Skip to main content
An Inclisiran First Strategy vs Usual Care in Patients with Atherosclerosis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology Koren, M. J., Rodriguez, F., East, C., Toth, P. P., Watwe, V., Abbas, C. A., Sarwat, S., Kleeman, K., Kumar, B., Ali, Y., Jaffrani, N. 2024

Abstract

Most patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) fail to achieve guideline-directed low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals. Twice-yearly inclisiran lowers LDL-C by ~50% when added to statins.To evaluate the effectiveness of an "inclisiran first" implementation strategy (adding inclisiran immediately upon failure to reach LDL-C <70 mg/dL despite receiving maximally tolerated statins) versus representative usual care in US patients with ASCVD.VICTORION-INITIATE, a prospective, pragmatically designed trial, randomized patients 1:1 to inclisiran (284 mg at Days 0, 90, and 270) plus usual care (lipid management at treating physician's discretion) versus usual care alone. Primary endpoints were percentage change in LDL-C from baseline and statin discontinuation rates.We randomized 450 patients (30.9% female, 12.4% Black, 15.3% Hispanic); mean baseline LDL-C 97.4 mg/dL. The "inclisiran first" strategy led to significantly greater reductions in LDL-C from baseline to Day 330 versus usual care (60.0% vs 7.0%; p<0.001). Statin discontinuation rates with "inclisiran first" (6.0%) were noninferior versus usual care (16.7%). More "inclisiran first" patients achieved LDL-C goals vs usual care (<70 mg/dL: 81.8% vs 22.2%; <55 mg/dL: 71.6% vs 8.9%; p<0.001). Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and serious TEAE rates compared similarly between treatment strategies (62.8% vs 53.7% and 11.5% vs 13.4%, respectively). Injection-site TEAEs and TEAEs causing treatment withdrawal occurred more commonly with "inclisiran first" than usual care (10.3% vs 0.0%, and 2.6% vs 0.5%, respectively).An "inclisiran first" implementation strategy led to greater LDL-C lowering compared with usual care without discouraging statin use or raising new safety concerns.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2024.03.382

View details for PubMedID 38593947