|New and Improved! EvidenceAlerts has been re-designed to optimize function on all media devices. Content, alerting and search functions remain the same, but appearance on tablets and smart phones has been enhanced. Feedback most welcome!|
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.
|Family Medicine (FM)/General Practice (GP)|
|General Internal Medicine-Primary Care(US)|
Unexpected in some ways and disappointing findings.
As a general cardiologist, I find most of the practitioners know about these study results in terms of approach to such patient population included in the current study. The impact of omega-3 CA has little in terms of the reduction in MACE rates.
No use found for omega-3 fatty acids in most studies, and this study reconfirms it.
This is definitely something we see all the time in primary care. Primary care physicians won`t know this unless they read this paper, although they may not be surprised at the result.
Looks adequately powered to say that, once on a statin, this preparation doesn't add much. Why icosapent seems different, I would leave to others to surmise.
Relevant article for cardiologists and internists about the effect of high-dose Omega-3 fatty acids on MACE in patients at high cardiovascular risk. This is useful for clinical practice.
I wonder who sponsored this study?