Author Interviews, Heart Disease, Imperial College, Lipids, NEJM, Statins / 13.03.2019
Bempedoic Acid Lowers LDL When Statins Alone Aren’t Enough
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
[caption id="attachment_47863" align="alignleft" width="187"] Dr. Ray[/caption]
Prof. Kosh Ray, MB ChB, MD, MPhil
Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health
Chair in Public Health (Clinical)
Imperial College London
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Bempedoic acid is the first in class of a new therapy for lowering LDL cholesterol. This is the largest and longest study to date with this therapy and involved about 2200 pts with patients with either established cardiovascular disease or familial hypercholestrolaemia and in whom LDL was > 70mg/dl or 1.8 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statins. %0% were on high intensity statins and the majority of the rest on moderate intensity.
The aim was to show long term safety 1 year and efficacy at 24 weeks and at 1 year.
Dr. Ray[/caption]
Prof. Kosh Ray, MB ChB, MD, MPhil
Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health
Chair in Public Health (Clinical)
Imperial College London
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Bempedoic acid is the first in class of a new therapy for lowering LDL cholesterol. This is the largest and longest study to date with this therapy and involved about 2200 pts with patients with either established cardiovascular disease or familial hypercholestrolaemia and in whom LDL was > 70mg/dl or 1.8 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statins. %0% were on high intensity statins and the majority of the rest on moderate intensity.
The aim was to show long term safety 1 year and efficacy at 24 weeks and at 1 year. 
Dr. Leung[/caption]
Alexander A. Leung, MD, MPH
Department of Community Health Sciences
Department of Medicine
University of Calgary
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: The 2017 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) blood pressure guidelines redefined hypertension according to a blood pressure cutoff of ≥130/80 mm Hg, compared to the traditional cutoff of ≥140/90 mm Hg.
Dr. Rhee[/caption]
Chanu Rhee, MD,MPH
Assistant Professor of Population Medicine
Harvard Medical School / Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute
Assistant Hospital Epidemiologist
Brigham and Women’s Hospital
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Sepsis is the body’s reaction to a serious infection that results a cascade of inflammation in the body and organ dysfunction, such as low blood pressure, confusion, or failure of the lungs, kidneys, or liver. Sepsis is a major cause of death, disability, and cost in the U.S. and around the world. Growing recognition of this problem has led to numerous sepsis performance improvement initiatives in hospitals around the country. Some of these efforts have also been catalyzed by high-profile tragic cases of missed sepsis leading to death, which may have contributed to a perception that most sepsis deaths are preventable if doctors and hospitals were only better at recognizing it.
However, the extent to which sepsis-related deaths might be preventable with better hospital-based care is unknown. In my own experience as a critical care physician, a lot of sepsis patients we treat are extremely sick and even when they receive timely and optimal medical care, many do not survive. This led myself and my colleagues to conduct this study to better understand what types of patients are dying from sepsis and how preventable these deaths might be. 
Dr. Mikkola[/caption]
Tomi Mikkola MD
Associate Professor
Helsinki University Hospital
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Helsinki, Finland
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: In Finland we have perhaps the most comprehensive and reliable medical registers in the world. Thus, with my research group I have conducted various large studies evaluating association of postmenopausal hormone therapy use and various major diseases (see e.g. the references in the B;MJ paper). There has been various smaller studies indicating that hormone therapy might be protective for all kinds of dementias, also Alzheimer’s disease.
However, we have quite recently shown that hormone therapy seems to lower the mortality risk of vascular dementia but not Alzheimer’s disease (Mikkola TS et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2017;102:870-7). Now in this upcoming BMJ-paper we report in a very large case-control study (83 688 women with Alzheimer’s disease and same number of control women without the disease) that systemic hormone therapy was associated with a 9-17% increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease.
Furthermore, this risk increase is particularly in women using hormone therapy long, for more than 10 years. This was somewhat surprising finding, but it underlines the fact that mechanisms behind Alzheimer’s disease are likely quite different than in vascular dementia, where the risk factors are similar as in cardiovascular disease. We have also shown how hormone therapy protects against cardiovascular disease, particularly in women who initiate hormone therapy soon after menopause.
Dr. Kuan-Pin Su[/caption]
Kuan-Pin Su, MD, PhD
China Medical University
Taichung, Taiwan
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Delirium, also known as acute confusional state, is a serious disturbance in mental abilities that results in confused thinking and reduced awareness of the environment. Delirium can often be traced to one or more contributing factors, such as a severe or chronic illness, changes in metabolic balance (such as low sodium), medication, infection, surgery, or alcohol or drug intoxication or withdrawal. It’s critically important to identify and treat delirium because some of the contributing factors could be life-threatening. However, there is no sufficient evidence for choice of medication to treat or prevent the symptoms of delirium.
A recent paper, Association of Delirium Response and Safety of Pharmacological Interventions for the Management and Prevention of Delirium A Network Meta-analysis, published in JAMA Psychiatry provides important findings of this missing piece in that important clinical uncertainty. The leading author, Professor Kuan-Pin Su, at the China Medical University in Taichung, Taiwan, concludes the main finding about treatment/prevention of delirium: “In this report, we found that the combination of haloperidol and lorazepam demonstrated the best option for treatment of delirium, while ramelteon for prevention against delirium. 
Dr. Li[/caption]
Fuzhong Li, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Oregon Research Institute
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Injurious falls among community-dwelling older adults are a serious public health and cost-bearing problem worldwide.Exercise has been shown to reduce falls and injurious falls among older adults. However, evidence is limited with regard to the type of exercise interventions that are most effective, without exacerbating the risk in some individuals, in reducing injurious falls.
This study addresses this knowledge gap in the field of falls prevention. Findings from this study showed that a six-month Tai Ji Quan program reduced the incidence of injurious falls among frail elderly by 53% compared to a regular (multimodal) exercise intervention. The effect of the Tai Ji Quan intervention was shown to be robust, and still evident at follow-up examinations six months after the study.
Dr Paul Gentil
Faculty of Physical Education and Dance
Federal University of Goias
Goiania, Brazil
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Although being overweight and/or obese are associated with numerous health risks, the prevalence of both are continuing to increase worldwide. The treatment would include anything that results in an increase in energy expenditure (exercise) or a decrease in energy intake (diet). However, our metabolism seems to adapt to variations in physical activity to maintain total energy expenditure. Although lower-than-expected weight loss is often attributed to incomplete adherence to prescribed interventions, there are other factors that might influence the results, such as, metabolic downregulation.
So, instead of making people spend more calories, maybe we have to think on how to promote metabolic changes in order to overcome these physiological adaptations above-mentioned. In this regard, high intensity training might be particularly interesting as a strategy to promote fat loss. Irrespective the amount of calories spent during training, higher intensity exercise seems to promote many physiological changes that might favor long-term weight loss. For example, previous studies have shown that interval training is able to promote upregulation of important enzymes associated with glycolysis and beta oxidation pathways, which occurs in a greater extent than with moderate intensity continuous exercise.
Our findings suggest that interval training might be an important tool to promote weigh loss. However, I t might be performed adequately and under direct supervision in order to get better results.
Dr. Jeremiah Schuur[/caption]
Jeremiah Schuur, MD, MHS FACEP
Physician-in-chief for emergency medicine at Lifespan and Chair of the department of Emergency Medicine
Brown
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Firearm injury is a leading cause of injury and death in the United States. Many physician groups advocate for evidence-based policies, such as universal background checks, to reduce this morbidity and mortality.
We studied contributions of the 25 largest political action committees (PACs) affiliated with physician professional groups during the 2016 election cycle and found that almost all gave more money to political candidates who voted against universal background checks and were endorsed by the NRA.
These PACs contributed to more than twice as many incumbent US Senate candidates who voted against an amendment to expand firearm background checks than those who voted for the amendment. In the US House of Representatives, the pattern of giving was similar. These PACs gave $2.8 million more to candidates who did not sponsor a bill to expand background checks than to those who did. Finally, these physician PACs were more than twice as likely to contribute to and gave almost $1.5 million dollars more to candidates rated A by the NRA.
