Loading…
Our read is that PCSK9 inhibitors are a well-supported option for lowering cardiovascular risk, particularly in specific patient populations.
Our read is that PCSK9 inhibitors effectively lower apob and LDL cholesterol by increasing LDL receptor expression, offering significant impact on residual cardiovascular risk in maximally statin-treated patients.
However, our read is that there are concerns regarding their long-term impact on all-cause mortality and potential disruption of complex homeostatic mechanisms, with some experts suggesting limited benefit for certain patient groups.
Our read is that these injectable biologic drugs are considered a last-line defense for hypercholesterolemia due to their high cost and specific insurance criteria.
Bryan Johnson uses Repatha 140mg/mL every two weeks for cholesterol optimization. Some doctors are prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors instead of statins for cholesterol management.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Paul Saladino claims that a meta-analysis of clinical trials found that PCSK9 inhibitors did not improve cardiovascular health and that evolocumab increased the risk of all-cause mortality. Paul Saladino also suggests that reducing LDL significantly with PCSK9 inhibitors may be detrimental because LDL plays a role in dampening infection and reducing inflammation. Paul Saladino states that blocking the cannabinoid receptor system or using PCSK9 inhibitors are reductionist approaches to health problems. Paul Saladino claims that pharmaceutical interventions like PCSK9 inhibitors may disrupt complex homeostatic mechanisms, leading to unrecognized negative results. Paul Saladino notes that individuals with genetically high LP little A may not necessarily need PCSK9 inhibitors or statins, as diet can influence LP little A levels. Peter Attia states that total cholesterol has zero utility in clinical practice, except for diagnosing familial hypercholesterolemia to qualify for PCSK9 inhibitors. Paul Saladino claims that completely blocking PCSK9 may lead to increased all-cause mortality and does not appear to benefit cardiovascular health long-term. Paul Saladino states that the risks associated with plant toxins and PCSK9 inhibitors clearly outweigh their benefits. Paul Saladino notes that the Fourier trial showed no reduction in overall death and only a slight reduction in myocardial infarction with PCSK9 inhibitors and statins. Paul Saladino claims that the PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab increased the risk of all-cause mortality in the FOURIER trial when followed for 3.4 years. Paul Saladino also notes that in a 4-year follow-up, the percentage of participants who died was 4.3% in the placebo group and 4.8% in the evolocumab group, representing a number needed to harm of 213 for a median follow-up of 2.2 years. Paul Saladino states that patients on PCSK9 inhibitors with LDL levels in the single digits or teens, who do not have metabolic syndrome, do not benefit from cholesterol lowering.
Our read is that further long-term studies specifically addressing all-cause mortality and the impact on complex homeostatic mechanisms would change the verdict. Additionally, new evidence on the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of PCSK9 inhibitors for a broader patient population could alter the recommendation.
PCSK9 inhibitors, a pharmacological intervention to lower Apob, were developed based on observations of individuals with genetic variations in PCSK9.
PCSK9 inhibitors effectively lower apob.
Mechanistic and trial evidence converge on a real, replicable effect.
PCSK9 inhibitors are an injectable biologic class of drugs that can be used as an alternative to statins, offering added protective effects in lowering cardiovascular disease risk, even in patients already on statins.
PCSK9 inhibition is a specific intervention that addresses a common human disease, and its safety and efficacy were de-risked by observing individuals with natural PCSK9 null mutations.
Animal-model results don't translate to the human protocol being recommended.
Animal-model results don't translate to the human protocol being recommended.
Animal-model results don't translate to the human protocol being recommended.
Animal-model results don't translate to the human protocol being recommended.
The headline effect shrinks once you account for trial quality.