Serious adverse effects of extended-release niacin/laropiprant: results from the Heart Protection Study 2-Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events (HPS2-THRIVE) Trial

Purpose The Heart Protection Study 2–Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events (HPS2-THRIVE) trial of patients at high risk of vascular disease found that adding extended-release niacin-laropiprant to intensive statin-based LDL-lowering therapy had no benefit on cardiovascular outcomes. However, the trial also identified previously unrecognized serious adverse effects (including new-onset diabetes, bleeding, and infection). Our objective was to explore the safety profile of niacin-laropiprant and examine whether any patients were at lower (or higher) risk of its adverse effects. Methods HPS2-THRIVE was a randomized, double-blind trial of niacin-laropiprant (2000/40 mg/d) versus placebo among 25,673 patients at high risk of vascular disease. Information on all serious adverse events was collected during a median of 3.9 years of study treatment. Effects of niacin-laropiprant on new-onset diabetes, disturbances of diabetes control, bleeding, infection, and gastrointestinal upset were estimated by (1) time after randomization, (2) severity, (3) baseline characteristics, (4) baseline risk of the adverse event of interest, and (5) risk of major vascular event. Findings The hazard ratio (HR) for new-onset diabetes with niacin/laropiprant was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.16–1.51; P < .001), which corresponded to an absolute excess of 4 people (95% CI, 2–6) developing diabetes per 1000 person-years in the study population as a whole. Among the 8299 participants with diabetes at baseline, the HR for serious disturbances in diabetes control was 1.56 (95% CI, 1.35–1.80), corresponding to an absolute excess of 12 (95% CI, 8–16) per 1000 person-years. The HR was 1.38 (95% CI, 1.17–1.63; P < .001) for serious bleeding, corresponding to an absolute excess of 2 (95% CI, 1–3) per 1000 person-years and 1.22 (95% CI, 1.11–1.34; P < .001) for serious infection, corresponding to an absolute excess of 4 (95% CI, 2–6) per 1000 person-years. The excess risks of these serious adverse events were larger in the first year after starting niacin-laropiprant therapy than in later years (except for the excess of infection, which did not appear to attenuate with time), and the risks of nonfatal and fatal events were similarly increased. The absolute excesses of each of these adverse effects were similar regardless of the baseline risk of the outcome. Implications Practitioners or patients considering the use of niacin (in addition to, or instead of, a statin) despite the lack of evidence of cardiovascular benefits (at least when added to effective statin therapy) should take account of the significant risks of these serious adverse effects when making such decisions. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00461630

HPS2-THRIVE randomized placebo-controlled trial in 25 673 high-risk patients of ER niacin/laropiprant: trial design, pre-specified muscle and liver outcomes, and reasons for stopping study treatment.

AimsNiacin has potentially favourable effects on lipids, but its effect on cardiovascular outcomes is uncertain. HPS2-THRIVE is a large randomized trial assessing the effects of extended release (ER) niacin in patients at high risk of vascular events.Methods and results Prior to randomization, 42 424 patients with occlusive arterial disease were given simvastatin 40 mg plus, if required, ezetimibe 10 mg daily to standardize their low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-lowering therapy. The ability to remain compliant with ER niacin 2 g plus laropiprant 40 mg daily (ERN/LRPT) for ~1 month was then assessed in 38 369 patients and about one-third were excluded (mainly due to niacin side effects). A total of 25 673 patients were randomized between ERN/LRPT daily vs. placebo and were followed for a median of 3.9 years. By the end of the study, 25% of participants allocated ERN/LRPT vs. 17% allocated placebo had stopped their study treatment. The most common medical reasons for stopping ERN/LRPT were related to skin, gastrointestinal, diabetes, and musculoskeletal side effects. When added to statin-based LDL-lowering therapy, allocation to ERN/LRPT increased the risk of definite myopathy [75 (0.16%/year) vs. 17 (0.04%/year): risk ratio 4.4; 95% CI 2.6-7.5; P 3× upper limit of normal, in the absence of muscle damage, was seen in 48 (0.10%/year) ERN/LRPT vs. 30 (0.06%/year) placebo allocated participants.Conclusion The risk of myopathy was increased by adding ERN/LRPT to simvastatin 40 mg daily (with or without ezetimibe), particularly in Chinese patients whose myopathy rates on simvastatin were higher. Despite the side effects of ERN/LRPT, among individuals who were able to tolerate it for ~1 month, three-quarters continued to take it for ~4 years. © 2013 The Author.</p

Back to the future: the urgent need to re-introduce streamlined trials

The increasing over-regulation of randomized controlled trials during the past 20-30 years has caused increased obstacles, delays and costs. A direct consequence is fewer new treatments being developed by industry, and fewer academic trials being conducted of current therapies, slowing improvements in patient care. There is an urgent need to bring together all those with an interest in the reliable evaluation of treatment safety and efficacy in order to develop guidance based on the underlying scientific principles that is appropriate for randomized trials in the 21st century

Serious adverse effects of extended-release niacin/laropiprant: results from the Heart Protection Study 2-Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events (HPS2-THRIVE) Trial

Purpose The Heart Protection Study 2–Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events (HPS2-THRIVE) trial of patients at high risk of vascular disease found that adding extended-release niacin-laropiprant to intensive statin-based LDL-lowering therapy had no benefit on cardiovascular outcomes. However, the trial also identified previously unrecognized serious adverse effects (including new-onset diabetes, bleeding, and infection). Our objective was to explore the safety profile of niacin-laropiprant and examine whether any patients were at lower (or higher) risk of its adverse effects. Methods HPS2-THRIVE was a randomized, double-blind trial of niacin-laropiprant (2000/40 mg/d) versus placebo among 25,673 patients at high risk of vascular disease. Information on all serious adverse events was collected during a median of 3.9 years of study treatment. Effects of niacin-laropiprant on new-onset diabetes, disturbances of diabetes control, bleeding, infection, and gastrointestinal upset were estimated by (1) time after randomization, (2) severity, (3) baseline characteristics, (4) baseline risk of the adverse event of interest, and (5) risk of major vascular event. Findings The hazard ratio (HR) for new-onset diabetes with niacin/laropiprant was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.16–1.51; P Implications Practitioners or patients considering the use of niacin (in addition to, or instead of, a statin) despite the lack of evidence of cardiovascular benefits (at least when added to effective statin therapy) should take account of the significant risks of these serious adverse effects when making such decisions. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00461630.</p

Investigating modifications to participant information materials to improve recruitment into a large randomized trial.

Background:&nbsp;Large randomized trials are the best method to test the efficacy and safety of treatments expected to have moderate effects. We observed a significant decline in potential participants&rsquo; response to mailed invitations to participate in such trials over a 10-year period and investigated possible reasons behind this and potential modifications to the invitation process to mitigate it. Methods:&nbsp;Participants who declined to participate in the HPS2-THRIVE trial were asked to give a reason. Formal focus groups were conducted to explore the reasons that potential participants might have for not participating. In addition, two embedded randomized comparisons around the timing of provision of the full participant information leaflet (PIL) and its style were conducted during recruitment into this large randomized trial. HPS2-THRIVE is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00461630). Results:&nbsp;The commonest reason given for declining invitations related to mobility and transportation (despite the offer of travel expenses). Both the focus groups and potential participants who declined their invitation indicated concern about side-effects of the treatment (as presented in the PIL) as a reason for declining the invitation. Neither delaying provision of the full PIL until the potential participant attended the trial clinic, nor modifying the style of the PIL improved the proportion of potential participants entering the trial: odds ratio (OR) 1.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94&ndash;1.17) and 1.10 (95% CI 0.94&ndash;1.28), respectively. However, modifying the style of the PIL did increase the proportion of participants attending screening appointments (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03&ndash;1.33). Conclusions:&nbsp;Many reasons given for not participating in trials are not tractable to individual trials. However, modification of the PIL does show potential to modestly improve participation. If further trials could identify similar simple interventions that were beneficial, their net effects could substantially improve trial participation and facilitate recruitment into large trials.</p