Document Detail

Lipid management in the prevention of stroke: a meta-analysis of fibrates for stroke prevention.
Jump to Full Text
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  23282097     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Fibrates has been extensively used to improve plasma lipid levels and prevent adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, the effect of fibrates on stroke is unclear at the present time. We therefore carried out a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of fibrates on stroke. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists of articles, and proceedings of major meetings to identify studies for our analysis. We included randomized placebo controlled trials which reported the effects of fibrates on stroke. Relative risk (RR) was used to measure the effect of fibrates on the risk of stroke under random effect model. The analysis was further stratified by factors that could affect the treatment effects. RESULTS: Overall, fibrate therapy was not associated with a significant reduction on the risk of stroke (RR, 1.02, 95%CI, 0.90 to 1.16, P = 0.78). In the subgroup analyses, we observed that gemfibrozil therapy showed a beneficial effect on stroke (RR, 0.72, 95%CI, 0.53 to 0.98, P = 0.04). Similarly, fibrate therapy comparing to placebo had no effect on the incidence of fatal stroke. Subgroup analysis suggested that fibrate therapy showed an effect on fatal stroke when the Jadad score more than 3 (RR, 0.41, 95%CI, 0.17 to 1.00, P = 0.049). Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis indicated that fibrate therapy may play a role in fatal stroke (RR, 0.49, 95%CI, 0.26 to 0.93, P = 0.03) for patients with previous diabetes, cardiovascular disease or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicated that fibrate therapy might play an important role in reducing the risk of fatal stroke in patients with previous diabetes, cardiovascular disease or stroke. However, it did not have an effect on the incidence of stroke.
Authors:
Yu-Hao Zhou; Xiao-Fei Ye; Fei-Fei Yu; Xiao Zhang; Ying-Yi Qin; Jian Lu; Jia He
Related Documents :
8548927 - Elastase binding capacity of alpha 2-macroglobulin and its association with glucocortic...
3151067 - Reduced frequency of luteinizing hormone pulses in women with weight loss-related ameno...
22770467 - Age-related changes in speed and accuracy during rapid targeted center of pressure move...
23737897 - Correlation between plasma lipoprotein-associated phospholipase a2 and peripheral arter...
18079307 - Comparison of a norm-based versus criterion-based approach to measuring adhd symptomato...
23824907 - Clinical utility of an intimate partner violence screening tool for female vha patients.
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2013-1-3
Journal Detail:
Title:  BMC neurology     Volume:  13     ISSN:  1471-2377     ISO Abbreviation:  BMC Neurol     Publication Date:  2013 Jan 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2013-1-3     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  100968555     Medline TA:  BMC Neurol     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  1     Citation Subset:  -    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Full Text
Journal Information
Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Neurol
Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Neurol
ISSN: 1471-2377
Publisher: BioMed Central
Article Information
Download PDF
Copyright ©2013 Zhou et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
open-access:
Received Day: 10 Month: 5 Year: 2012
Accepted Day: 25 Month: 12 Year: 2012
collection publication date: Year: 2013
Electronic publication date: Day: 3 Month: 1 Year: 2013
Volume: 13First Page: 1 Last Page: 1
PubMed Id: 23282097
ID: 3554504
Publisher Id: 1471-2377-13-1
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2377-13-1

Lipid management in the prevention of stroke: a meta-analysis of fibrates for stroke prevention
Yu-Hao Zhou1 Email: yuhao860407@yahoo.com.cn
Xiao-Fei Ye1 Email: yexiaofei198378@hotmail.com
Fei-Fei Yu1 Email: yffling@hotmail.com
Xiao Zhang1 Email: simabamboo@163.com
Ying-Yi Qin1 Email: oo.rabbit@hotmail.com
Jian Lu1 Email: lujian419@hotmail.com
Jia He1 Email: hejia63@yahoo.com
1Department of Health Statistics, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, 200433, China

Background

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of premature morbidity and mortality for both men and women worldwide, accounting for 30.9% of global mortality and 10.3% of global burden of disease [1,2]. Over the past few decades, a series of studies have shown a strong correlation between hypertriglyceridemia and cardiovascular disease. Those studies indicated that elevated triglyceride levels as a risk factor of coronary artery disease. In addition, it has been suggested that raised triglycerides in the blood should be lowered as a therapeutic approach to prevent cardiovascular disease [3-7]. However, reduction of the concentrations of triglycerides in the blood has not been shown consistently to be beneficial for stroke [8].

Recently, a meta-analysis [5] revealed that statins could effectively achieve target cholesterol goals and reduce the risk of stroke. However, certain patients intolerant to statins also need stroke prevention. In addition, a high residual risk of coronary and other cardiovascular events persists during the statin therapy. It is necessary to find additional effective preventive therapies. Fibrates has been clearly shown to be effective in elevating HDL cholesterol, lowering triglyceride concentrations, reducing LDL cholesterol and chylomicron remnants [9]. However, inconsistent clinical results have been reported [8,10], and the efficacy of fibrates lowering triglyceride levels in reducing the risk of stroke has not been confirmed by randomized trials.

Although a number of trials indicated that fibrates had limited effect on the event of stroke. VA-HIT study [10] showed that fibrates significantly reduced the risk of stroke. In order to reveal the effect of fibrates on the event of stroke further, data from recent trials is needed to be re-evaluated and combined with former literatures. Therefore, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of pooled data from randomized controlled trials which reported stroke as the endpoint in relation to fibrate therapy.


Methods
Data sources, search strategy, and selection criteria

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and trials of fibrate therapy in English-language literature were eligible for inclusion in our research, regardless of publication status (published, unpublished, in press, or in progress). References of our meta-analysis were identified through searches of Pubmed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, with a date up to Dec 10, 2011. We searched with the following terms “clofibrate”, “bezafibrate”, “gemfibrozil”, “fenofibrate”, “procetofen”, and “randomised controlled trials”. The search was restricted to trials in human beings and published in English. References were also identified by screening the proceedings of annual meeting, bibliographies of publications for potentially relevant trials. We restricted our research to randomized controlled trials, which were less likely to be subject to confounding and bias than observational studies. Studies were eligible for inclusion when they met the following requirements: randomized controlled design; the intervention duration was at least 6 months and follow-up period was more than 12 months; recorded data on the event of stroke. The literature search was undertaken independently by 2 authors (Fei-Fei Yu and Ying-Yi. Qin) with a standardized approach, and any disagreement between these 2 authors was settled by a third author (Yu-Hao. Zhou) until a consensus was reached. This review was conducted and reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) Statement issued in 2009 (Additional file 1) [11].

Data collection and quality assessment

3,279 identified studies were reviewed by 2 authors (Xiao-Fei Ye and Xiao Zhang) independently. Other two investigators (Ying-Yi Qin and Jian Lu) independently checked each full-text trial for eligibility and extracted and tabulated all relevant data with a standard protocol and reviewed by a third investigators (Yu-Hao Zhou). Any discrepancy was settled by group discussion, and then the primary authors (Yu-Hao. Zhou and Jia He) made the final decision. Recorded data variables were shown as follows: first author or study group’s name, publication year, the number of patients enrolled, gender, mean age, pre-existent diseases, percentage of diabetes, total cholesterol, blinding, interventions, control, the duration of follow-up, lifestyle modification, and the event of stroke. Study quality was assessed by the Jadad score [12].

Statistical analysis

We assessed the overall effect of fibrate therapy on the risk of stroke based on all data from the included trials. Outcome was reported by relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the effect of fibrate therapy on the event of stroke. We then performed subgroup analysis by the type of drug (clofibrate, bezafibrate, gemfibrozil, or fenofibrate), mean age (≥60 or <60), triglyceride lowering (≥10% or <10%), pre-exsistent diseases (diabetes, stroke, or other), number of patients (≥1000 or <1000), published years (after 2000 or previous), duration of follow-up (≥60 months or <60 months), baseline total cholesterol (≥6.0 mmol/L or <6.0 mmol/L), total cholesterol lowering (≥5% or <5%), triglyceridemia (≥30% or <30%), or Jadad score (score 4 or 5, less than 4). Furthermore, the effect of between-group triglyceride lowering, and total cholesterol change on stroke incidence was assessed by linear regression model for the logarithmic relative risk of stroke. Although the fixed-effect and random-effect models yielded similar conclusions, we used random-effect model with Mantel-Haenszel statistics in our study. Under this model, we assumed that the true underlying effect varied among included trials due to the different pre-existent diseases, intervention regimens, and the duration of follow-up which were involved in the original trials. Moreover, many investigators also considered the random-effect model to be a more natural choice than the fixed-effect model in medical decision-making contexts [13,14]. Heterogeneity of treatment effects among studies was investigated by scatter plot analysis and the heterogeneity I2 statistic [15]. Egger’s test [16] was used to check for potential publication bias. All P values were reported as two-sided and P values less than 0.05 were regarded as statistically significant for all included studies. SAS software (version 9.1.3) was used for the regression analysis and STATA (version 10.0) was used for the meta-analysis.


Results

We identified 3,279 potential trials from our initial searches and 3,191 were excluded during a preliminary review. Among the 88 trials retrieved for detailed assessment, 78 trials were excluded for lack of data on stroke, polytherapy in either treatment group or control group, or reporting the same population. Our final analysis included 10 randomized controlled trials, which consisted of 37,791 individual patients. Table 1 summarized the baseline characteristics of the included studies and their participants. Design characteristics of included trials were presented in Table 2. The trials compared fibrate therapy with placebo were included in our research. Sample size of the trials ranged from 95 to 10,627, with a mean of 3,779, and the duration of follow-up for patients ranged from 30 to 104 months. 4 of included trials [17-20] evaluated the effect of clofibrates, 2 trials [8,21,22] evaluated the effect of bezafibrate, 2 studies [10,23] evaluated the effect of gemfibrozil, and the remaining 2 studies [24,25] evaluated the effect of fenofibrate. In addition, 9 trials included patients with pre-existing disease: 2 trials [17,18] reported that patients had the history of cerebral or TIA, and the remaining 7 trials [8,10,19,21-25] reported patients had the history of myocardial infarction, diabetes, coronary disease or lower extremity arterial disease. Another trial [20] included participants with high level of cholesterol. The quality of the trials was assessed according to the pre-fixed criteria using the Jadad score. Among the 10 included trials, five trials [8,10,19,24,25] scored 4, one [23] scored 3, two [20,21] scored 2, one [18] scored 1 and the remaining one trial [17] scored 0.

After pooling included trials, we concluded that fibrate therapy had no effect on the risk of stroke (RR, 1.02; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.16). Heterogeneity test for all analysis in Table 3 showed that all P value for heterogeneity were larger than 0.05, and heterogeneity was not statistically significant in the overall analysis and in subgroup analysis. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis also showed that the results were not affected by sequential exclusion of any particular trial.

Six trials [10,17,18,20,23,25] included 20871 individuals and 93 total events of fatal stroke were recorded. There was no evidence to support that fibrate therapy protected against fatal stroke (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.23, Table 3) with homogenity across included studies. Furthermore, we observed that the results were not affected by excluding of any specific trial from the pooled analysis.

Post-intervention total cholesterol lowering was measured in all included studies except one [23]. There was considerable variation in the net and relative reduction of total cholesterol concentration among the included trials, ranging from 3.0% to 19.6% (Table 4). We observed an inverse relation between total cholesterol lowering and incidence of stroke (r = −0.68, p = 0.044). When we stratified the trials by the degree of total cholesterol lowering, the RR in total cholesterol of less than 5% was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.45, P = 0.93), and the RR in total cholesterol of 5% or more was 1.04 (95%, 0.92 to 1.18, P = 0.49). Although we found inverse relation between total cholesterol lowering and incidence of stroke, the results were not affected by subgroup analysis. Similarly, there seemed to be related between total cholesterol lowering and incidence of fatal stroke, triglyceride lowering and incidence of stroke, or fatal stroke. However, the effect of relation was not a statistically significant, and the results were not affected by subgroup analysis.

Subgroup analysis was performed for stroke, and fatal stroke. We observed that gemfibrozil therapy was associated with a statistical significant difference on the risk of stroke (RR, 0.72, 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.98, P = 0.04, Table 3). Furthermore, fibrate therapy might play a role in preventing the event of fatal stroke (RR, 0.41, 95% CI, 0.17 to 1.00, P = 0.049, Table 3), when we included the trials with Jadad score of 4. However, no other significant differences were identified between the effect of fibrate therapy and placebo based on other subset factors.

Egger’s test [16] was used to check potential publication bias. There was no evidence of publication bias for the outcomes of fatal stroke (P value for Egger’s test, 0.34). However, we observed the evidence of publication bias for stroke (P value for Egger’s test, 0.034). Subsequently, we used trim and fill methods [26] and found that the conclusion was not changed after adjusting the publication bias.


Discussion and conclusion

The results of our study indicated that fibrate therapy has no effect on the incidence of stroke, and fatal stroke. Although VA-HIT study [10] has shown that fibrate therapy can significantly reduce the risk of stroke, this significant effect became attenuated or balanced by pooling analysis with other trials.

The inverse relation between the total cholesterol lowering and incidence of stroke indicated that there is causal relationship beween total cholesterol and the risk of stroke. Previous meta-analysis [5] indicated that statins could effectively achieve target cholesterol goals and reduce the risk of the event of stroke, which demonstrated the relation between total cholesterol and the incidence of stroke. Two previous large randomized controlled trials, VA-HIT study [10] and BIP study [8], suggest different conclusions. The VA-HIT study [10] indicated that gemfibrozil therapy significantly reduced the risk of stroke, which was consistent with our study. However, BIP study [8] suggest that although bezafibrate therapy increased the high density lipoprotein (HDL) level and decreased triglyceride level, no effect was observed on the incidence of stroke. Therefore, we carried out a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to explain the possible effect of fibrate therapy on the event of stroke. Our study was based on randomized controlled trials and explored any possible correlation between fibrates therapy and the outcomes of stroke-related disease.

Our main findings are compared with the findings of previous individual randomized controlled trials and support the conclusion made by all included individual trials except for VA-HIT study [10]. No significant difference in the relative risk of stroke, or fatal stroke was reported across a wide background of high-risk participants. In our study, participants with a history of stoke, diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, coronary disease, lower extremity arterial disease, or high levels of cholesterol, were included. However, an unimportant heterogeneity was detected on the risk of stroke or fatal stroke for the included trials. Another important factor that may affect the results is the degree of total cholesterol lowering, although stratified analysis based on the changing of total cholesterol suggested it had no effect on the risk of stroke. However, subgroup analysis indicated that the RR of fibrate therapy on the risk of stroke ranged from 0.93 to 1.15, and fatal stroke ranged from 0.69 to 0.81 when based on baseline total cholesterol level. The reason for the suboptimal effect of fibrate therapy could be that fewer trials reported the data of stroke or fatal stroke events. Furthermore, although the information about degree of total cholesterol lowering was available, few trials reported some specific index, such as the changing of LDL. As a result, we were unable to assess the relationship between the level of reduction in some specific index and the event of stroke, or fatal stroke.

The relationship between serum total cholesterol levels, LDL and stroke were described in previous individual trials [27-30]. Epidemiological studies [31-33] also indicated that low serum level of HDL had the risk of cerebrovascular event. VA-HIT study [10] also supported this conclusion. They illustrated that gemfibrozil increased serum HDL levels by 6%, reduced triglyceride levels by 31%, and the levels of serum LDL remained same. This study indicated that gemfibrozil therapy could effectively reduce the risk of stroke. However, in BIP study [8] bezafibrate therapy increased HDL by 18%, reduced TG by 21%, and LDL by 6.5%, BIP study [8] concluded that fibrate therapy did not have an effect on the incidence of stroke. We noted that the LDL values were higher in BIP study [8] than in VA-HIT study [10], which might play an important role to lessen or counter the effect of fibrate therapy on the risk of stroke.

Although our study demonstrated no significant differences between fibrate therapy and placebo in respect of fatal stroke, when excluded WHO-COOP committee of principal Investigators study [20] and LEADER study [21,22] (two trials specifically included individuals without previous with diabetes, cardiovascular disease or stroke), a sensitivity analysis indicated that fibrates might play a role in fatal stroke (RR, 0.49, 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.93, without evidence of heterogeneity of effect). The reason for this result could be that fibrate therapy resulted in improved serum lipid profiles, which contributed an important role in the reduction of the incidence of recurrent event of stroke.

In our study, subgroup analysis illustrated that gemfibrozil therapy was associated with the reduction of risk of stroke, which was decreased by 28% (RR, 0.72, 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.98). However, these conclusions might be unreliable because only a smaller number of trials [10,21] were included in such subsets. We just gave a relative result by comparing gemfibrozil therapy with placebo and provided a synthetic and comprehensive review.

Our study also has several potential limitations. Firstly, the result was based on published data, while individual patient data and original data were not available, which limited the capacity to fully explore the effects in subgroup analysis. Secondly, although subgroup analysis indicated that fibrate therapy significantly reduced the risk of stroke, or fatal stroke for patients used gemfibrozil, or Jadad score of 4, these results might be variable due to the small number of trials. Furthermore, different baseline characteristic among participants might contribute to the lack of difference revealed in our analysis.

In conclusion, our research suggested that fibrate therapy had no significant effect on stroke, or fatal stroke. Furthermore, our study could help personally appropriate judgments about their own use of fibrate therapy, and provide evidence to prevent the incidence of fatal stroke in patients with cardiovascular disease or previous stroke. Therefore, in future study, it is important to focus on patients with previous stroke or cardiovascular disease for secondary prevention of the event of stroke or recurrent stroke, and to combine other lipid-lowering therapy, such as statins, to provide an optimal therapy to prevent the incidence of stroke. We suggest that the future trials could be improved by the following ways: (i) promising interventions should be tested, including dosage, duration of treatment or combination with influencing factors, through which we might confirm the optimal time of treatment, the optimal dosage and the optimal therapy. (ii) adverse event of trials should be reported in details so that the side-effects of any treatment could be evaluated in future trials.


Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


Authors’ contributions

YHZ and JH participated in the conceptualization and design of the review, performed the selection of studies, data-extraction and -analysis, and drafted the review. YHZ and XFY were involved in the conceptualization and design of the review, and the data analysis. FFY and XZ participated in the selection of studies and data-extraction. YHZ and JL carried out the statistical analysis and interpretation of data. All authors participated in revising the manuscript and the final approval of the manuscript.


Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2377/13/1/prepub


Supplementary Material Additional file 1

PRISMA 2009 Checklist.


Click here for additional data file (1471-2377-13-1-S1.doc)


Acknowledgement

This study was conducted under a grant from the key discipline construction of evidence-based public health in Shanghai (12GWZX0602) and three grants from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (2008ZX10002–018, 2008ZX09312–007,2009ZX09312-025).


References
Williams GR,Jiang JG,Matchar DB,Samsa GP,Incidence and occurrence of total (first-ever and recurrent) strokeStrokeYear: 1999302523252810.1161/01.STR.30.12.252310582972
Yusuf S,Reddy S,Ounpuu S,et al. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases, I: general considerations, the epidemiologic transition, risk factors, and impact of urbanizationCirculationYear: 20011042746275310.1161/hc4601.09948711723030
Frick MH,Syvanne M,Nieminen MS,et al. Prevention of the angiographic progression of coronary and vein-graft atherosclerosis by gemfibrozil after coronary bypass surgery in men with low levels of HDL cholesterolCirculationYear: 1997962137214310.1161/01.CIR.96.7.21379337181
Syvanne M,Nieminen MS,Frick MH,et al. Associations between lipoproteins and the progression of coronary and vein-graft atherosclerosis in a controlled trial with Gemfibrozil in men with low baseline levels of HDL cholesterolCirculationYear: 1998981993199910.1161/01.CIR.98.19.19939808595
Amarenco P,Labreuche J,Lipid management in the prevention of stroke: review and updated meta-analysis of statins for stroke preventionLancet NeurolYear: 2009845346310.1016/S1474-4422(09)70058-419375663
Austin MA,King M-C,Vranizan KM,Krauss RM,Atherogenic lipoprotein phenotype: a proposed genetic marker for coronary heart disease riskCirculationYear: 19908249550610.1161/01.CIR.82.2.4952372896
Frick MH,Elo O,Haapa K,et al. Helsinki Heart Study: primary-prevention trial with gemfibrozil in middle-aged men with dyslipidemia. Safety of treatment, changes in risk factors, and incidence of coronary heart diseaseN Engl J MedYear: 19873171237124510.1056/NEJM1987111231720013313041
The BIP study groupSecondary prevention by raising HDL cholesterol and reducing triglycerides in patients with coronary artery disease. The bezafibrate infarction prevention (BIP) studyCirculationYear: 2000102212710880410
Brunzell JD,HypertriglyceridemiaN Engl J MedYear: 20073571009101710.1056/NEJMcp07006117804845
Rubins HB,Robins SJ,Collins D,et al. Gemfibrozil for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in men with low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterolN Engl J MedYear: 199934141041810.1056/NEJM19990805341060410438259
Moher D,Liberati A,Tetzlaff J,et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis: The PRISMA StatementPlos MedicineYear: 20096
Jadad AR,Moore RA,Carroll D,et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?Control Clin TrialsYear: 19961711210.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-48721797
DerSimonian R,Laird N,Meta-analysis in clinical trialsControl Clin TrialsYear: 1986717718810.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-23802833
Ades AE,Lu G,Higgins JP,The interpretation of random-effects meta-analysis in decision modelsMed Decis MakingYear: 20052564665410.1177/0272989X0528264316282215
Deeks JJ,Higgins JPT,Altman DG,Higgins J, Green SAnalyzing data and undertaking meta-analysesCochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.0.1Year: 2008Oxford, UK: The Cochrane Collaborationchap 9
Egger M,Davey Smith G,Schneider M,Minder C,Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical testBMJYear: 199731562963410.1136/bmj.315.7109.6299310563
Acheson J,Hutchinson EC,Controlled trial of clofibrate in cerebral ascular diseaseAtherosclerosisYear: 19721517718310.1016/0021-9150(72)90067-64579955
The Veterans Administration Cooperative Study GroupThe treatment of cerebrovascular disease with clofibrate. Final report of the veterans administration cooperative study of atherosclerosis, Neurology SectionStrokeYear: 197346846934723698
The Coronary Drug Project Research GroupClofibrate and niacin in coronary heart diseaseJAMAYear: 19752313603811088963
W.H.O Cooperative trial committee of principal investigatorsA co-operative trial in the primary prevention of ischemic heart disease using clofibrate, report from the committee of principal investigatorsBr Heart JYear: 19784010691118361054
Meade TW,Design and intermediate results of the Lower Extremity Arterial Disease Event Reduction (LEADER) trial of bezafibrate in men with lower extremity arterial diseaseCurr Control Trials Cardiovasc MedYear: 2001219520410.1186/CVM-2-4-19511806795
Meade T,Zuhrie R,Cook C,et al. Bezafibrate in men with lower extremity arterial disease: randomised controlled trialBMJYear: 2002325113910.1136/bmj.325.7373.113912433762
Whitney EJ,Krasuski RA,Personius BE,et al. A randomized trial of a strategy for increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels: effects on progression of coronary heart disease and clinical eventsAnn Intern MedYear: 20051429510415657157
The FIELD study investigatorsEffects of long-term fenofibrate therapy on cardiovascular events in 9795 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the FIELD study): randomised controlled trialLancetYear: 20053661849186116310551
The ACCORD Study GroupEffects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitusN Engl J MedYear: 2010362171563157420228404
Duvall S,Tweedie R,A nonparametric “trim and fill” method for assessing publication bias in meta-analysisJ Am Stat AssocYear: 2000958998
Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study GroupRandomized trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the scandinavian simvastatin survival study (4S)LancetYear: 1994344138313897968073
LIPID Study GroupPrevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravaststin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levelsNew Engl J MedYear: 1998339134913579841303
Sacks FM,Pfeffer MA,Moye LA,et al. The effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levelsNew Engl J MedYear: 19963351001100910.1056/NEJM1996100333514018801446
White HD,Simes RJ,Anderson NE,et al. Pravastatin therapy and the risk of strokeNew Engl J MedYear: 200034331732610.1056/NEJM20000803343050210922421
Tanne D,Yaari S,Goldbourt U,High-density lipoprotein cholesterol and risk of ischaemic stroke mortalityStrokeYear: 199728838710.1161/01.STR.28.1.838996494
Lindenstrom E,Boysen G,Nyboe J,Influence of total cholesterol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides on risk of cerebrovascular disease: the Copenhagen city heart studyBr Med JYear: 1994309111510.1136/bmj.309.6946.118044059
Prospective studies collaborationCholesterol, diastolic blood pressure and stroke: 13,000 strokes in 45,0000 people in 45 prospective cohortsLancetYear: 1995346164716538551820

Tables
[TableWrap ID: T1] Table 1 

Baseline characteristic of trials participants


Source No. of patients Gender (male) Mean age, y Pre-existent diseases Diabetes Total cholesterol (mmol/L)
BIP study [8] (2000)
3090
2825 (91%)
60
MI more than 6 month, and less than 5 year and/or stable angina
10%
5.5
VA-HIT study [10] (1999)
2531
2531 (100%)
64
Histories of CHD
25%
4.5
Acheson J [17] (1972)
95
65 (68%)
NR
Cerebral vascular disease
Excluded severe diabetics
7.5
Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group [18] (1973)
532
532 (100%)
NR
cerebral I or TIA within 12 month
24%
6.2
Coronary Drug Project Research Group [19] (1975)
3892
3892 (100%)
NR
MI more than 3 month
NR
6.5
WHO-COOP committee of principal Investigators [20] (1978)
10627
10627 (100%)
46
Upper third level of cholesterol from 15 745 healthy men
0%
6.4
LEADER study [21,22] (2002)
1568
1568 (100%)
68
lower extremity arterial disease
66%
5.6
E J Whitney [23] (2005)
9795
6138 (63%)
62
Type 2 diabetes mellitus
100%
5.0
FIELD study [24] (2005)
143
132 (92%)
63
Low HDL-C and coronary disease
NR
5.1
The ACCORD Study Group [25] (2010) 5518 3824 (69%) 62 Type 2 diabetes mellitus 100% 5.0

[TableWrap ID: T2] Table 2 

Design of trials included in the systematic review and meta-analysis


Source Blinding Intervention Control Follow-up (month) Lifestyle intervention Jadad score
BIP study [8] (2000)
Double
Bezafibrate 400 mg daily
Placebo
74.4
Yes
4
VA-HIT study [10] (1999)
Double
Gemfibrozil 1200 mg daily
Placebo
36–60
Yes
4
Acheson J [17] (1972)
Open
Clofibrate 1–2 g daily
Corn oil then placebo
104 in treatment group 91 in placebo group
NR
0
Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group [18] (1973)
Double
Clofibrate 2 g daily
Placebo
54
NR
1
Coronary Drug Project Research Group [19] (1975)
Double
Clofibrate 1.8 g daily
Placebo
74.4
NR
4
WHO-COOP committee of principal Investigators [20] (1978)
Double
Clofibrate 1.6 g daily
Olive oil Placebo
63.6
Yes
2
LEADER study [21,22] (2002)
Double
Bezafibrate 400 mg daily
Placebo
55.2
NR
2
E J Whitney [23] (2005)
Double
Gemfibrozil 600 mg daily
Placebo
30
Yes
3
FIELD study [24] (2005)
Double
Fenofibrate 200 mg daily
Placebo
60
Yes
4
The ACCORD Study Group [25] (2010) Double Fenofibrate 160 mg daily Placebo 56.4 Yes 4

[TableWrap ID: T3] Table 3 

Subgroup analysis for the effect of fibrates therapy on stoke, and fatal stroke


 
Group
Stroke event/total patients
Relative risk (RR)
P value
Heterogeneity
P value for heterogeneity
    Fibrates Placebo        
stroke
Published years
 
after 2000
341/10062
351/10052
0.97 (0.84 to 1.13)
0.72
0%
0.51
 
before 2000
292/8013
471/9664
1.06 (0.84 to 1.33)
0.63
52%
0.08
 
Number of patients
 
≥1000
573/17689
775/19332
0.99 (0.87, 1.12)
0.85
23%
0.26
 
<1000
60/386
47/384
1.23 (0.80, 1.90)
0.34
30%
0.24
 
Mean age
 
<60
32/5331
27/5296
1.18 (0.71 to 1.96)
0.53
-
-
 
≥60
405/11326
439/11319
0.93 (0.80 to 1.08)
0.34
17%
0.30
 
Gender
 
male
329/8749
498/10401
1.09 (0.86 to 1.38)
0.47
56%
0.06
 
Male/female
304/9326
324/9315
0.95 (0.82 to 1.10)
0.48
0%
0.77
 
Drug
 
clofibrate
228/6749
383/8397
1.15 (0.98 to 1.34)
0.08
0%
0.59
 
bezafibrate
132/2331
126/2327
1.05 (0.80 to 1.38)
0.37
21%
0.26
 
gemfibrozil
64/1335
90/1339
0.72 (0.53 to 0.98)
0.04
0%
0.41
 
fenofibrate
209/7660
223/7653
0.94 (0.78 to 1.13)
0.49
0%
0.49
 
Control
 
corn or olive oil
55/5378
49/5344
1.11 (0.80 to 1.54)
0.53
0%
0.76
 
placebo
572/12697
761/14372
1.02 (0.88 to 1.17)
0.83
32%
0.17
 
Follow-up
 
≥60 months
421/12924
612/14575
1.01 (0.90 to 1.14)
0.85
0%
0.62
 
<60 months
212/5151
210/5141
1.05 (0.76 to 1.46)
0.75
59%
0.05
 
Total cholesterol
 
≥6.0 mmol/L
228/6749
383/8397
1.15 (0.98 to 1.34)
0.08
0%
0.59
 
<6.0 mmol/L
405/11326
439/11319
0.93 (0.80 to 1.08)
0.34
17%
0.30
 
Total cholesterol lowering
 
≥5%
409/12230
586/13890
1.04 (0.92 to 1.18)
0.49
0%
0.51
 
<5%
173/3080
188/3073
0.98 (0.67 to 1.45)
0.93
71%
0.03
 
Triglyceride lowering
 
≥30%
101/1603
113/1603
0.96 (0.46 to 1.99)
0.92
74%
0.02
 
<30%
477/11094
660/12769
1.02 (0.91 to 1.15)
0.69
0%
0.51
 
Pre-exsistent diseases
 
stroke
60/315
45/312
1.28 (0.86 to 1.90)
0.23
35%
0.22
 
diabetes
209/7660
223/7653
0.94 (0.78 to 1.13)
0.49
0%
0.49
 
other
364/10100
554/11751
1.00 (0.83 to 1.20)
0.99
36%
0.16
 
Jadad score
 
4
481/11575
699/13251
0.95 (0.82 to 1.09)
0.48
30%
0.22
 
<4
152/6500
123/6465
1.22 (0.98 to 1.52)
0.07
0%
0.58
 
Overall
633/18075
822/19716
1.02 (0.90 to 1.16)
0.78
27%
0.20
Fatal stroke
Published years
 
after 2000
17/3548
17/3538
0.93 (0.33 to 2.60)
0.89
51%
0.15
 
before 2000
24/6910
35/6875
0.70 (0.41 to 1.19)
0.18
0%
0.47
 
Number of patients
 
≥1000
34/10143
40/10101
0.82 (0.45 to 1.48)
0.51
32%
0.22
 
<1000
7/315
12/312
0.59 (0.23 to 1.47)
0.26
0%
0.59
 
Mean age
 
<60
14/5331
14/5296
0.99 (0.47 to 2.08)
0.99
-
-
 
≥60
20/4812
26/4805
0.69 (0.27 to 1.75)
0.44
53%
0.12
 
Gender
 
male
35/7646
39/7612
0.89 (0.53 to 1.51)
0.67
19%
0.30
 
Male/female
6/2812
13/2801
0.46 (0.18 to 1.21)
0.12
0%
0.85
 
Drug
 
clofibrate
21/5646
26/5608
0.81 (0.45 to 1.44)
0.47
0%
0.59
 
bezafibrate
13/783
9/785
1.45 (0.62 to 3.37)
0.39
-
-
 
gemfibrozil
3/1264
9/1267
0.33 (0.09 to 1.23)
0.10
-
-
 
fenofibrate
4/2765
8/2753
0.50 (0.15 to 1.65)
0.25
-
-
 
Control
 
corn or olive oil
16/5378
19/5344
0.85 (0.43 to 1.66)
0.63
0%
0.32
 
placebo
25/5151
33/5141
0.73 (0.38 to 1.40)
0.34
30%
0.23
 
Follow-up
 
≥60 months
16/5378
19/5344
0.85 (0.43 to 1.66)
0.63
0%
0.32
 
<60 months
25/5080
33/5069
0.73 (0.38 to 1.40)
0.34
30%
0.23
 
Total cholesterol
 
≥6.0 mmol/L
21/5646
26/5608
0.81 (0.45 to 1.44)
0.47
0%
0.59
 
<6.0 mmol/L
20/4812
26/4805
0.69 (0.27 to 1.75)
0.44
53%
0.12
 
Total cholesterol lowering
 
≥5%
29/6161
28/6129
1.04 (0.62 to 1.76)
0.87
0%
0.38
 
<5%
8/1532
16/1531
0.51 (0.22 to 1.20)
0.12
0%
0.40
 
Triglyceride lowering
 
≥30%
8/1532
16/1531
0.51 (0.22 to 1.20)
0.12
0%
0.40
 
<30%
17/3548
17/3538
0.93 (0.33 to 2.60)
0.89
51%
0.15
 
Pre-exsistent diseases
 
stroke
7/315
12/312
0.59 (0.23 to 1.47)
0.26
0%
0.59
 
diabetes
4/2765
8/2753
0.50 (0.15 to 1.65)
0.25
-
-
 
other
30/7378
32/7348
0.91 (0.45 to 1.83)
0.78
42%
0.18
 
Jadad score
 
4
7/4029
17/4020
0.41 (0.17 to 1.00)
0.05
0%
0.66
 
<4
34/6429
35/6393
0.97 (0.60 to 1.57)
0.91
0%
0.51
  Overall 41/10458 52/10413 0.79 (0.51 to 1.23) 0.30 6% 0.38

[TableWrap ID: T4] Table 4 

Relative risk of stroke and change in total cholesterol and triglyceride concentration between fibrates and placebo therapy


Source Triglyceride lowering Total cholesterol lowering Relative risk (RR) and 95% CI for stroke Relative risk (RR) and 95% CI for fatal stroke
BIP study [8] (2000)
11.0%
3.0%
0.93 (0.68, 1.27)
-
VA-HIT study [10] (1999)
31.0%
4.0%
0.73 (0.53, 1.00)
0.33 (0.09, 1.23)
Acheson J [17] (1972)
NR
6.4%
1.07 (0.70, 1.63)
0.41 (0.08, 2.00)
Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group [18] (1973)
33.2%
3.7%
1.58 (0.97, 2.59)
0.70 (0.23, 2.19)
Coronary Drug Project Research Group [19] (1975)
22.3%
6.5%
1.11 (0.92, 1.34)
-
WHO-COOP committee of principal Investigators [20] (1978)
NR
9.0%
1.18 (0.71, 1.96)
0.99 (0.47, 2.08)
LEADER study [21,22] (2002)
23.4%
8.1%
1.23 (0.85, 1.77)
1.45 (0.62, 3.37)
E J Whitney [23] (2005)
21.5%
6.8%
0.90 (0.73, 1.12)
-
FIELD study [24] (2005)
49.8%
19.6%
0.20 (0.01, 4.15)
-
The ACCORD Study Group [25] (2010) 15.6% NR 1.06 (0.72, 1.56) 0.50 (0.15, 1.65)


Article Categories:
  • Research Article

Keywords: Fibrates, Stroke, Meta-analysis.

Previous Document:  Potential metabolic mechanism of girls' central precocious puberty: a network analysis on urine meta...
Next Document:  Prediction of nuclear proteins using nuclear translocation signals proposed by probabilistic latent ...