S

Steven E. Nissen

Cleveland Clinic

Publishes on Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health, Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics, Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics. 196 papers and 22.4k citations.

196Publications
22.4kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Effect of Intensive Compared With Moderate Lipid-Lowering Therapy on Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis
Cited by 2.4k

CONTEXT: Statin drugs reduce both atherogenic lipoproteins and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, the optimal strategy and target level for lipid reduction remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of regimens designed to produce intensive lipid lowering or moderate lipid lowering on coronary artery atheroma burden and progression. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Double-blind, randomized active control multicenter trial (Reversal of Atherosclerosis with Aggressive Lipid Lowering [REVERSAL]) performed at 34 community and tertiary care centers in the United States comparing the effects of 2 different statins administered for 18 months. Intravascular ultrasound was used to measure progression of atherosclerosis. Between June 1999 and September 2001, 654 patients were randomized and received study drug; 502 had evaluable intravascular ultrasound examinations at baseline and after 18 months of treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive a moderate lipid-lowering regimen consisting of 40 mg of pravastatin or an intensive lipid-lowering regimen consisting of 80 mg of atorvastatin. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy parameter was the percentage change in atheroma volume (follow-up minus baseline). RESULTS: Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level (mean, 150.2 mg/dL [3.89 mmol/L] in both treatment groups) was reduced to 110 mg/dL (2.85 mmol/L) in the pravastatin group and to 79 mg/dL (2.05 mmol/L) in the atorvastatin group (P<.001). C-reactive protein decreased 5.2% with pravastatin and 36.4% with atorvastatin (P<.001). The primary end point (percentage change in atheroma volume) showed a significantly lower progression rate in the atorvastatin (intensive) group (P =.02). Similar differences between groups were observed for secondary efficacy parameters, including change in total atheroma volume (P =.02), change in percentage atheroma volume (P<.001), and change in atheroma volume in the most severely diseased 10-mm vessel subsegment (P<.01). For the primary end point, progression of coronary atherosclerosis occurred in the pravastatin group (2.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2% to 4.7%; P =.001) compared with baseline. Progression did not occur in the atorvastatin group (-0.4%; CI -2.4% to 1.5%; P =.98) compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with coronary heart disease, intensive lipid-lowering treatment with atorvastatin reduced progression of coronary atherosclerosis compared with pravastatin. Compared with baseline values, patients treated with atorvastatin had no change in atheroma burden, whereas patients treated with pravastatin showed progression of coronary atherosclerosis. These differences may be related to the greater reduction in atherogenic lipoproteins and C- reactive protein in patients treated with atorvastatin.

Effect of Very High-Intensity Statin Therapy on Regression of Coronary Atherosclerosis
Cited by 2k

CONTEXT: Prior intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) trials have demonstrated slowing or halting of atherosclerosis progression with statin therapy but have not shown convincing evidence of regression using percent atheroma volume (PAV), the most rigorous IVUS measure of disease progression and regression. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether very intensive statin therapy could regress coronary atherosclerosis as determined by IVUS imaging. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective, open-label blinded end-points trial (A Study to Evaluate the Effect of Rosuvastatin on Intravascular Ultrasound-Derived Coronary Atheroma Burden [ASTEROID]) was performed at 53 community and tertiary care centers in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia. A motorized IVUS pullback was used to assess coronary atheroma burden at baseline and after 24 months of treatment. Each pair of baseline and follow-up IVUS assessments was analyzed in a blinded fashion. PATIENTS: Between November 2002 and October 2003, 507 patients had a baseline IVUS examination and received at least 1 dose of study drug. After 24 months, 349 patients had evaluable serial IVUS examinations. INTERVENTION: All patients received intensive statin therapy with rosuvastatin, 40 mg/d. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two primary efficacy parameters were prespecified: the change in PAV and the change in nominal atheroma volume in the 10-mm subsegment with the greatest disease severity at baseline. A secondary efficacy variable, change in normalized total atheroma volume for the entire artery, was also prespecified. RESULTS: The mean (SD) baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level of 130.4 (34.3) mg/dL declined to 60.8 (20.0) mg/dL, a mean reduction of 53.2% (P<.001). Mean (SD) high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) level at baseline was 43.1 (11.1) mg/dL, increasing to 49.0 (12.6) mg/dL, an increase of 14.7% (P<.001). The mean (SD) change in PAV for the entire vessel was -0.98% (3.15%), with a median of -0.79% (97.5% CI, -1.21% to -0.53%) (P<.001 vs baseline). The mean (SD) change in atheroma volume in the most diseased 10-mm subsegment was -6.1 (10.1) mm3, with a median of -5.6 mm3 (97.5% CI, -6.8 to -4.0 mm3) (P<.001 vs baseline). Change in total atheroma volume showed a 6.8% median reduction; with a mean (SD) reduction of -14.7 (25.7) mm3, with a median of -12.5 mm3 (95% CI, -15.1 to -10.5 mm3) (P<.001 vs baseline). Adverse events were infrequent and similar to other statin trials. CONCLUSIONS: Very high-intensity statin therapy using rosuvastatin 40 mg/d achieved an average LDL-C of 60.8 mg/dL and increased HDL-C by 14.7%, resulting in significant regression of atherosclerosis for all 3 prespecified IVUS measures of disease burden. Treatment to LDL-C levels below currently accepted guidelines, when accompanied by significant HDL-C increases, can regress atherosclerosis in coronary disease patients. Further studies are needed to determine the effect of the observed changes on clinical outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00240318.

Effect of Evolocumab on Progression of Coronary Disease in Statin-Treated Patients
Cited by 1.1kOpen Access

Importance: Reducing levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) with intensive statin therapy reduces progression of coronary atherosclerosis in proportion to achieved LDL-C levels. Proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors produce incremental LDL-C lowering in statin-treated patients; however, the effects of these drugs on coronary atherosclerosis have not been evaluated. Objective: To determine the effects of PCSK9 inhibition with evolocumab on progression of coronary atherosclerosis in statin-treated patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: The GLAGOV multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial (enrollment May 3, 2013, to January 12, 2015) conducted at 197 academic and community hospitals in North America, Europe, South America, Asia, Australia, and South Africa and enrolling 968 patients presenting for coronary angiography. Interventions: Participants with angiographic coronary disease were randomized to receive monthly evolocumab (420 mg) (n = 484) or placebo (n = 484) via subcutaneous injection for 76 weeks, in addition to statins. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy measure was the nominal change in percent atheroma volume (PAV) from baseline to week 78, measured by serial intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) imaging. Secondary efficacy measures were nominal change in normalized total atheroma volume (TAV) and percentage of patients demonstrating plaque regression. Safety and tolerability were also evaluated. Results: Among the 968 treated patients (mean age, 59.8 years [SD, 9.2]; 269 [27.8%] women; mean LDL-C level, 92.5 mg/dL [SD, 27.2]), 846 had evaluable imaging at follow-up. Compared with placebo, the evolocumab group achieved lower mean, time-weighted LDL-C levels (93.0 vs 36.6 mg/dL; difference, -56.5 mg/dL [95% CI, -59.7 to -53.4]; P < .001). The primary efficacy parameter, PAV, increased 0.05% with placebo and decreased 0.95% with evolocumab (difference, -1.0% [95% CI, -1.8% to -0.64%]; P < .001). The secondary efficacy parameter, normalized TAV, decreased 0.9 mm3 with placebo and 5.8 mm3 with evolocumab (difference, -4.9 mm3 [95% CI, -7.3 to -2.5]; P < .001). Evolocumab induced plaque regression in a greater percentage of patients than placebo (64.3% vs 47.3%; difference, 17.0% [95% CI, 10.4% to 23.6%]; P < .001 for PAV and 61.5% vs 48.9%; difference, 12.5% [95% CI, 5.9% to 19.2%]; P < .001 for TAV). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with angiographic coronary disease treated with statins, addition of evolocumab, compared with placebo, resulted in a greater decrease in PAV after 76 weeks of treatment. Further studies are needed to assess the effects of PCSK9 inhibition on clinical outcomes. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01813422.

Effect of High-Dose Omega-3 Fatty Acids vs Corn Oil on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients at High Cardiovascular Risk
Cited by 976Open Access

Importance: It remains uncertain whether the omega-3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) reduce cardiovascular risk. Objective: To determine the effects on cardiovascular outcomes of a carboxylic acid formulation of EPA and DHA (omega-3 CA) with documented favorable effects on lipid and inflammatory markers in patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia and high cardiovascular risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial (enrollment October 30, 2014, to June 14, 2017; study termination January 8, 2020; last patient visit May 14, 2020) comparing omega-3 CA with corn oil in statin-treated participants with high cardiovascular risk, hypertriglyceridemia, and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). A total of 13 078 patients were randomized at 675 academic and community hospitals in 22 countries in North America, Europe, South America, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive 4 g/d of omega-3 CA (n = 6539) or corn oil, which was intended to serve as an inert comparator (n = 6539), in addition to usual background therapies, including statins. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy measure was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization. Results: When 1384 patients had experienced a primary end point event (of a planned 1600 events), the trial was prematurely halted based on an interim analysis that indicated a low probability of clinical benefit of omega-3 CA vs the corn oil comparator. Among the 13 078 treated patients (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [9.0] years; 35% women; 70% with diabetes; median low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol level, 75.0 mg/dL; median triglycerides level, 240 mg/dL; median HDL-C level, 36 mg/dL; and median high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level, 2.1 mg/L), 12 633 (96.6%) completed the trial with ascertainment of primary end point status. The primary end point occurred in 785 patients (12.0%) treated with omega-3 CA vs 795 (12.2%) treated with corn oil (hazard ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90-1.09]; P = .84). A greater rate of gastrointestinal adverse events was observed in the omega-3 CA group (24.7%) compared with corn oil-treated patients (14.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among statin-treated patients at high cardiovascular risk, the addition of omega-3 CA, compared with corn oil, to usual background therapies resulted in no significant difference in a composite outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events. These findings do not support use of this omega-3 fatty acid formulation to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02104817.

Effect of Torcetrapib on the Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis
Steven E. Nissen, Jean‐Claude Tardif, Stephen J. Nicholls et al.|New England Journal of Medicine|2007
Cited by 964Open Access

BACKGROUND: Levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol are inversely related to cardiovascular risk. Torcetrapib, a cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitor, increases HDL cholesterol levels, but the functional effects associated with this mechanism remain uncertain. METHODS: A total of 1188 patients with coronary disease underwent intravascular ultrasonography. After treatment with atorvastatin to reduce levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol to less than 100 mg per deciliter (2.59 mmol per liter), patients were randomly assigned to receive either atorvastatin monotherapy or atorvastatin plus 60 mg of torcetrapib daily. After 24 months, disease progression was measured by repeated intravascular ultrasonography in 910 patients (77%). RESULTS: After 24 months, as compared with atorvastatin monotherapy, the effect of torcetrapib-atorvastatin therapy was an approximate 61% relative increase in HDL cholesterol and a 20% relative decrease in LDL cholesterol, reaching a ratio of LDL cholesterol to HDL cholesterol of less than 1.0. Torcetrapib was also associated with an increase in systolic blood pressure of 4.6 mm Hg. The percent atheroma volume (the primary efficacy measure) increased by 0.19% in the atorvastatin-only group and by 0.12% in the torcetrapib-atorvastatin group (P=0.72). A secondary measure, the change in normalized atheroma volume, showed a small favorable effect for torcetrapib (P=0.02), but there was no significant difference in the change in atheroma volume for the most diseased vessel segment. CONCLUSIONS: The CETP inhibitor torcetrapib was associated with a substantial increase in HDL cholesterol and decrease in LDL cholesterol. It was also associated with an increase in blood pressure, and there was no significant decrease in the progression of coronary atherosclerosis. The lack of efficacy may be related to the mechanism of action of this drug class or to molecule-specific adverse effects. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00134173 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).