Table 2.
Name of trial | Ref. Allocation and blinding | No. of patients | Inclusion criteria | Study arms (with dosing) | Primary end point | Results |
LAPLACE-2 (NCT01763866) | Robinson et al[75]; Randomized double blinded trial | 1896 | Individuals with LDL > 150 mg/dL (not on statin); or LDL > 100 mg/dL (on non-intensive statin); or LDL ≥ 80 mg/dL (with intensive statin therapy) | Initially randomized to daily moderate or high intensity atorvastatin for 4 wk. Patients were again randomized to Evolocumab (sc) vs ezetimibe vs placebo | Percentage change in calculated LDL cholesterol level from baseline to week 12 | Evolocumab q2w and qmonthly: 63% to 75% reduction in LDL vs placebo Ezetimibe 19% to 32% reduction in LDL vs placebo |
YUKAWA-2 (NCT01953328) | Kiyosue et al[76]; Randomized double blinded | 404 | Japanese patients with LDL > 70 on stable dose statins for > 4 wk and high cardiovascular risk | Initially randomized to daily atorvastatin of 5 mg or 20 mg for 4 wk. They were further randomized to Evolocumab (sc) at q2 week and qmonthly vs placebo | Percent change in calculated LDL-C from baseline at week 12 | -67.0% to -76% reduction with Evolocumab compared to placebo (P < 0.0001) |
GAUSS-2 (NCT01763905) | Stroes et al[78]; Randomized double blinded | 307 | Patients with LDL not at goal according to their cardiovascular risk and not on statin or low dose statin due to history of statin intolerance (> 2 statins) with stable LLT > 4 wk | Evolovumab (SC) at q2 week and qmonthly dosing vs Placebo (SC) + Ezetimibe (10 mg/d) daily | Percent change in LDL-C from baseline at the mean of weeks 10 and 12 and at week 12 Change from baseline LDL at week 12 | -55.3% to -56.1% for Evolocumab compared with -16.6% to -19.2% for ezetimibe (P < 0.0001) -103.6 to -105.4 (Evolocumab) vs -33 to -39 (mg/dL) |
MENDEL-2 (NCT01763827 | Koren et al[77]; Randomized double-blinded | 614 | NCEP ATP III Framingham risk score of < 10% Fasting LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL and < 190 mg/dL | Oral placebo to SC placebo; ezetimibe to SC placebo and oral placebo to SC Evolocumab at dosing regimens of 140 mg biweekly and 420 mg monthly | Percent change from baseline in LDL-C level averaged at weeks 10 and 12 | Percent LDL change from baseline averaged at weeks 10 and 12 in the: Once per 2 wk arm: -56.9% (with Evolocumab) vs -17.5 (with ezetimibe) vs -0.4% (placebo) For monthly arm: -58.8% (with evolocumab) vs -19.1 (with ezetimibe) vs -1.4% (placebo) |
Percent change from baseline in LDL-C level at week 12 | Percent LDL change from baseline averaged at weeks 12: Once per 2 wk arm: -57% (with Evolocumab) vs -17.8 (with ezetimibe) vs 0.1% (placebo) For monthly arm: -56.1% (with Evolocumab) vs -18.6 (with ezetimibe) vs -1.3% (placebo) | |||||
RUTHERFORD-2 (NCT01763918) | Raal et al[72]; Randomized double blinded | 329 | Patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia who are on stable LLT for 4 wk and LDL > 100 mg/dL | Evolocumab (SC) at 140 mg q2 weeks vs placebo SC q2w AND Evolocumab SC qmonthly vs Placebo (SC) | Percent change from baseline in LDL-C level averaged at weeks 10 and 12 Percent change from baseline in LDL-C level at week 12 | Percent LDL change from baseline averaged at weeks 12 in the: Once per 2 wk arm: -61.2% (with Evolocumab) vs -1.1% (with placebo) For monthly arm: -63.3% (with evolocumab) vs 2.3% (with placebo) Percent LDL change from baseline averaged at weeks 10 and 12 in the: Once per 2 wk arm: -61.3% (with Evolocumab) vs -2% (with placebo) For monthly arm: -55.7% (with Evolocumab) vs 5.5% (with placebo) |
TESLA (NCT01588496) | Raal et al[82]; Randomized double-blinded | 50 | Homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia, on stable lipid-regulating therapy for at least 4 wk, LDL cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dL (3.4 mmol/L); Triglyceride ≤ 400 mg/dL (4.5 mmol/L); Body weight of ≥ 40 kg at screening, and not receiving lipoprotein apheresis | Evolocumab (SC) 420 mg every 4 wk vs placebo (SC) | Percentage change in ultracentrifugation LDL cholesterol from baseline at week 12 compared with placebo, analyzed by intention-to-treat Percent change from baseline in LDL-C at week 52 | Evolocumab significantly reduced ultracentrifugation LDL cholesterol at 12 wk by 30.9% (95%CI: -43.9% to -18.0%; P < 0.0001) vs placebo |
DESCARTES (NCT01516879) | Blom et al[80]; Randomized, double-blinded | 901 | Fasting LDL ≥ 75 mg/dL and meeting the following on background LLT: (1) < 100 mg/dL for subjects with diagnosed CHD or CHD risk equivalent; (2) < 130 mg/dL for subjects without diagnosed CHD or CHD risk equivalent; (3) on maximal background LLT defined as atorvastatin 80 mg PO QD and ezetimibe 10 mg PO QD Fasting triglycerides ≤ 400 mg/dL | Evolocumab (SC) 420 mg every 4 wk with diet alone vs placebo with diet Evolocumab (SC) 420 mg every 4 wk with diet + atorvastatin 10 mg/d vs placebo with diet and atorvastatin 10 mg/d Evolocumab (SC) 420 mg every 4 wk + atorvastatin 80 mg/d vs placebo + atorvastatin 80 mg/d Evolocumab (SC) 420 mg every 4 wk + atorvastatin 80 mg/d + ezetimibe 10 mg/d vs placebo + atorvastatin 80 mg/d + ezetimibe 10 mg/d | Percent change from baseline in LDL-C at week 52 | Addition of Evolocumab resulted in LDL reduction by: (1) 51% to 60% in diet alone group; (2) 59% to 64% in patients on 10 mg atorvastatin (3) 51% to 62% in patients on 80 mg atorvastatin (4) 43% to 54% in patients with atorvastatin 80 mg/d and ezetimibe 10 mg/d (P < 0.001 for all) |
SC: Subcutaneous; LLT: Lipid lowering therapy; heFH: Heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia; CHD: Coronary heart disease; HCL: Hypercholesterolemia; MACE: Major adverse Cardiovascular Events; MI: Myocardial infarction; UA: Unstable angina; HR: Hazards ratio; CI: Confidence interval.