Abstract

Background: Identifying the best markers to judge the adequacy of lipid-lowering treatment is increasingly important for coronary heart disease (CHD) prevention given that several novel, potent lipid-lowering therapies are in development. Reductions in LDL-C, non-HDL-C, or apoB can all be used but which most closely relates to benefit, as defined by the reduction in events on statin treatment, is not established.

Methods And Results: We performed a random-effects frequentist and Bayesian meta-analysis of 7 placebo-controlled statin trials in which LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and apoB values were available at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Summary level data for change in LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and apoB were related to the relative risk reduction from statin therapy in each trial. In frequentist meta-analyses, the mean CHD risk reduction (95% CI) per standard deviation decrease in each marker across these 7 trials were 20.1% (15.6%, 24.3%) for LDL-C; 20.0% (15.2%, 24.7%) for non-HDL-C; and 24.4% (19.2%, 29.2%) for apoB. Compared within each trial, risk reduction per change in apoB averaged 21.6% (12.0%, 31.2%) greater than changes in LDL-C (P<0.001) and 24.3% (22.4%, 26.2%) greater than changes in non-HDL-C (P<0.001). Similarly, in Bayesian meta-analyses using various prior distributions, Bayes factors (BFs) favored reduction in apoB as more closely related to risk reduction from statins compared with LDL-C or non-HDL-C (BFs ranging from 484 to 2380).

Conclusions: Using both a frequentist and Bayesian approach, relative risk reduction across 7 major placebo-controlled statin trials was more closely related to reductions in apoB than to reductions in either non-HDL-C or LDL-C.