• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Fish Oil Sinks Coronary Event Rates...


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 30 March 2007 - 06:23 PM


Link to Source: MedPage Today

Posted Image

Fish Oil Sinks Coronary Event Rates When Added to Statins

By Neil Osterweil, Senior Associate Editor, MedPage Today

Reviewed by Zalman S. Agus, MD; Emeritus Professor at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.
March 30, 2007


MedPage Today Action Points

o Explain to patients who ask that diets rich in fish oil, specifically the omega-3 fatty acid eicosapentaenoic acid, or EPA, have been shown in several studies to significantly reduce the occurrence of major coronary events, primarily sudden death.

o Explain that this study suggested that adding fish-oil supplements to patients who already eat fish-heavy diets and who take statins can enhance the purported protection for patients with coronary artery disease.


Review

KOBE, Japan, March 30 -- Fish-oil supplements added to statin therapy can further reduce the risk of major coronary events, even among patients who already eat a diet heavy in fish, investigators here reported.

Among more than 18,000 patients with hypercholesterolemia and a history of coronary artery disease, the addition to statins of eicosapentaenoic acid, a long-chain-n-3 fatty acid in fish oil, reduced the occurrence of major coronary events by 19% over statins alone, reported Mitsuhiro Yokoyama, M.D., from Kobe University here, and colleagues.

Eicosapentaenoic acid, (EPA) was associated with significant reductions in unstable angina and non-fatal coronary events, but there were no differences in either sudden cardiac death or coronary death, the investigators in the Japan EPA Lipid Intervention Study (JELIS).wrote in the March 31 issue of The Lancet.

In an accompanying editorial, Dariush Mozaffarian, M.D., Dr.P.H., of the Harvard School of Public Health commented that the findings lack the flash of clinical trial results on blockbuster drugs, but they show that a low-risk and inexpensive intervention could have a major effect on health

"We must curb our infatuation with downstream risk factors and treatments, and focus on the fundamental risk factors for cardiovascular disease: dietary habits, smoking, and physical activity," he wrote. "If the millions of heart attacks occurring each year were not a clarion call, the obesity epidemic certainly should be. The JELIS investigators should be commended, and their efforts should inspire additional clinical trials of the effects of fish oil and other dietary factors and habits on cardiovascular health."

The JELIS investigators recruited 18,645 patients from 1996 to 1999, with a total cholesterol of 6.5 mmol/L (253 mg/dL) or greater. The patients were randomly assigned to 1,800 mg of EPA daily with a statin (9,326 patients) or statin therapy alone (9,319).

EPA was given at a dose of 600 mg, three times a day after meals (to a total of 1,800 mg per day). Statin therapy was initiated with either 10 mg of pravastatin (Pravachol) or 5 mg of simvastatin (Zocor) once daily as first-line treatment. For patients with uncontrolled hypercholesterolemia, the daily dose could be increased to 20 mg of pravastatin or 10 mg of simvastatin.

The primary endpoint was any major coronary event, including sudden cardiac death, fatal and non-fatal MI, and other nonfatal events, including unstable angina, angioplasty, stenting, or coronary artery bypass graft. Follow-up was for five years, with analysis by intention-to-treat.

The authors found that at the mean follow-up of 4.6 years, 2.8% of patients in the EPA group (262 patients) and 3.5% of controls (324 patients) had a major coronary event. This difference translated into a 19% relative reduction in the primary endpoint for the EPA group (P=0.011).

In both groups, LDL concentrations decreased by 25%, from a mean of 4.7 mmol/L (183 mg/dL) at baseline, and total cholesterol declined by 19%.

The omega-3 fatty acid was also associated with a significant reduction of 24% in the frequency of unstable angina, although there were no significant differences in the rate of either coronary death or myocardial infarction between the groups.

"The frequency of fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction was not significantly reduced (23%) in the EPA group," the authors wrote. "However, that of non-fatal coronary events (including non-fatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina, and events of angioplasty, stenting, or coronary artery bypass grafting) was significantly lower (19%) in the EPA group than in controls."

Yet in a subgroup of patients with coronary artery disease who had already suffered a major coronary event (secondary prevention group), EPA treatment was associated with a significant 19% reduction in total major coronary events, and a 28% reduction in the incidence of unstable angina.

That the authors did not see an effect of EPA on mortality is not surprising, Dr. Mozaffarian commented.

"In Japan, average fish consumption is one serving of 85 g (3 oz; 900 mg EPA and DHA) per day, and 90% of individuals eat fish at least once a week," he wrote. "Thus, most of the population is already above the threshold for preventing cardiac death. In any such population, one would expect low baseline rates of cardiac death, and little further reduction in cardiac death with additional fish-oil consumption."

He also noted that the reduction in non-fatal events was consistent with findings of observational studies of Japanese populations and some U.S populations with high levels of fish consumption.

The investigators wrote that their study was limited by an open, unblinded design, and by the use of pravastatin or simvastatin as first-line agents (because they were the only statins available in Japan at study outset). In addition, the trial was underpowered for analysis of subgroups, because of the low incidence of coronary artery disease in the Japanese population.

The study was supported by grants from Mochida Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd, Tokyo, maker of the eicosapentaenoic acid capsules used in the study. Dr. Yokoyama received travel expenses from the company to present partial results of the study at the 2005 annual meeting of the American Heart Association.

Primary source: The Lancet
Source reference:
Yokoyama M et al. "Effects of eicosapentaenoic acid on major coronary events in hypercholesterolemic patients (JELIS): a randomized open-label, blinded endpoint analysis." Lancet 2007; 369: 1090-98.

Additional source: The Lancet
Source reference:
Mozaffarian D. "JELIS, fish oil, and cardiac events." Lancet 2007; 369: 1062-63.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer
The information presented in this activity is that of the authors and does not necessarily represent the views of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, MedPage Today, and the commercial supporter. Specific medicines discussed in this activity may not yet be approved by the FDA for the use as indicated by the writer or reviewer. Before prescribing any medication, we advise you to review the complete prescribing information, including indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions, and adverse effects. Specific patient care decisions are the responsibility of the healthcare professional caring for the patient. Please review our Terms of Use.


© 2004-2007 MedPage Today, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

#2 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 31 March 2007 - 03:30 AM

"The frequency of fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction was not significantly reduced (23%) in the EPA group," the authors wrote. "However, that of non-fatal coronary events (including non-fatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina, and events of angioplasty, stenting, or coronary artery bypass grafting) was significantly lower (19%) in the EPA group than in controls."

Am I the only one who finds this confusing? 23% is not significant, but 19% is?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for SUPPLEMENTS (in thread) to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 wayside

  • Guest
  • 344 posts
  • -1

Posted 31 March 2007 - 01:26 PM

It probably means "was not significantly reduced compared with the group taking statins", IOW both groups had somewhere around a 23% reduction.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users