No abstract

No abstract

Aims As the potential impact of statins on cognitive decline and dementia is still debated, we conducted a meta-analysis of observational studies to examine the effect of statin use on the risk of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and dementia. Methods and results PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched since inception to January 2021. Inclusion criteria were: (i) cohort or case–control studies; (ii) statin users compared to non-users; and (iii) AD and/or dementia risk as outcome. Estimates from original studies were pooled using restricted maximum-likelihood random-effect model. Measure of effects were reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In the pooled analyses, statins were associated with a decreased risk of dementia [36 studies, OR 0.80 (CI 0.75–0.86)] and of AD [21 studies, OR 0.68 (CI 0.56–0.81)]. In the stratified analysis by sex, no difference was observed in the risk reduction of dementia between men [OR 0.86 (CI 0.81–0.92)] and women [OR 0.86 (CI 0.81–0.92)]. Similar risks were observed for lipophilic and hydrophilic statins for both dementia and AD, while high-potency statins showed a 20% reduction of dementia risk compared with a 16% risk reduction associated with low-potency statins, suggesting a greater efficacy of the former, although a borderline statistical significance (P = 0.05) for the heterogeneity between estimates. Conclusion These results confirm the absence of a neurocognitive risk associated with statin treatment and suggest a potential favourable role of statins. Randomized clinical trials with an ad hoc design are needed to explore this potential neuroprotective effect.

No abstract

Background A significant proportion of individuals clinically diagnosed with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), but without any disease‐causing mutation, are likely to have polygenic hypercholesterolemia. We evaluated the distribution of a polygenic risk score, consisting of 12 low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C)‐raising variants (polygenic LDL‐C risk score), in subjects with a clinical diagnosis of FH. Methods and Results Within the Lipid Transport Disorders Italian Genetic Network (LIPIGEN) study, 875 patients who were FH‐mutation positive (women, 54.75%; mean age, 42.47±15.00 years) and 644 patients who were FH‐mutation negative (women, 54.21%; mean age, 49.73±13.54 years) were evaluated. Patients who were FH‐mutation negative had lower mean levels of pretreatment LDL‐C than patients who were FH‐mutation positive (217.14±55.49 versus 270.52±68.59 mg/dL, P <0.0001). The mean value (±SD) of the polygenic LDL‐C risk score was 1.00 (±0.18) in patients who were FH‐mutation negative and 0.94 (±0.20) in patients who were FH‐mutation positive ( P <0.0001). In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, the area under the curve for recognizing subjects characterized by polygenic hypercholesterolemia was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.56–0.62), with sensitivity and specificity being 78% and 36%, respectively, at 0.905 as a cutoff value. Higher mean polygenic LDL‐C risk score levels were observed among patients who were FH‐mutation negative having pretreatment LDL‐C levels in the range of 150 to 350 mg/dL (150–249 mg/dL: 1.01 versus 0.91, P <0.0001; 250–349 mg/dL: 1.02 versus 0.95, P =0.0001). A positive correlation between polygenic LDL‐C risk score and pretreatment LDL‐C levels was observed among patients with FH independently of the presence of causative mutations. Conclusions This analysis confirms the role of polymorphisms in modulating LDL‐C levels, even in patients with genetically confirmed FH. More data are needed to support the use of the polygenic score in routine clinical practice.