P. Niacin and fibrates in atherogenic acid on serum lipids: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Atheroscler Rep
dyslipidemia: pharmacotherapy to reduce cardiovascular risk. Pharmacol Ther 2011;13:474 –483.
2010;126:314 – 345. 285. Kotwal S, Jun M, Sullivan D, Perkovic V, Neal B. Omega 3 fatty acids and cardio-
264. Catapano AL, Farnier M, Foody JM, Toth PP, Tomassini JE, Brudi P, vascular outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Out-
Tershakovec AM. Combination therapy in dyslipidemia: where are we now? comes 2012;5:808 –818.
Atherosclerosis 2014;237:319 – 335. 286. Yokoyama M, Origasa H, Matsuzaki M, Matsuzawa Y, Saito Y, Ishikawa Y,
265. Frick MH, Elo O, Haapa K, Heinonen OP, Heinsalmi P, Helo P, Huttunen JK, Oikawa S, Sasaki J, Hishida H, Itakura H, Kita T, Kitabatake A, Nakaya N,
Kaitaniemi P, Koskinen P, Manninen V et al. Helsinki Heart Study: primary- Sakata T, Shimada K, Shirato K. Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid on major coron-
prevention trial with gemfibrozil in middle-aged men with dyslipidemia. Safety ary events in hypercholesterolaemic patients (JELIS): a randomised open-label,
of treatment, changes in risk factors, and incidence of coronary heart disease. blinded endpoint analysis. Lancet 2007;369:1090 –1098.
N Engl J Med 1987;317:1237 –1245. 287. Hooper L, Thompson RL, Harrison RA, Summerbell CD, Ness AR, Moore HJ,
266. Rubins HB, Robins SJ, Collins D, Fye CL, Anderson JW, Elam MB, Faas FH, Worthington HV, Durrington PN, Higgins JP, Capps NE, Riemersma RA,
Linares E, Schaefer EJ, Schectman G, Wilt TJ, Wittes J. Gemfibrozil for the second- Ebrahim SB, Davey Smith G. Risks and benefits of omega 3 fats for mortality, car-
ary prevention of coronary heart disease in men with low levels of high-density diovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review. BMJ 2006;332:752 – 760.
ESC/EAS Guidelines 3058g
288. Marchioli R, Barzi F, Bomba E, Chieffo C, Di Gregorio D, Di Mascio R, 296. Veerkamp MJ, de Graaf J, Bredie SJ, Hendriks JC, Demacker PN, Stalenhoef AF.
Franzosi MG, Geraci E, Levantesi G, Maggioni AP, Mantini L, Marfisi RM, Diagnosis of familial combined hyperlipidemia based on lipid phenotype expres-
Mastrogiuseppe G, Mininni N, Nicolosi GL, Santini M, Schweiger C, Tavazzi L, sion in 32 families: results of a 5-year follow-up study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol
Tognoni G, Tucci C, Valagussa F. Early protection against sudden death by n-3 2002;22:274 –282.
polyunsaturated fatty acids after myocardial infarction: time-course analysis of 297. Benn M, Watts GF, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, Nordestgaard BG. Familial hypercholes-
the results of the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell’Infarto terolemia in the Danish general population: prevalence, coronary artery disease,
Miocardico (GISSI)-Prevenzione. Circulation 2002;105:1897 – 1903. and cholesterol-lowering medication. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012;97:3956 –3964.
289. Brasky TM, Darke AK, Song X, Tangen CM, Goodman PJ, Thompson IM, 298. de Ferranti SD, Rodday AM, Mendelson MM, Wong JB, Leslie LK, Sheldrick RC.
Meyskens FL Jr, Goodman GE, Minasian LM, Parnes HL, Klein EA, Kristal AR. Plas- Prevalence of familial hypercholesterolemia in the 1999 to 2012 United States
ma phospholipid fatty acids and prostate cancer risk in the SELECT trial. J Natl National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES). Circulation
Cancer Inst 2013;105:1132 – 1141. 2016;133:1067 –1072.
290. Nicholls SJ, Tuzcu EM, Sipahi I, Grasso AW, Schoenhagen P, Hu T, Wolski K, 299. Risk of fatal coronary heart disease in familial hypercholesterolaemia. Scientific
Crowe T, Desai MY, Hazen SL, Kapadia SR, Nissen SE. Statins, high-density lipo- Steering Committee on behalf of the Simon Broome Register Group. BMJ
protein cholesterol, and regression of coronary atherosclerosis. JAMA 2007;297: 1991;303:893 –896.
499 –508. 300. World Health Organization. Human Genetics Programme. Familial hypercholes-
291. Barter PJ, Brandrup-Wognsen G, Palmer MK, Nicholls SJ. Effect of statins terolemia: report of a second WHO consultation. WHO/HGN/FH/Cons/992.

on HDL-C: a complex process unrelated to changes in LDL-C: analysis of the Geneva: World Health Organization, 1999.
VOYAGER Database. J Lipid Res 2010;51:1546 –1553. 301. Defesche JC, Lansberg PJ, Umans-Eckenhausen MA, Kastelein JJ. Advanced meth-
292. Barter P, Gotto AM, LaRosa JC, Maroni J, Szarek M, Grundy SM, Kastelein JJ, od for the identification of patients with inherited hypercholesterolemia. Semin
Bittner V, Fruchart JC. HDL cholesterol, very low levels of LDL cholesterol, Vasc Med 2004;4:59–65.
and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1301 –1310. 302. Cuchel M, Bruckert E, Ginsberg HN, Raal FJ, Santos RD, Hegele RA,
293. Fruchart JC, Sacks FM, Hermans MP, Assmann G, Brown WV, Ceska R, Kuivenhoven JA, Nordestgaard BG, Descamps OS, Steinhagen-Thiessen E,
Chapman MJ, Dodson PM, Fioretto P, Ginsberg HN, Kadowaki T, Tybjærg-Hansen A, Watts GF, Averna M, Boileau C, Borén J, Catapano AL,
Lablanche JM, Marx N, Plutzky J, Reiner Z, Rosenson RS, Staels B, Stock JK, Defesche JC, Hovingh GK, Humphries SE, Kovanen PT, Masana L, Pajukanta P,
Sy R, Wanner C, Zambon A, Zimmet P. The Residual Risk Reduction Initiative: Parhofer KG, Ray KK, Stalenhoef AF, Stroes E, Taskinen MR, Wiegman A,
a call to action to reduce residual vascular risk in dyslipidaemic patient. Diab Wiklund O, Chapman MJ. Homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia: new in-
Vasc Dis Res 2008;5:319 –335. sights and guidance for clinicians to improve detection and clinical management.
294. Barter PJ, Caulfield M, Eriksson M, Grundy SM, Kastelein JJ, Komajda M, A position paper from the Consensus Panel on Familial Hypercholesterolaemia of
Lopez-Sendon J, Mosca L, Tardif JC, Waters DD, Shear CL, Revkin JH, the European Atherosclerosis Society. Eur Heart J 2014:35:2146 –2157.
Buhr KA, Fisher MR, Tall AR, Brewer B. Effects of torcetrapib in patients at 303. Wiegman A, Gidding SS, Watts GF, Chapman MJ, Ginsberg HN, Cuchel M, Ose L,
high risk for coronary events. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2109 –2122. Averna M, Boileau C, Borén J, Bruckert E, Catapano AL, Defesche JC,
295. Global Lipids Genetics Consortium, Willer CJ, Schmidt EM, Sengupta S, Descamps OS, Hegele RA, Hovingh GK, Humphries SE, Kovanen PT,
Peloso GM, Gustafsson S, Kanoni S, Ganna A, Chen J, Buchkovich ML, Mora S, Kuivenhoven JA, Masana L, Nordestgaard BG, Pajukanta P, Parhofer KG, Raal FJ,
Beckmann JS, Bragg-Gresham JL, Chang HY, Demirkan A, Den Hertog HM, Ray KK, Santos RD, Stalenhoef AF, Steinhagen-Thiessen E, Stroes ES,
Do R, Donnelly LA, Ehret GB, Esko T, Feitosa MF, Ferreira T, Fischer K,
Taskinen MR, Tybjærg-Hansen A, Wiklund O. Familial hypercholesterolaemia in
Fontanillas P, Fraser RM, Freitag DF, Gurdasani D, Heikkilä K, Hyppönen E,
children and adolescents: gaining decades of life by optimizing detection and treat-
Isaacs A, Jackson AU, Johansson A, Johnson T, Kaakinen M, Kettunen J,
ment. Eur Heart J 2015;36:2425 – 2437.
Kleber ME, Li X, Luan J, Lyytikäinen LP, Magnusson PK, Mangino M, Mihailov E,
304. Johansen CT, Wang J, Lanktree MB, McIntyre AD, Ban MR, Martins RA,
Montasser ME, Müller-Nurasyid M, Nolte IM, O’Connell JR, Palmer CD,
Kennedy BA, Hassell RG, Visser ME, Schwartz SM, Voight BF, Elosua R,
Perola M, Petersen AK, Sanna S, Saxena R, Service SK, Shah S, Shungin D,
Salomaa V, O’Donnell CJ, Dallinga-Thie GM, Anand SS, Yusuf S, Huff MW,
Sidore C, Song C, Strawbridge RJ, Surakka I, Tanaka T, Teslovich TM,
Kathiresan S, Cao H, Hegele RA. An increased burden of common and rare
Thorleifsson G, Van den Herik EG, Voight BF, Volcik KA, Waite LL, Wong A,
lipid-associated risk alleles contributes to the phenotypic spectrum of hypertri-
Wu Y, Zhang W, Absher D, Asiki G, Barroso I, Been LF, Bolton JL,
glyceridemia. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2011;31:1916 –1926.
Bonnycastle LL, Brambilla P, Burnett MS, Cesana G, Dimitriou M, Doney AS,
305. Gaudet D, Méthot J, Déry S, Brisson D, Essiembre C, Tremblay G, Tremblay K, de
Döring A, Elliott P, Epstein SE, Eyjolfsson GI, Gigante B, Goodarzi MO,
Wal J, Twisk J, van den Bulk N, Sier-Ferreira V, van Deventer S. Efficacy and long-
Grallert H, Gravito ML, Groves CJ, Hallmans G, Hartikainen AL, Hayward C,
term safety of alipogene tiparvovec (AAV1-LPLS447X) gene therapy for lipopro-
Hernandez D, Hicks AA, Holm H, Hung YJ, Illig T, Jones MR, Kaleebu P,
tein lipase deficiency: an open-label trial. Gene Ther 2013;20:361 –369.
Kastelein JJ, Khaw KT, Kim E, Klopp N, Komulainen P, Kumari M, Langenberg C,
306. Huff MW, Hegele RA. Apolipoprotein C-III: going back to the future for a lipid
Lehtimäki T, Lin SY, Lindström J, Loos RJ, Mach F, McArdle WL, Meisinger C,
drug target. Circ Res 2013;112:1405 –1408.
Mitchell BD, Müller G, Nagaraja R, Narisu N, Nieminen TV, Nsubuga RN,
307. Lindkvist B, Appelros S, Regner S, Manjer J. A prospective cohort study on risk of
Olafsson I, Ong KK, Palotie A, Papamarkou T, Pomilla C, Pouta A, Rader DJ,
Reilly MP, Ridker PM, Rivadeneira F, Rudan I, Ruokonen A, Samani N, acute pancreatitis related to serum triglycerides, cholesterol and fasting glucose.
Scharnagl H, Seeley J, Silander K, Stancáková A, Stirrups K, Swift AJ, Tiret L, Pancreatology 2012;12:317 –324.
Uitterlinden AG, van Pelt LJ, Vedantam S, Wainwright N, Wijmenga C, 308. Ewald N, Hardt PD, Kloer HU. Severe hypertriglyceridemia and pancreatitis: pres-
Wild SH, Willemsen G, Wilsgaard T, Wilson JF, Young EH, Zhao JH, Adair LS, entation and management. Curr Opin Lipidol 2009;20:497 – 504.
Arveiler D, Assimes TL, Bandinelli S, Bennett F, Bochud M, Boehm BO, 309. Reiner Z, Guardamagna O, Nair D, Soran H, Hovingh K, Bertolini S, Jones S,
Boomsma DI, Borecki IB, Bornstein SR, Bovet P, Burnier M, Campbell H, Ćorić M, Calandra S, Hamilton J, Eagleton T, Ros E. Lysosomal acid lipase defi-
Chakravarti A, Chambers JC, Chen YD, Collins FS, Cooper RS, Danesh J, ciency—an under-recognized cause of dyslipidaemia and liver dysfunction. Athero-
Dedoussis G, de Faire U, Feranil AB, Ferrières J, Ferrucci L, Freimer NB, sclerosis 2014;235:21–30.
Gieger C, Groop LC, Gudnason V, Gyllensten U, Hamsten A, Harris TB, 310. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Expert panel on integrated guidelines
Hingorani A, Hirschhorn JN, Hofman A, Hovingh GK, Hsiung CA, for cardiovascular health and risk reduction in children and adolescents: summary
Humphries SE, Hunt SC, Hveem K, Iribarren C, Järvelin MR, Jula A, Kähönen M, report. Pediatrics 2011;128(Suppl 5):S213 –S256.
Kaprio J, Kesäniemi A, Kivimaki M, Kooner JS, Koudstaal PJ, Krauss RM, Kuh D, 311. Reiner Z. Impact of early evidence of atherosclerotic changes on early treatment
Kuusisto J, Kyvik KO, Laakso M, Lakka TA, Lind L, Lindgren CM, Martin NG, in children with familial hypercholesterolemia. Circ Res 2014;114:233 –235.
März W, McCarthy MI, McKenzie CA, Meneton P, Metspalu A, Moilanen L, 312. Jonsdottir LS, Sigfússon N, Gudnason V, Sigvaldason H, Thorgeirsson G. Do lipids,
Morris AD, Munroe PB, Njølstad I, Pedersen NL, Power C, Pramstaller PP, blood pressure, diabetes, and smoking confer equal risk of myocardial infarction in
Price JF, Psaty BM, Quertermous T, Rauramaa R, Saleheen D, Salomaa V, women as in men? The Reykjavik Study. J Cardiovasc Risk 2002;9:67 –76.
Sanghera DK, Saramies J, Schwarz PE, Sheu WH, Shuldiner AR, Siegbahn A, 313. Falk E, Nakano M, Bentzon JF, Finn AV, Virmani R. Update on acute coronary syn-
Spector TD, Stefansson K, Strachan DP, Tayo BO, Tremoli E, Tuomilehto J, dromes: the pathologists’ view. Eur Heart J 2013;34:719 –728.
Uusitupa M, van Duijn CM, Vollenweider P, Wallentin L, Wareham NJ, 314. Walsh JM, Pignone M. Drug treatment of hyperlipidemia in women. JAMA 2004;
Whitfield JB, Wolffenbuttel BH, Ordovas JM, Boerwinkle E, Palmer CN, 291:2243 –2252.
Thorsteinsdottir U, Chasman DI, Rotter JI, Franks PW, Ripatti S, Cupples LA, 315. d’Emden MC, Jenkins AJ, Li L, Zannino D, Mann KP, Best JD, Stuckey BG, Park K,
Sandhu MS, Rich SS, Boehnke M, Deloukas P, Kathiresan S, Mohlke KL, Saltevo J, Keech AC. Favourable effects of fenofibrate on lipids and cardiovascular
Ingelsson E, Abecasis GR. Discovery and refinement of loci associated with lipid disease in women with type 2 diabetes: results from the Fenofibrate Intervention
levels. Nat Genet 2013;45:1274 –1283. and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study. Diabetologia 2014;57:2296 –2303.
3058h ESC/EAS Guidelines
316. Spitzer WO, Faith JM, MacRae KD. Myocardial infarction and third generation oral 336. Wenger NK, Lewis SJ, Herrington DM, Bittner V, Welty FK. Outcomes of using
contraceptives: aggregation of recent studies. Human Reprod 2002;17: high- or low-dose atorvastatin in patients 65 years of age or older with stable cor-
2307 –2314. onary heart disease. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:1–9.
317. Shufelt CL, Bairey Merz CN. Contraceptive hormone use and cardiovascular dis- 337. Gränsbo K, Melander O, Wallentin L, Lindbäck J, Stenestrand U, Carlsson J,
ease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:221–231. Nilsson J. Cardiovascular and cancer mortality in very elderly post-myocardial in-
318. Manson JE, Hsia J, Johnson KC, Rossouw JE, Assaf AR, Lasser NL, Trevisan M, farction patients receiving statin treatment. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:1362 – 1369.
Black HR, Heckbert SR, Detrano R, Strickland OL, Wong ND, Crouse JR, 338. Zimmet PZ, Magliano DJ, Herman WH, Shaw JE. Diabetes: a 21st century chal-
Stein E, Cushman M. Estrogen plus progestin and the risk of coronary heart dis- lenge. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014;2:56–64.
ease. N Engl J Med 2003;349:523–534. 339. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Seshasai SR, Kaptoge S, Thompson A, Di
319. Rosengren A. Better treatment and improved prognosis in elderly patients with Angelantonio E, Gao P, Sarwar N, Whincup PH, Mukamal KJ, Gillum RF,
AMI: but do registers tell the whole truth? Eur Heart J 2012;33:562 –563. Holme I, Njølstad I, Fletcher A, Nilsson P, Lewington S, Collins R, Gudnason V,
320. Gale CP, Cattle BA, Woolston A, Baxter PD, West TH, Simms AD, Blaxill J, Thompson SG, Sattar N, Selvin E, Hu FB, Danesh J. Diabetes mellitus, fasting glu-
Greenwood DC, Fox KA, West RM. Resolving inequalities in care? Reduced mor- cose, and risk of cause-specific death. N Engl J Med 2011;364:829 –841.
tality in the elderly after acute coronary syndromes. The Myocardial Ischaemia 340. Gregg EW, Li Y, Wang J, Burrows NR, Ali MK, Rolka D, Williams DE, Geiss L.
National Audit Project 2003 –2010. Eur Heart J 2012;33:630 –639. Changes in diabetes-related complications in the United States, 1990– 2010. N
321. Prospective Studies Collaboration, Lewington S, Whitlock G, Clarke R, Engl J Med 2014;370:1514 –1523.

Sherliker P, Emberson J, Halsey J, Qizilibash N, Peto R, Collins R. Blood choles- 341. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Sarwar N, Gao P, Seshasai SR, Gobin R,
terol and vascular mortality by age, sex, and blood pressure: a meta-analysis of Kaptoge S, Di Angelantonio E, Ingelsson E, Lawlor DA, Selvin E, Stampfer M,
individual data from 61 prospective studies with 55,000 vascular deaths. Lancet Stehouwer CD, Lewington S, Pennells L, Thompson A, Sattar N, White IR,
2007;370:1829 –1839. Ray KK, Danesh J. Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and
322. Prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice. Recommendations of the risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies.
Second Joint Task Force of European and other societies on coronary prevention. Lancet 2010;375:2215 –2222.
Eur Heart J 1998;19:1434 –1503. 342. Sattar N. Revisiting the links between glycaemia, diabetes and cardiovascular dis-
323. Berry JD, Dyer A, Cai X, Garside DB, Ning H, Thomas A, Greenland P, Van ease. Diabetologia 2013;56:686 –695.
Horn L, Tracy RP, Lloyd-Jones DM. Lifetime risks of cardiovascular disease. N 343. Liu J, Grundy SM, Wang W, Smith SC Jr, Vega GL, Wu Z, Zeng Z, Wang W,
Engl J Med 2012;366:321 –329. Zhao D. Ten-year risk of cardiovascular incidence related to diabetes, predia-
324. Giang KW, Björck L, Novak M, Lappas G, Wilhelmsen L, Torén K, Rosengren A. betes, and the metabolic syndrome. Am Heart J 2007;153:552 –558.
Stroke and coronary heart disease: predictive power of standard risk factors into 344. Despres JP. Body fat distribution and risk of cardiovascular disease: an update.
old age—long-term cumulative risk study among men in Gothenburg, Sweden.
Circulation 2012;126:1301 –1313.
Eur Heart J 2013;34:1068 –1074.
345. Donahoe SM, Stewart GC, McCabe CH, Mohanavelu S, Murphy SA, Cannon CP,
325. Wilhelmsen L, Svärdsudd K, Eriksson H, Rosengren A, Hansson PO, Welin C,
Antman EM. Diabetes and mortality following acute coronary syndromes. JAMA
Odén A, Welin L. Factors associated with reaching 90 years of age: a study of
2007; 298:765 – 775.
men born in 1913 in Gothenburg, Sweden. J Intern Med 2011;269:441 –451.
346. Tchernof A, Despres JP. Pathophysiology of human visceral obesity: an update.
326. Reiner Z. Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with statins in the elderly.
Physiol Rev 2013;93:359 –404.
Curr Atheroscler Rep 2014;16:420.
347. van Vliet-Ostaptchouk JV, Nuotio ML, Slagter SN, Doiron D, Fischer K, Foco L,
327. Savarese G, Gotto AM Jr, Paolillo S, D’Amore C, Losco T, Musella F, Scala O,
Gaye A, Gögele M, Heier M, Hiekkalinna T, Joensuu A, Newby C, Pang C,
Marciano C, Ruggiero D, Marsico F, De Luca G, Trimarco B, Perrone-Filardi P.
Partinen E, Reischl E, Schwienbacher C, Tammesoo ML, Swertz MA, Burton P,
Benefits of statins in elderly subjects without established cardiovascular disease:
Ferretti V, Fortier I, Giepmans L, Harris JR, Hillege HL, Holmen J, Jula A,
a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:2090 –2099.
Kootstra-Ros JE, Kvaløy K, Holmen TL, Männistö S, Metspalu A, Midthjell K,
328. Downs JR, Clearfield M, Weis S, Whitney E, Shapiro DR, Beere PA,
Murtagh MJ, Peters A, Pramstaller PP, Saaristo T, Salomaa V, Stolk RP,
Langendorfer A, Stein EA, Kruyer W, Gotto AM Jr. Primary prevention of acute
Uusitupa M, van der Harst P, van der Klauw MM, Waldenberger M, Perola M,
coronary events with lovastatin in men and women with average cholesterol le-
Wolffenbuttel BH. The prevalence of metabolic syndrome and metabolically
vels: results of AFCAPS/TexCAPS. Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis
healthy obesity in Europe: a collaborative analysis of ten large cohort studies.
Prevention Study. JAMA 1998;279:1615 – 1622.
BMC Endocr Disord 2014;14:9.
329. Glynn RJ, Koenig W, Nordestgaard BG, Shepherd J, Ridker PM. Rosuvastatin for
348. Mottillo S, Filion KB, Genest J, Joseph L, Pilote L, Poirier P, Rinfret S, Schiffrin EL,
primary prevention in older persons with elevated C-reactive protein and low to
Eisenberg MJ. The metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk a systematic re-
average low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels: exploratory analysis of a ran-
view and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:1113 –1132.
domized trial. Ann Intern Med 2010;152:488 –496, W174.
330. Shepherd J, Blauw GJ, Murphy MB, Bollen EL, Buckley BM, Cobbe SM, Ford I, 349. Adiels M, Olofsson SO, Taskinen MR, Borén J. Overproduction of very low-
Gaw A, Hyland M, Jukema JW, Kamper AM, Macfarlane PW, Meinders AE, density lipoproteins is the hallmark of the dyslipidemia in the metabolic syndrome.
Norrie J, Packard CJ, Perry IJ, Stott DJ, Sweeney BJ, Twomey C, Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2008;28:1225 –1236.
Westendorp RG. Pravastatin in elderly individuals at risk of vascular disease 350. Taskinen MR, Boren J. New insights into the pathophysiology of dyslipidemia in
(PROSPER): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:1623 – 1630. type 2 diabetes. Atherosclerosis 2015;239:483 –495.
331. Deedwania P, Stone PH, Bairey Merz CN, Cosin-Aguilar J, Koylan N, Luo D, 351. Scott R, O’Brien R, Fulcher G, Pardy C, D’Emden M, Tse D, Taskinen MR,
Ouyang P, Piotrowicz R, Schenck-Gustafsson K, Sellier P, Stein JH, Ehnholm C, Keech A. Effects of fenofibrate treatment on cardiovascular disease
Thompson PL, Tzivoni D. Effects of intensive versus moderate lipid-lowering risk in 9,795 individuals with type 2 diabetes and various components of the meta-
therapy on myocardial ischemia in older patients with coronary heart disease: re- bolic syndrome: the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes
sults of the Study Assessing Goals in the Elderly (SAGE). Circulation 2007;115: (FIELD) study. Diabetes Care 2009;32:493 –498.
700 –707. 352. Ballantyne CM, Olsson AG, Cook TJ, Mercuri MF, Pedersen TR, Kjekshus J. Influ-
332. Miettinen TA, Pyörälä K, Olsson AG, Musliner TA, Cook TJ, Faergeman O, Berg K, ence of low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and elevated triglyceride on cor-
Pedersen T, Kjekshus J. Cholesterol-lowering therapy in women and elderly pa- onary heart disease events and response to simvastatin therapy in 4S. Circulation
tients with myocardial infarction or angina pectoris: findings from the Scandi- 2001;104:3046 –3051.
navian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Circulation 1997;96:4211 –4218. 353. Saha SA, Arora RR. Fibrates in the prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients
333. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study with type 2 diabetes mellitus—a pooled meta-analysis of randomized placebo-
of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a rando- controlled clinical trials. Int J Cardiol 2010;141:157 –166.
mised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:7– 22. 354. Ilanne-Parikka P, Eriksson JG, Lindstrom J, Peltonen M, Aunola S, Hämäläinen H,
334. Hunt D, Young P, Simes J, Hague W, Mann S, Owensby D, Lane G, Tonkin A. Ben- Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi S, Laakso M, Valle TT, Lahtela J, Uusitupa M, Tuomilehto J;
efits of pravastatin on cardiovascular events and mortality in older patients with Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group. Effect of lifestyle intervention on the
coronary heart disease are equal to or exceed those seen in younger patients: re- occurrence of metabolic syndrome and its components in the Finnish Diabetes
sults from the LIPID trial. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:931 –940. Prevention Study. Diabetes Care 2008;31:805 –807.
335. Lewis SJ, Moye LA, Sacks FM, Johnstone DE, Timmis G, Mitchell J, Limacher M, 355. Laing SP, Swerdlow AJ, Slater SD, Burden AC, Morris A, Waugh NR, Gatling W,
Kell S, Glasser SP, Grant J, Davis BR, Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E. Effect of pravastatin Bingley PJ, Patterson CC. Mortality from heart disease in a cohort of 23,000 pa-
on cardiovascular events in older patients with myocardial infarction and choles- tients with insulin-treated diabetes. Diabetologia 2003;46:760 –765.
terol levels in the average range. Results of the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events 356. Chillaron JJ, Flores Le-Roux JA, Benaiges D, Pedro-Botet J. Type 1 diabetes, meta-
(CARE) trial. Ann Intern Med 1998;129:681 – 689. bolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk. Metabolism 2014;63:181 – 187.
ESC/EAS Guidelines 3058i
357. Collins R, Armitage J, Parish S, Sleigh P, Peto R; Heart Protection Study Collabora- rosuvastatin in patients with chronic heart failure (the GISSI-HF trial): a rando-
tive Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol-lowering with sim- mised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2008;372:1231 –1239.
vastatin in 5963 people with diabetes: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. 375. Rogers JK, Jhund PS, Perez AC, Böhm M, Cleland JG, Gullestad L, Kjekshus J, van
Lancet 2003;361:2005 –2016. Veldhuisen DJ, Wikstrand J, Wedel H, McMurray JJ, Pocock SJ. Effect of rosuvas-
358. Schwartz GG, Olsson AG, Ezekowitz MD, Ganz P, Oliver MF, Waters D, tatin on repeat heart failure hospitalizations: the CORONA Trial (Controlled Ro-
Zeiher A, Chaitman BR, Leslie S, Stern T. Effects of atorvastatin on early recurrent suvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure). JACC Heart Fail 2014;2:289–297.
ischemic events in acute coronary syndromes: the MIRACL study: a randomized 376. GISSI-HF Investigators, Tavazzi L, Maggioni AP, Marchioli R, Barlera S,
controlled trial. JAMA 2001;285:1711 –1718. Franzosi MG, Latini R, Lucci D, Nicolosi GL, Porcu M, Tognoni G. Effect of n-3
359. de Lemos JA, Blazing MA, Wiviott SD, Lewis EF, Fox KA, White HD, Rouleau JL, polyunsaturated fatty acids in patients with chronic heart failure (the GISSI-HF
Pedersen TR, Gardner LH, Mukherjee R, Ramsey KE, Palmisano J, Bilheimer DW, trial): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2008;372:
Pfeffer MA, Califf RM, Braunwald E. Early intensive vs a delayed conservative sim- 1223–1230.
vastatin strategy in patients with acute coronary syndromes: phase Z of the A to Z 377. Cowell SJ, Newby DE, Prescott RJ, Bloomfield P, Reid J, Northridge DB, Boon NA.
trial. JAMA 2004;292:1307 –1316. A randomized trial of intensive lipid-lowering therapy in calcific aortic stenosis. N
360. Ray KK, Cannon CP, McCabe CH, Cairns R, Tonkin AM, Sacks FM, Jackson G, Engl J Med 2005;352:2389 –2397.
Braunwald E. Early and late benefits of high-dose atorvastatin in patients with 378. Chan KL, Teo K, Dumesnil JG, Ni A, Tam J. Effect of lipid lowering with rosuvas-
acute coronary syndromes: results from the PROVE IT-TIMI 22 trial. J Am Coll Car- tatin on progression of aortic stenosis: results of the aortic stenosis progression

diol 2005;46:1405 –1410. observation: measuring effects of rosuvastatin (ASTRONOMER) trial. Circulation
361. Rizos EC, Ntzani EE, Bika E, Kostapanos MS, Elisaf MS. Association between 2010;121:306 – 314.
omega-3 fatty acid supplementation and risk of major cardiovascular disease 379. Arsenault BJ, Boekholdt SM, Mora S, DeMicco DA, Bao W, Tardif JC, Amarenco P,
events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2012;308:1024 –1033. Pedersen T, Barter P, Waters DD. Impact of high-dose atorvastatin therapy and
362. Schwartz GG, Olsson AG, Abt M, Ballantyne CM, Barter PJ, Brumm J, clinical risk factors on incident aortic valve stenosis in patients with cardiovascular
Chaitman BR, Holme IM, Kallend D, Leiter LA, Leitersdorf E, McMurray JJ, disease (from TNT, IDEAL, and SPARCL). Am J Cardiol 2014;113:1378 –1382.
Mundl H, Nicholls SJ, Shah PK, Tardif JC, Wright RS. Effects of dalcetrapib in pa- 380. Milin AC, Vorobiof G, Aksoy O, Ardehali R. Insights into aortic sclerosis and its
tients with a recent acute coronary syndrome. N Engl J Med 2012;367: relationship with coronary artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc 2014;3:e001111.
2089 –2099. 381. Antonini-Canterin F, Moura LM, Enache R, Leiballi E, Pavan D, Piazza R,
363. Di Sciascio G, Patti G, Pasceri V, Gaspardone A, Colonna G, Montinaro A. Efficacy Popescu BA, Ginghina C, Nicolosi GL, Rajamannan NM. Effect of hydroxymethyl-
of atorvastatin reload in patients on chronic statin therapy undergoing percutan- glutaryl coenzyme-a reductase inhibitors on the long-term progression of rheum-
eous coronary intervention: results of the ARMYDA-RECAPTURE (Atorvastatin atic mitral valve disease. Circulation 2010;121:2130 –2136.
for Reduction of Myocardial Damage During Angioplasty) Randomized Trial. J Am 382. Antonini-Canterin F, Zuppiroli A, Popescu BA, Granata G, Cervesato E, Piazza R,
Coll Cardiol 2009;54:558 –565. Pavan D, Nicolosi GL. Effect of statins on the progression of bioprosthetic aortic
364. Patti G, Cannon CP, Murphy SA, Mega S, Pasceri V, Briguori C, Colombo A, valve degeneration. Am J Cardiol 2003;92:1479 – 1482.
Yun KH, Jeong MH, Kim JS, Choi D, Bozbas H, Kinoshita M, Fukuda K, Jia XW, 383. Goldberg RJ, Urowitz MB, Ibañez D, Nikpour M, Gladman DD. Risk factors for
Hara H, Cay S, Di Sciascio G. Clinical benefit of statin pretreatment in patients development of coronary artery disease in women with systemic lupus erythema-
undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a collaborative patient-level tosus. J Rheumatol 2009;36:2454 –2461.
meta-analysis of 13 randomized studies. Circulation 2011;123:1622 –1632. 384. Ogdie A, Yu Y, Haynes K, Love TJ, Maliha S, Jiang Y, Troxel AB, Hennessy S,
365. Briguori C, Visconti G, Focaccio A, Golia B, Chieffo A, Castelli A, Mussardo M, Kimmel SE, Margolis DJ, Choi H, Mehta NN, Gelfand JM. Risk of major cardiovas-
Montorfano M, Ricciardelli B, Colombo A. Novel approaches for preventing or cular events in patients with psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis:
limiting events (Naples) II trial: impact of a single high loading dose of atorvastatin a population-based cohort study. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:326 –332.
on periprocedural myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:2157 –2163. 385. Peters MJ, Symmons DP, McCarey D, Dijkmans BA, Nicola P, Kvien TK,
366. Kim JS, Kim J, Choi D, Lee CJ, Lee SH, Ko YG, Hong MK, Kim BK, Oh SJ, Jeon DW, McInnes IB, Haentzschel H, Gonzalez-Gay MA, Provan S, Semb A,
Yang JY, Cho JR, Lee NH, Cho YH, Cho DK, Jang Y. Efficacy of high-dose atorvas- Sidiropoulos P, Kitas G, Smulders YM, Soubrier M, Szekanecz Z, Sattar N,
tatin loading before primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment Nurmohamed MT. EULAR evidence-based recommendations for cardiovascular
elevation myocardial infarction: the STATIN STEMI trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv risk management in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of inflam-
2010;3:332–339. matory arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:325 – 331.
367. Gandhi S, Mosleh W, Abdel-Qadir H, Farkouh ME. Statins and contrast-induced 386. De Vera MA, Choi H, Abrahamowicz M, Kopec J, Goycochea-Robles MV,
acute kidney injury with coronary angiography. Am J Med 2014;127:987 –1000. Lacaille D. Statin discontinuation and risk of acute myocardial infarction in pa-
368. Kjekshus J, Pedersen TR, Olsson AG, Faergeman O, Pyörälä K. The effects of sim- tients with rheumatoid arthritis: a population-based cohort study. Ann Rheum
vastatin on the incidence of heart failure in patients with coronary heart disease. Dis 2011;70:1020 – 1024.
J Card Fail 1997;3:249–254. 387. Barry R, James MT. Guidelines for classification of acute kidney diseases and dis-
369. Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) Study orders. Nephron 2015;131:221 – 226.
Group. Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients 388. Olechnowicz-Tietz S, Gluba A, Paradowska A, Banach M, Rysz J. The risk of ath-
with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. N Engl J erosclerosis in patients with chronic kidney disease. Int Urol Nephrol 2013;45:
Med 1998;339:1349 –1357. 1605 –1612.
370. Sacks FM, Pfeffer MA, Moye LA, Rouleau JL, Rutherford JD, Cole TG, Brown L, 389. Franczyk-Skóra B, Gluba A, Banach M, Rozentryt P, Poloński L, Rysz J. Acute cor-
Warnica JW, Arnold JM, Wun CC, Davis BR, Braunwald E. The effect of pravas- onary syndromes in patients with chronic kidney disease. Curr Vasc Pharmacol
tatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average chol- 2013;11:758 – 767.
esterol levels. Cholesterol and Recurrent Events Trial investigators. N Engl J Med 390. Gansevoort RT, Correa-Rotter R, Hemmelgarn BR, Jafar TH, Heerspink HJ,
1996;335:1001 –1009. Mann JF, Matsushita K, Wen CP. Chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular
371. Scirica BM, Morrow DA, Cannon CP, Ray KK, Sabatine MS, Jarolim P, Shui A, risk: epidemiology, mechanisms, and prevention. Lancet 2013;382:339 –352.
McCabe CH, Braunwald E. Intensive statin therapy and the risk of hospitalization 391. Chronic Kidney Disease Prognosis Consortium, Matsushita K, van der Velde M,
for heart failure after an acute coronary syndrome in the PROVE IT-TIMI 22 study. Astor BC, Woodward M, Levey AS, de Jong PE, Coresh J, Gansevoort RT. Asso-
J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:2326 –2331. ciation of estimated glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria with all-cause and
372. Khush KK, Waters DD, Bittner V, Deedwania PC, Kastelein JJ, Lewis SJ, cardiovascular mortality in general population cohorts: a collaborative
Wenger NK. Effect of high-dose atorvastatin on hospitalizations for heart failure: meta-analysis. Lancet 2010;375:2073 – 2081.
subgroup analysis of the Treating to New Targets (TNT) study. Circulation 2007; 392. Loncar G, Barthelemy O, Berman E, Kerneis M, Petroni T, Payot L, Choussat R,
115:576 –583. Silvain J, Collet JP, Helft G, Montalescot G, Le Feuvre C. Impact of renal failure
373. Kjekshus J, Apetrei E, Barrios V, Böhm M, Cleland JG, Cornel JH, Dunselman P, on all-cause mortality and other outcomes in patients treated by percutaneous
Fonseca C, Goudev A, Grande P, Gullestad L, Hjalmarson A, Hradec J, Jánosi A, coronary intervention. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2015;108:554 – 562.
Kamenský G, Komajda M, Korewicki J, Kuusi T, Mach F, Mareev V, McMurray JJ, 393. Palmer SC, Navaneethan SD, Craig JC, Johnson DW, Perkovic V, Hegbrant J,
Ranjith N, Schaufelberger M, Vanhaecke J, van Veldhuisen DJ, Waagstein F, Strippoli GF. HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for people with chronic kid-
Wedel H, Wikstrand J. Rosuvastatin in older patients with systolic heart failure. ney disease not requiring dialysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;5:CD007784.
N Engl J Med 2007;357:2248 –2261. 394. Barylski M, Nikfar S, Mikhailidis DP, Toth PP, Salari P, Ray KK, Pencina MJ, Rizzo M,
374. GISSI-HF Investigators, Tavazzi L, Maggioni AP, Marchioli R, Barlera S, Rysz J, Abdollahi M, Nicholls SJ, Banach M. Statins decrease all-cause mortality
Franzosi MG, Latini R, Lucci D, Nicolosi GL, Porcu M, Tognoni G. Effect of only in CKD patients not requiring dialysis therapy--a meta-analysis of 11
3058j ESC/EAS Guidelines
randomized controlled trials involving 21,295 participants. Pharmacol Res 2013;72: 412. Tedeschi-Reiner E, Strozzi M, Skoric B, Reiner Z. Relation of atherosclerotic
35 –44. changes in retinal arteries to the extent of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol
395. Wanner C, Krane V, März W, Olschewski M, Mann JF, Ruf G, Ritz E. Atorvastatin in 2005;96:1107 – 1109.
patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing hemodialysis. N Engl J Med 2005; 413. Keech AC, Mitchell P, Summanen PA, O’Day J, Davis TM, Moffitt MS,
353:238 –248. Taskinen MR, Simes RJ, Tse D, Williamson E, Merrifield A, Laatikainen LT,
396. Fellström BC, Jardine AG, Schmieder RE, Holdaas H, Bannister K, Beutler J, d’Emden MC, Crimet DC, O’Connell RL, Colman PG. Effect of fenofibrate on
Chae DW, Chevaile A, Cobbe SM, Grönhagen-Riska C, De Lima JJ, Lins R, the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy (FIELD study): a randomised
Mayer G, McMahon AW, Parving HH, Remuzzi G, Samuelsson O, Sonkodi S, controlled trial. Lancet 2007;370:1687 –1697.
Sci D, Süleymanlar G, Tsakiris D, Tesar V, Todorov V, Wiecek A, Wüthrich RP, 414. ACCORD Study Group; ACCORD Eye Study Group, Chew EY, Ambrosius WT,
Gottlow M, Johnsson E, Zannad F. Rosuvastatin and cardiovascular events in pa- Davis MD, Danis RP, Gangaputra S, Greven CM, Hubbard L, Esser BA, Lovato JF,
tients undergoing hemodialysis. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1395 –1407. Perdue LH, Goff DC Jr, Cushman WC, Ginsberg HN, Elam MB, Genuth S,
397. Baigent C, Landray MJ, Reith C, Emberson J, Wheeler DC, Tomson C, Wanner C, Gerstein HC, Schubart U, Fine LJ. Effects of medical therapies on retinopathy pro-
Krane V, Cass A, Craig J, Neal B, Jiang L, Hooi LS, Levin A, Agodoa L, Gaziano M, gression in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2010;363:233 –244.
Kasiske B, Walker R, Massy ZA, Feldt-Rasmussen B, Krairittichai U, 415. Golledge J, Muller J, Daugherty A, Norman P. Abdominal aortic aneurysm: patho-
Ophascharoensuk V, Fellström B, Holdaas H, Tesar V, Wiecek A, Grobbee D, genesis and implications for management. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2006;26:
de Zeeuw D, Grönhagen-Riska C, Dasgupta T, Lewis D, Herrington W, 2605 –2613.

Mafham M, Majoni W, Wallendszus K, Grimm R, Pedersen T, Tobert J, 416. Paraskevas KI, Liapis CD, Hamilton G, Mikhailidis DP. Can statins reduce peri-
Armitage J, Baxter A, Bray C, Chen Y, Chen Z, Hill M, Knott C, Parish S, operative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing non-cardiac vascular
Simpson D, Sleight P, Young A, Collins R. The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol surgery? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2006;32:286 –293.
with simvastatin plus ezetimibe in patients with chronic kidney disease (Study of 417. Durazzo AE, Machado FS, Ikeoka DT, De Bernoche C, Monachini MC,
Heart and Renal Protection): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2011; Puech-Leão P, Caramelli B. Reduction in cardiovascular events after vascular sur-
377:2181 – 2192. gery with atorvastatin: a randomized trial. J Vasc Surg 2004;39:967– 975; discus-
398. Erickson KF, Japa S, Owens DK, Chertow GM, Garber AM, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD. sion 975 –976.
Cost-effectiveness of statins for primary cardiovascular prevention in chronic kid- 418. Schouten O, Boersma E, Hoeks SE, Benner R, van Urk H, van Sambeek MR,
ney disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:1250 – 1258. Verhagen HJ, Khan NA, Dunkelgrun M, Bax JJ, Poldermans D. Fluvastatin and peri-
399. Tonelli M, Wanner C, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes Lipid Guide- operative events in patients undergoing vascular surgery. N Engl J Med 2009;361:
line Development Work Group Members. Lipid management in chronic kidney 980 –989.
disease: synopsis of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes 2013 clinical 419. Takagi H, Yamamoto H, Iwata K, Goto S, Umemoto T, Group A. Effects of statin
practice guideline. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:182. therapy on abdominal aortic aneurysm growth: a meta-analysis and
400. Kobashigawa JA, Katznelson S, Laks H, Johnson JA, Yeatman L, Wang XM, Chia D, meta-regression of observational comparative studies. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg
Terasaki PI, Sabad A, Cogert GA. Effect of pravastatin on outcomes after cardiac 2012;44:287 –292.
transplantation. N Engl J Med 1995;333:621–627. 420. Hackam DG, Wu F, Li P, Austin PC, Tobe SW, Mamdani MM, Garg AX. Statins and
401. Wenke K, Meiser B, Thiery J, Nagel D, von Scheidt W, Steinbeck G, Seidel D, renovascular disease in the elderly: a population-based cohort study. Eur Heart J
Reichart B. Simvastatin reduces graft vessel disease and mortality after heart trans- 2011;32:598 –610.
plantation: a four-year randomized trial. Circulation 1997;96:1398 – 1402. 421. Subherwal S, Patel MR, Kober L, Peterson ED, Bhatt DL, Gislason GH, Olsen AM,
402. Page RL 2nd, Miller GG, Lindenfeld J. Drug therapy in the heart transplant recipi- Jones WS, Torp-Pedersen C, Fosbol EL. Peripheral artery disease is a coronary
ent: part IV: drug-drug interactions. Circulation 2005;111:230 –229. heart disease risk equivalent among both men and women: results from a nation-
403. Navaneethan SD, Perkovic V, Johnson DW, Nigwekar SU, Craig JC, Strippoli GF. wide study. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2015;22:317–325.
HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for kidney transplant recipients. Cochrane 422. Amarenco P, Labreuche J. Lipid management in the prevention of stroke: review
Database Syst Rev 2009;2:CD005019. and updated meta-analysis of statins for stroke prevention. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:
404. Shaw SM, Chaggar P, Ritchie J, Shah MK, Baynes AC, O’Neill N, Fildes JE, Yonan N, 453 –463.
Williams SG. The efficacy and tolerability of ezetimibe in cardiac transplant reci- 423. McKinney JS, Kostis WJ. Statin therapy and the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage: a
pients taking cyclosporin. Transplantation 2009;87:771 –775. meta-analysis of 31 randomized controlled trials. Stroke 2012;43:2149 – 2156.
405. European Stroke Organisation, Tendera M, Aboyans V, Bartelink ML, 424. Sever PS, Dahlöf B, Poulter NR, Wedel H, Beevers G, Caulfield M, Collins R,
Baumgartner I, Clément D, Collet JP, Cremonesi A, De Carlo M, Erbel R, Kjeldsen SE, Kristinsson A, McInnes GT, Mehlsen J, Nieminen M, O’Brien E,
Fowkes FG, Heras M, Kownator S, Minar E, Ostergren J, Poldermans D, Ostergren J. Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hyper-
Riambau V, Roffi M, Röther J, Sievert H, van Sambeek M, Zeller T. ESC Guidelines tensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentra-
on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral artery diseases: document covering tions, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial--Lipid Lowering Arm
atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, (ASCOT-LLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003;361:
upper and lower extremity arteries: the Task Force on the Diagnosis and Treat- 1149 –1158.
ment of Peripheral Artery Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). 425. Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FA, Genest J, Gotto AM Jr, Kastelein JJ,
Eur Heart J 2011;32:2851 – 2906. Koenig W, Libby P, Lorenzatti AJ, MacFadyen JG, Nordestgaard BG, Shepherd J,
406. McDermott MM, Mandapat AL, Moates A, Albay M, Chiou E, Celic L, Greenland P. Willerson JT, Glynn RJ. Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and wo-
Knowledge and attitudes regarding cardiovascular disease risk and prevention in men with elevated C-reactive protein. N Engl J Med 2008;359:2195 –2207.
patients with coronary or peripheral arterial disease. Arch Intern Med 2003;163: 426. Byington RP, Davis BR, Plehn JF, White HD, Baker J, Cobbe SM, Shepherd J. Re-
2157 –2162. duction of stroke events with pravastatin: the Prospective Pravastatin Pooling
407. Aung PP, Maxwell HG, Jepson RG, Price JF, Leng GC. Lipid-lowering for (PPP) Project. Circulation 2001;103:387 –392.
peripheral arterial disease of the lower limb. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;4: 427. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group, Bulbulia R, Bowman L,
CD000123. Wallendszus K, Parish S, Armitage J, Peto R, Collins R. Effects on 11-year mortality
408. Kumbhani DJ, Steg PG, Cannon CP, Eagle KA, Smith SC Jr, Goto S, Ohman EM, and morbidity of lowering LDL cholesterol with simvastatin for about 5 years in
Elbez Y, Sritara P, Baumgartner I, Banerjee S, Creager MA, Bhatt DL. Statin therapy 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2011;378:
and long-term adverse limb outcomes in patients with peripheral artery disease: 2013 –2020.
insights from the REACH registry. Eur Heart J 2014;35:2864 – 2872. 428. Amarenco P, Bogousslavsky J, Callahan A 3rd, Goldstein LB, Hennerici M,
409. Westin GG, Armstrong EJ, Bang H, Yeo KK, Anderson D, Dawson DL, Pevec WC, Rudolph AE, Sillesen H, Simunovic L, Szarek M, Welch KM, Zivin JA. High-dose
Amsterdam EA, Laird JR. Association between statin medications and mortality, atorvastatin after stroke or transient ischemic attack. N Engl J Med 2006;355:
major adverse cardiovascular event, and amputation-free survival in patients 549 –559.
with critical limb ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:682–690. 429. Merwick Á, Albers GW, Arsava EM, Ay H, Calvet D, Coutts SB, Cucchiara BL,
410. Amarenco P, Labreuche J, Lavallee P, Touboul PJ. Statins in stroke prevention and Demchuk AM, Giles MF, Mas JL, Olivot JM, Purroy F, Rothwell PM, Saver JL,
carotid atherosclerosis: systematic review and up-to-date meta-analysis. Stroke Sharma VK, Tsivgoulis G, Kelly PJ. Reduction in early stroke risk in carotid stenosis
2004;35:2902 – 2909. with transient ischemic attack associated with statin treatment. Stroke 2013;44:
411. Huang Y, Li W, Dong L, Li R, Wu Y. Effect of statin therapy on the progression of 2814– 2820.
common carotid artery intima-media thickness: an updated systematic review and 430. Riddler SA, Smit E, Cole SR, Li R, Chmiel JS, Dobs A, Palella F, Visscher B, Evans R,
meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Atheroscler Thromb 2013;20: Kingsley LA. Impact of HIV infection and HAART on serum lipids in men. JAMA
108 –121. 2003;289:2978 –2982.
ESC/EAS Guidelines 3058k
431. Hemkens LG, Bucher HC. HIV infection and cardiovascular disease. Eur Heart J 453. McGinnis BD, Olson KL, Delate TM, Stolcpart RS. Statin adherence and mortality
2014;35:1373 –1381. in patients enrolled in a secondary prevention program. Am J Manag Care 2009;15:
432. Islam FM, Wu J, Jansson J, Wilson DP. Relative risk of cardiovascular disease among 689 –695.
people living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HIV Med 2012;13: 454. Huser MA, Evans TS, Berger V. Medication adherence trends with statins. Adv Ther
453– 468. 2005;22:163 – 171.
433. Bavinger C, Bendavid E, Niehaus K, Olshen RA, Olkin I, Sundaram V, Wein N, 455. Bosworth HB, Granger BB, Mendys P, Brindis R, Burkholder R, Czajkowski SM,
Holodniy M, Hou N, Owens DK, Desai M. Risk of cardiovascular disease from Daniel JG, Ekman I, Ho M, Johnson M, Kimmel SE, Liu LZ, Musaus J,
antiretroviral therapy for HIV: a systematic review. PLoS One 2013;8:e59551. Shrank WH, Whalley Buono E, Weiss K, Granger CB. Medication adherence: a
434. Triant VA, Lee H, Hadigan C, Grinspoon SK. Increased acute myocardial infarction call for action. Am Heart J 2011;162:412 –424.
rates and cardiovascular risk factors among patients with human immunodefi- 456. Hinchcliffe A. Patient Adherence to Treatment with Statins for the Prevention of Cardio-
ciency virus disease. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007;92:2506 –2512. vascular Disease. Cardiff: Public Health Wales NHS Trust, 2011.
435. Wohl DA, Waters D, Simpson RJ Jr, Richard S, Schnell A, Napravnik S, Keys J, 457. Blackburn DF, Dobson RT, Blackburn JL, Wilson TW, Stang MR, Semchuk WM.
Eron JJ Jr, Hsue P. Ezetimibe alone reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol Adherence to statins, beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibi-
in HIV-infected patients receiving combination antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect tors following a first cardiovascular event: a retrospective cohort study. Can J
Dis 2008;47:1105 –1108. Cardiol 2005;21:485 – 488.
436. Calza L, Manfredi R, Chiodo F. Statins and fibrates for the treatment of 458. Wei L, Wang J, Thompson P, Wong S, Struthers AD, MacDonald TM. Adherence

hyperlipidaemia in HIV-infected patients receiving HAART. AIDS 2003;17: to statin treatment and readmission of patients after myocardial infarction: a six
851 –859. year follow up study. Heart 2002;88:229 –233.
437. Correll CU, Robinson DG, Schooler NR, Brunette MF, Mueser KT, 459. Corrao G, Conti V, Merlino L, Catapano AL, Mancia G. Results of a retrospective
Rosenheck RA, Marcy P, Addington J, Estroff SE, Robinson J, Penn DL, Azrin S, database analysis of adherence to statin therapy and risk of nonfatal ischemic heart
Goldstein A, Severe J, Heinssen R, Kane JM. Cardiometabolic risk in patients disease in daily clinical practice in Italy. Clin Ther 2010;32:300 – 310.
with first-episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders: baseline results from the 460. Aubert RE, Yao J, Xia F, Garavaglia SB. Is there a relationship between early statin
RAISE-ETP study. JAMA Psychiatry 2014;71:1350 –1363. compliance and a reduction in healthcare utilization? Am J Manag Care 2010;16:
438. Andrade C. Primary prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with major 459 –466.
mental illness: a possible role for statins. Bipolar Disord 2013;15:813 – 823. 461. Sokol MC, McGuigan KA, Verbrugge RR, Epstein RS. Impact of medication ad-
439. Tiihonen J, Lönnqvist J, Wahlbeck K, Klaukka T, Niskanen L, Tanskanen A, herence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care 2005;43:
Haukka J. 11-year follow-up of mortality in patients with schizophrenia: a 521 – 530.
462. Naderi SH, Bestwick JP, Wald DS. Adherence to drugs that prevent cardiovascular
population-based cohort study (FIN11 study). Lancet 2009;374:620–627.
disease: meta-analysis on 376,162 patients. Am J Med 2012;125:882 –887.e1.
440. Laursen TM. Life expectancy among persons with schizophrenia or bipolar affect-
463. Wise J. Open letter raises concerns about NICE guidance on statins. BMJ 2014;
ive disorder. Schizophr Res 2011;131:101 –104.
348:g3937.
441. Godin O, Etain B, Henry C, Bougerol T, Courtet P, Mayliss L, Passerieux C,
464. Abramson JD, Rosenberg HG, Jewell N, Wright JM. Should people at low risk of
Azorin JM, Kahn JP, Gard S, Costagliola D, Leboyer M. Metabolic syndrome in a
cardiovascular disease take a statin? BMJ 2013;347:f6123.
French cohort of patients with bipolar disorder: results from the FACE-BD co-
465. Huffman M, Taylor F, Ebrahim S. Huffman and colleagues’ response to Abramson
hort. J Clin Psychiatry 2014;75:1078 –1085; quiz 1085.
and colleagues’ article on statins in low risk people. BMJ 2014;348:g1520.
442. Lawrence D, Kisely S, Pais J. The epidemiology of excess mortality in people with
466. Ajzen I. The Theory of Planned Behaviour. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1991;
mental illness. Can J Psychiatry 2010;55:752 –760.
50:179 –211.
443. Goldstein BI, Fagiolini A, Houck P, Kupfer DJ. Cardiovascular disease and hyper-
467. Becker MH. The Health Belief Model and personal health behaviour. Health Educ
tension among adults with bipolar I disorder in the United States. Bipolar Disord
Monogr 1974;2:324 –508.
2009;11:657–662.
468. Rich A, Brandes K, Mullan B, Hagger MS. Theory of planned behavior and adher-
444. De Hert M, Dekker JM, Wood D, Kahl KG, Holt RI, Möller HJ. Cardiovascular dis-
ence in chronic illness: a meta-analysis. J Behav Med 2015;38:673–688.
ease and diabetes in people with severe mental illness position statement from the
469. Kamran A, Sadeghieh Ahari S, Biria M, Malepour A, Heydari H. Determinants of
European Psychiatric Association (EPA), supported by the European Association
patient’s adherence to hypertension medications: application of health belief
for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).
model among rural patients. Ann Med Health Sci Res 2014;4:922 – 927.
Eur Psychiatry 2009;24:412–424.
470. Jackson C, Eliasson L, Barber N, Weinman J. Applying COM-B to medication ad-
445. Ojala K, Repo-Tiihonen E, Tiihonen J, Niskanen L. Statins are effective in treating herence. Eur Health Psychol 2014;16:7 –17.
dyslipidemia among psychiatric patients using second-generation antipsychotic 471. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for
agents. J Psychopharmacol 2008;22:33–38. characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci 2011;
446. Mitchell AJ, Lord O. Do deficits in cardiac care influence high mortality rates in 6:42.
schizophrenia? A systematic review and pooled analysis. J Psychopharmacol 2010; 472. Mann DM, Woodward M, Muntner P, Falzon L, Kronish I. Predictors of nonadher-
24(4 Suppl):69 –80. ence to statins: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Pharmacother 2010;44:
447. Wood D, Kotseva K, Connolly S, Jennings C, Mead A, Jones J, Holden A, De 1410 –1421.
Bacquer D, Collier T, De Backer G, Faergeman O. Nurse-coordinated multidis- 473. Latry P, Molimard M, Dedieu B, Couffinhal T, Bégaud B, Martin-Latry K. Adher-
ciplinary, family-based cardiovascular disease prevention programme (EUROAC- ence with statins in a real-life setting is better when associated cardiovascular
TION) for patients with coronary heart disease and asymptomatic individuals at risk factors increase: a cohort study. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders 2011;11:46.
high risk of cardiovascular disease: a paired, cluster-randomised controlled trial. 474. Lewey J, Shrank WH, Bowry AD, Kilabuk E, Brennan TA, Choudhry NK. Gender
Lancet 2008;371:1999 –2012. and racial disparities in adherence to statin therapy: a meta-analysis. Am Heart J
448. Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, Abraham C, Francis J, Hardeman W, 2013;165:665 – 678.e1.
Eccles MP, Cane J, Wood CE. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) 475. Harrison TN, Derose SF, Cheetham TC, Chiu V, Vansomphone SS, Green K,
of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus Tunceli K, Scott RD, Marrett E, Reynolds K. Primary nonadherence to statin ther-
for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med 2013;46: apy: patients’ perceptions. Am J Manag Care 2013;19:e133–e139.
81 –95. 476. DeWalt DA, Broucksou KA, Hawk V, Brach C, Hink A, Rudd R, Callahan L. Devel-
449. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and oping and testing the health literacy universal precautions toolkit. Nurs Outlook
evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Int 2011;59:85 –94.
J Nurs Stud 2013;50:587 –592. 477. Rubak S, Sandbaek A, Lauritzen T, Christensen B. Motivational interviewing: a sys-
450. Benner JS, Glynn RJ, Mogun H, Neumann PJ, Weinstein MC, Avorn J. tematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Gen Pract 2005;55:305 –312.
Long-term persistence in use of statin therapy in elderly patients. JAMA 2002; 478. Bandura A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman, 1997.
288:455 –461. 479. Schedlbauer A, Davies P, Fahey T. Interventions to improve adherence to lipid
451. Chodick G, Shalev V, Gerber Y, Heymann AD, Silber H, Simah V, Kokia E. Long- lowering medication. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;3:CD004371.
term persistence with statin treatment in a not-for-profit health maintenance or- 480. Nieuwlaat R, Wilczynski N, Navarro T, Hobson N, Jeffery R, Keepanasseril A,
ganization: a population-based retrospective cohort study in Israel. Clin Ther 2008; Agoritsas T, Mistry N, Iorio A, Jack S, Sivaramalingam B, Iserman E, Mustafa RA,
30:2167 –2179. Jedraszewski D, Cotoi C, Haynes RB. Interventions for enhancing medication ad-
452. Jackevicius CA, Mamdani M, Tu JV. Adherence with statin therapy in elderly herence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;11:CD000011.
patients with and without acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2002;288: 481. Martin SS, Sperling LS, Blaha MJ, Wilson PW, Gluckman TJ, Blumenthal RS,
462 – 467. Stone NJ. Clinician-patient risk discussion for atherosclerotic cardiovascular
3058l ESC/EAS Guidelines
disease prevention: importance to implementation of the 2013 ACC/AHA consumers: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;65:1361 –1368. 2014;4:CD007768.
482. Thom S, Poulter N, Field J, Patel A, Prabhakaran D, Stanton A, Grobbee DE, Bots ML, 485. Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, Albus C, Brotons C, Catapano AL, Cooney MT,
Reddy KS, Cidambi R, Bompoint S, Billot L, Rodgers A. Effects of a fixed-dose Corrà U, Cosyns B, Deaton C, Graham I, Hall MS, Hobbs FD, Løchen ML,
combination strategy on adherence and risk factors in patients with or at high risk Löllgen H, Marques-Vidal P, Perk J, Prescott E, Redon J, Richter DJ, Sattar N,
of CVD: the UMPIRE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2013;310:918–929. Smulders Y, Tiberi M, van der Worp HB, van Dis I, Verschuren WM; Authors/
483. Castellano JM, Sanz G, Peñalvo JL, Bansilal S, Fernández-Ortiz A, Alvarez L, Guzmán L, Task Force Members. 2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease
Linares JC, Garcı́a F, D’Aniello F, Arnáiz JA, Varea S, Martı́nez F, Lorenzatti A, Imaz I, prevention in clinical practice: The Sixth Joint Task Force of the European So-
Sánchez-Gómez LM, Roncaglioni MC, Baviera M, Smith SC Jr, Taubert K, Pocock S, ciety of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention
Brotons C, Farkouh ME, Fuster V. A polypill strategy to improve adherence: results in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited
from the FOCUS project. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64:2071–2082. experts) Developed with the special contribution of the European Association
484. Ryan R, Santesso N, Lowe D, Hill S, Grimshaw J, Prictor M, Kaufman C, Cowie G, for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR). Eur Heart J. 2016;37:
Taylor M. Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by 2315 – 2381.

2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines For The Management of Dyslipidaemias

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines For The Management of Dyslipidaemias

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines For The Management of Dyslipidaemias

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

European Heart Journal (2016) 37, 2999–3058 ESC/EAS GUIDELINES

2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Developed with the special contribution of the European Assocciation

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

7.4 Statins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 9.7 Heart failure and valvular diseases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

ART antiretroviral treatment HF heart failure

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Table 1 Classes of recommendations

Classes of Definition Suggested wording to

Class I Evidence and/or general agreement Is recommended/is

Class II Conflicting evidence and/or a

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Class IIb Usefulness/efficacy is less well May be considered

Class III Evidence or general agreement that Is not recommended

completing the loop between clinical research, writing of guidelines,

individual level, in those at moderate to high risk of CVD or patients

guidelines, which can be found at http://www.escardio.org/

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Box 3 How to use the risk estimation charts Box 4 Qualifiers

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Box 5 Factors modifying SCORE risks

therapeutic decisions in older people, with a firm commitment to

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

– prevent further increase in total CV risk,

Total CV risk LDL-C levels

Class a /Levelb I/C I/C I/C I/C IIa/A

Lifestyle intervention, Lifestyle intervention, Lifestyle intervention,

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Class a /Levelb I/C I/C IIa/A IIa/A I/A

Lifestyle intervention, Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention

Class a /Levelb IIa/A IIa/A IIa/A I/A I/A

Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention Lifestyle intervention

Class a /Levelb IIa/A IIa/A I/A I/A I/A

Table 6 Recommendations for risk estimation

associated with premature CVD. Antiretroviral therapies may

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Apo ¼ apolipoprotein; CKD ¼ chronic kidney disease; CVD ¼ cardiovascular

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

3.3.2 Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

The lipid goals are part of a comprehensive CV risk reduc-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

Table 12 Impact of specific lifestyle changes on lipid levels

Magnitude of the effect Level of evidence References

HDL-C ¼ high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; LDL-C ¼ low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; TC ¼ total cholesterol; TG ¼ triglycerides.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020

To be preferred To be used with moderation To be chosen occasionally in limited amounts

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/39/2999/2414995 by guest on 09 August 2020