Journal List > Endocrinol Metab > v.39(5) > 1516088772

TOOLS
Kim, Lee, Chon, Yu, Jeong, Lim, Kim, Song, Cho, Yu, Kim, Kim, Lee, Kim, Kwak, Lee, Chung, Lee, Jin, Lee, Koh, Kim, Kim, Lee, Kim, Jeon, Lee, Jeon, Yoo, Kim, Park, Nam-Goong, Hong, Ahn, Yu, Park, Park, Park, Joung, Ryu, Park, Hong, Cha, Won, Chung, and Kim: Study Design and Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of a Triple Combination of Ezetimibe, Fenofibrate, and Moderate-Intensity Statin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors (ENSEMBLE)
Original Article
Diabetes, obesity and metabolism

Endocrinol Metab (Seoul) 2024;39(5):722-731.

Published online: 22 August 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3803/EnM.2024.1995

Study Design and Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of a Triple Combination of Ezetimibe, Fenofibrate, and Moderate-Intensity Statin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors (ENSEMBLE)

Nam Hoon Kim1, Juneyoung Lee2, Suk Chon3, Jae Myung Yu4, In-Kyung Jeong5, Soo Lim6, Won Jun Kim7, Keeho Song8, Ho Chan Cho9, Hea Min Yu10, Kyoung-Ah Kim11, Sang Soo Kim12, Soon Hee Lee13, Chong Hwa Kim14, Soo Heon Kwak15, Yong‐ho Lee16, Choon Hee Chung17, Sihoon Lee18, Heung Yong Jin19, Jae Hyuk Lee20, Gwanpyo Koh21, Sang-Yong Kim22, Jaetaek Kim23, Ju Hee Lee24, Tae Nyun Kim25, Hyun Jeong Jeon26, Ji Hyun Lee27, Jae-Han Jeon28, Hye Jin Yoo29, Hee Kyung Kim30, Hyeong-Kyu Park31, Il Seong Nam-Goong32, Seongbin Hong33, Chul Woo Ahn34, Ji Hee Yu35, Jong Heon Park36, Keun-Gyu Park37, Chan Ho Park38, Kyong Hye Joung39, Ohk-Hyun Ryu40, Keun Yong Park41, Eun-Gyoung Hong42, Bong-Soo Cha16, Kyu Chang Won43, Yoon-Sok Chung44, Sin Gon Kim1

1Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

2Department of Biostatistics, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

3Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Kyung Hee University Hospital, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Korea

4Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Seoul, Korea

5Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Korea

6Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea

7Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea

8Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

9Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea

10Department of Internal Medicine, Daejeon Eulji Medical Center, Eulji University, Daejeon, Korea

11Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea

12Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea

13Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea

14Department of Internal Medicine, Bucheon Sejong Hospital, Bucheon, Korea

15Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

16Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

17Department of Internal Medicine, Research Institute of Metabolism and Inflammation, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea

18Department of Internal Medicine, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea

19Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine of Jeonbuk National University Medical School-Biomedical Research Institute of Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea

20Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Myongji Hospital, Goyang, Korea

21Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Jeju National University College of Medicine, Jeju, Korea

22Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Chosun University College of Medicine, Gwangju, Korea

23Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

24Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea

25Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea

26Department of Endocrinology, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju, Korea

27Department of Internal Medicine, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea

28Department of Internal Medicine, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea

29Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

30Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea

31Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

32Department of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, Korea

33Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea

34Department of Internal Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

35Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Ansan, Korea

36Big Data Steering Department, National Health Insurance Service, Wonju, Korea

37Department of Internal Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea

38Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Dong-A University Medical Center, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea

39Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea

40Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Korea

41Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Konyang University Hospital, Konyang University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea

42Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hwaseong, Korea

43Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea

44Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea

Corresponding authors: Sin Gon Kim. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73 Goryeodae-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, Korea Tel: +82-2-920-5890, Fax: +82-2-953-9355, E-mail: k50367@korea.ac.kr

Kyu Chang Won. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, 170 Hyeonchung-ro, Nam-gu, Daegu 42415, Korea Tel: +82-53-620-3846, Fax: +82-53-654-3486, E-mail: kcwon@med.yu.ac.kr

Yoon-Sok Chung. Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Ajou University School of Medicine, 206 World cup-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon 16499, Korea Tel: +82-31-219-5127, Fax: +82-31-219-4497, E-mail: yschung@ajou.ac.kr

Received 1 April 2024       Revised 14 May 2024       Accepted 12 June 2024

Copyright © 2024 Korean Endocrine Society

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background

Atherogenic dyslipidemia, which is frequently associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and insulin resistance, contributes to the development of vascular complications. Statin therapy is the primary approach to dyslipidemia management in T2D, however, the role of non-statin therapy remains unclear. Ezetimibe reduces cholesterol burden by inhibiting intestinal cholesterol absorption. Fibrates lower triglyceride levels and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels via peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha agonism. Therefore, when combined, these drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels. Despite this, few clinical trials have specifically targeted non-HDL-C, and the efficacy of triple combination therapies, including statins, ezetimibe, and fibrates, has yet to be determined.

Methods

This is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active-comparator controlled trial involving 3,958 eligible participants with T2D, cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated non-HDL-C (≥100 mg/dL). Participants, already on moderate-intensity statins, will be randomly assigned to either Ezefeno (ezetimibe/fenofibrate) addition or statin dose-escalation. The primary end point is the development of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and diabetic microvascular events over 48 months.

Conclusion

This trial aims to assess whether combining statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate is as effective as, or possibly superior to, statin monotherapy intensification in lowering cardiovascular and microvascular disease risk for patients with T2D. This could propose a novel therapeutic approach for managing dyslipidemia in T2D.

Keywords: Diabetes mellitus, type 2, Statin, Ezetimibe, Fibric acids, Dyslipidemias, Cardiovascular diseases

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive metabolic disorder that poses a significant risk for both microvascular and macrovascular complications [1]. Altered lipid metabolism in T2D, coupled with insulin resistance, manifests as elevated triglycerides (TGs), low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and an increase in small dense low-density lipoprotein particles, significantly contributing to the development of diabetic vascular complications [2,3]. Non-HDL-C levels, encompassing the atherogenic properties of circulating lipoproteins [4], emerge as a robust predictor of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), comparable in strength with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), particularly in individuals with atherogenic dyslipidemia [5,6]. Current guidelines for dyslipidemia management endorse non-HDL-C levels as an alternative treatment goal for lipid management to reduce cardiovascular risk [7,8].
Ezetimibe primarily reduces the serum concentration of LDL-C by inhibiting cholesterol absorption from the intestine via blockade of the Niemann-Pick C1-like 1 protein [9]. Fenofibrate activates peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α [10], resulting in reduced TG and elevated HDL-C levels [11]. These drugs effectively lower non-HDL-C levels, and their combined effects are particularly potent [12-14]. Additionally, they offer multiple potential benefits for patients with T2D. The Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT) highlighted significant cardiovascular benefits of ezetimibe in patients with T2D [15,16]. The randomised comparison of efficacy and safety of lipid lowering with statin monotherapy versus statin–ezetimibe combination for high-risk cardiovascular disease (RACING) trial demonstrated that a moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination was not inferior to high-intensity statin therapy in reducing cardiovascular events in patients with ASCVD [17,18]. Fenofibrate exhibits various beneficial effects on diabetic microvascular complications, including diabetic retinopathy and nephropathy, beyond its lipid-modifying effects [19-22].
Microvascular complications in T2D pose considerable health and economic burdens comparable with cardiovascular complications [23,24]. Recognizing dyslipidemia as a significant risk factor for both microvascular and macrovascular complications [25], the comprehensive objective of managing dyslipidemia in T2D is better aligned with the prevention or delay of all forms of vascular complications.
Therefore, this study aims to investigate the impact of a triple combination of ezetimibe, fenofibrate, and statins on microvascular and macrovascular endpoints in patients with T2D.

METHODS

Study design and overview

The Ezefeno (Hyundai Pharm, Seoul, Korea) dual or statin monotherapy for patients with type 2 diabetes and modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (ENSEMBLE) is an investigator-initiated, registry-based, pragmatic, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, active comparator-controlled trial. This study was designed to compare the effects of triple combinations of ezetimibe, fenofibrate (administered as a fixed-dose combination, Ezefeno) and moderate-intensity statin versus statin monotherapy intensification on microvascular and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D whose non-HDL-C was inadequately controlled with moderate-intensity statin. The primary objective of the study is to demonstrate a non-inferiority for incidence of predefined major adverse cardiovascular events and diabetic microvascular events in triple combination therapy group compared to high dose statin group. If non-inferiority is established, superiority of the triple combination therapy over high dose statin therapy will be determined under a gatekeeping procedure.
Fig. 1 illustrates the overall scheme of the study. The study protocol received approval from the Institutional Review Board of Korea University Anam Hospital (IRB number: 2023AN04 29) and independent ethics committees at each site. The study protocol adheres to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization of Good Clinical Practice. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (registration no. NCT06293417).

Study population

The study participants will be recruited from 37 tertiary medical centers in South Korea. Eligible participants are adults (aged ≥ 19 years) with T2D who have a history of ASCVD or at least one of cardiovascular risk factors. Key inclusion criteria include a non-HDL-C level of ≥100 mg/dL, TG level of ≥200, <500 mg/dL on moderate-intensity statins. Further details on key inclusion and exclusion criteria are presented in Table 1.

Randomization

Participants meeting the eligibility criteria will undergo randomization into either the triple combination therapy or statin monotherapy intensification group in a 1:1 ratio. Randomization will be stratified based on the participating centers, and an interactive web response system provided by a central randomization service will be utilized.

Study procedures

The overall timetable of this study is presented in Table 2. During the initial visit, comprehensive data collection will be undertaken, encompassing demographic information, medical and medication history, physical examination, electrocardiogram, and laboratory tests (including hematology, blood chemistry, urinalysis, and lipid profile). The laboratory tests will be conducted on the basis of each participating center. Following a meticulous review of inclusion and exclusion criteria, eligible participants will be randomly assigned to one of the following groups:
• Group 1: will receive two tablets of the test drug (moderate-intensity statin+Ezefeno).
• Group 2: will receive one tablet of the active control drug (involving moderate-intensity statin dose escalation).
Throughout the trial, patient medical and medication histories, trial endpoint occurrences, and any adverse events (AEs) will be thoroughly assessed at each scheduled visit. Any events corresponding to pre-specified primary or secondary endpoints will be recorded. In line with the pragmatic nature of registry-based trials, participant electronic medical records and a nationwide medical registry provided by the National Health Insurance Service will also be utilized for assessing outcome measures. This approach will provide some benefits including profound retention of study subjects, detection of events occurred in other sites but not included in this trial, substantially low costs, and future long-term follow-up of the study cohort.
Two committees will be established to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of study end points and safety, each assigned distinct roles and responsibilities: the Adjudication Committee will comprise independent experts convened to assess and make decisions regarding critical events or outcomes within the clinical trial. These experts will remain blinded to the treatment assignments and results allocated to the participants. The Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) serves as an independent data monitoring committee with the primary responsibility of regularly evaluating the progress of the trial, data safety, and relevant evaluation variables. Its role extends to advising the investigator on key decisions, such as the continuation, modification, or termination of the trial.

Outcomes

The primary endpoint of the trial is the composite of major adverse cardiovascular or microvascular events within a 48-month period. Major adverse cardiovascular events include nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or peripheral artery disease, transient ischemic attack, coronary or peripheral revascularization (endovascular or surgical), and death from cardiovascular causes. Microvascular events include renal events (a sustained decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] of ≥40% from baseline, development of macroalbuminuria, onset of end-stage kidney disease [dialysis for ≥28 days, kidney transplantation, or a sustained eGFR of <15 mL/min/1.73 m2], and death from renal causes) and retinopathy events (development of proliferative diabetic retinopathy, development of macular edema, blindness due to diabetic retinopathy, and surgical treatment of diabetic retinopathy [laser photocoagulation, vitrectomy, intravitreal injection therapy]). Death from renal causes is defined as death due to end-stage kidney disease.
Key secondary endpoints were (1) a composite of key adverse major adverse cardiovascular events (non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, death from cardiovascular causes, hospitalization for heart failure); (2) a composite of key adverse renal events (a sustained decline in eGFR of ≥40%, onset of end-stage kidney disease, death from renal causes); (3) death from any causes. Additional secondary endpoints include the percentages of participants maintaining non-HDL-C ≤100 mg/dL and LDL-C ≤70 mg/dL during the trial period, as well as mean changes in non-HDL-C, LDL-C, HDL-C, TG, LDL-C/HDL-C ratio, and total cholesterol (TC)/HDL-C ratio during the trial period.

Safety

An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended medical occurrence, encompassing signs, symptoms, or diseases in a study participant. AEs of special interest include myalgia, myopathy, myonecrosis, and acute kidney injury. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) refer to AEs either absent before medication or pre-existing events worsening in intensity or frequency post-treatment.
Throughout the study period, investigators will be recording AEs and TEAEs. The intensities of AEs and TEAEs will be categorized as mild, moderate, or severe based on factors such as frequency, duration, and tolerability of the signs or symptoms. Additionally, medical judgment will be employed to assess the relationship, considering all relevant factors.

Statistical consideration

The primary objective of this trial is to assess the noninferiority of the incidence of the composite of major adverse cardiovascular events or microvascular events within 48 months following randomization in the triple combination therapy group compared with the statin monotherapy intensification group. The primary efficacy analysis will utilize the confidence interval (CI) of the difference in incidence between the groups. Noninferiority will be determined by assessing the incidence difference and its confidence limits. The null hypothesis posits that the incidence difference is greater than or equal to the specified noninferiority margin (δ≥0.03), whereas the alternative hypothesis sets that the incidence difference of the triple combination therapy group versus the statin monotherapy group is <0.03.
The selected noninferiority margin (δ=0.03) was established considering a 2% incidence difference observed in the IMPROVE-IT study, a 1% difference of composite of major adverse cardiovascular events during the 3-year follow-up RACING study, and clinical judgment favoring a broader primary composite of major adverse cardiovascular or microvascular events in this trial. Notably, a Korean targeted RACING study observed a 9% incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events after a 3-year follow-up in the moderate-intensity statin group. In this trial, participants will undergo follow-ups for up to 4 years, assuming a 10% incidence in the high-dose statin monotherapy group. An interim analysis, utilizing a group sequential design, is scheduled upon completing 50% of the intended follow-ups. To maintain an overall one-sided 2.5% significance level for multiple testing, the upper bounds of the 99.48% and 95.2% CI for the incidence difference will be compared with the noninferiority margin in the interim final analyses [26].
The estimated patient count was determined considering various factors, including the noninferiority margin, number of interim analyses, incidence in the control (monotherapy) group, significance level (type I error), power of the primary comparison (type II error), and dropout rate. Both interim and final analyses utilize O’Brian-Fleming boundaries, leading to a sample size inflation factor of 1.008 [26]. Assuming a noninferiority margin of 3% and a 10% incidence in the control group, a minimum of 3,958 participants (1,979 participants per group) were required to achieve 80% power in concluding the noninferiority of the triple combination therapy group over the monotherapy group at an overall one-sided 2.5% significance level. This calculation considers a 20% dropout rate and accounts for the sample size inflation factor.
In both interim and final analyses, if the noninferiority of the triple combination therapy group compared with the control group is confirmed for the primary efficacy endpoint, an additional assessment for the statistical superiority of the triple combination therapy group will be carried out. If both noninferiority and superiority are confirmed during the interim analysis, the possibility of early termination based on efficacy considerations may be considered, aligning with the recommendations of the DSMB. However, a futility analysis was not performed for the interim analysis.
For the secondary efficacy endpoints, the comparison between study groups regarding the percentages of participants maintaining non-HDL-C ≤100 mg/dL and LDL-C ≤70 mg/dL throughout the trial period will be assessed using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Additionally, changes in non-HDL-C, LDL-C, HDL-C, TG, LDL-C/HDL-C ratio, and TC/HDL-C ratio will be evaluated using a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), followed by contrast tests for further analysis.
Safety evaluations of the triple combination therapy group will be compared with that of the monotherapy group in terms of AE and TEAE. Special attention will be given to the proportion of patients experiencing myalgia, myopathy, myonecrosis, and acute kidney injury in each treatment group. Comparisons of these proportions between groups will be conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate.
Furthermore, the MMRM method will be employed to compare mean differences in repeatedly measured laboratory test results both between and within groups. The test results will be categorized as normal, non-clinically significant abnormal, or clinically significant abnormal. Differences in proportions between groups and changes within groups will be assessed using the generalized estimating equation method.
The trial is not blinded concerning triple combination therapy or monotherapy. However, blinding will be maintained for all investigators, members of the coordinating center, operations committee, steering committee, event adjudication committee, and the sponsor with respect to treatment-level analyses of efficacy and safety. Access to the randomization code and treatment-related event information will be restricted to the DSMB and DSMB-associated biostatistician exclusively.
Following the intention-to-treat principle, all study endpoints will be examined using a full analysis set (FAS) population. This includes all randomized patients who received the study medication at least once, excluding those who did not undergo efficacy evaluation at all. Efficacy endpoints will also undergo analysis using a per-protocol set (PPS) population, encompassing all patients in the FAS population whose primary efficacy endpoints were observed according to the protocol without major violations. Instances of protocol violations will be identified during the analysis population review meeting before database locking. The safety set (SS) population consists of all participants who received at least one dose of the trial drug. Analyses of both primary and secondary endpoints will be carried out using both the FAS and PPS populations, with the conclusion of the trial based on the analysis results of the FAS. The SS population will be utilized for the analysis of safety endpoints.
No imputation for missing data will be performed for primary efficacy and safety endpoints, with the exception of the analysis of secondary efficacy endpoints using the FAS population, where last-observation-carried-forward imputation will be applied. All statistical analyses will be performed at a two-sided 5% level of significance, except for the evaluation of noninferiority in the primary efficacy endpoint, which will use a one-sided 2.5% level of significance.

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, the ENSEMBLE trial represents the first large-scale outcome trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of a triple combination of statins, ezetimibe, and fenofibrate in patients with T2D and cardiovascular risks. The primary focus of this trial is to compare the effects of triple combination therapy with intensified statin therapy on the development of both microvascular and cardiovascular events. A unique aspect of the trial is its primary outcome—a composite of adverse cardiovascular and microvascular events—which implies a potential shift in the perspective regarding the ultimate goal of dyslipidemia management in T2D. Although ASCVD remains a major health concern and leading cause of death in individuals with T2D, an increasing number of patients are experiencing and suffering from microvascular complications [27,28]. Given the scarcity of clinical evidence on whether dyslipidemia management truly contributes to the reduction of microvascular events in T2D, this trial aims to provide essential data on the microvascular effects of different dyslipidemia management approaches. Additionally, the trial will compare the safety and compliance of the two treatment strategies.
Undoubtedly, statin therapy remains the cornerstone of dyslipidemia management for individuals at risk of ASCVD, including those with T2D. However, a substantial risk of ASCVD persists even with appropriate statin therapy [29]. Moreover, achieving target LDL-C levels with optimal statin treatment poses a challenge in clinical practice [30,31]. In South Korea, despite the widespread use of statins, only 55.2% of individuals with T2D and ASCVD reach their target LDL-C levels [32]. Various factors contribute to this, including misunderstandings about statin therapy, side effects, and non-adherence or treatment intensification issues [33-36]. The combination of statins and ezetimibe has been proposed as a plausible strategy for stricter LDL-C management, potentially improving treatment compliance [37-39]. Additionally, concerns persist about residual cardiovascular risk even after effective LDL-C management. Elevated TG levels have emerged as potent markers of residual cardiovascular risk [40,41]. Although fenofibrates failed to further reduce cardiovascular risk when added to statin therapy in cardiovascular outcome trials [42], there remains a possibility of cardioprotective effectiveness in individuals with atherogenic dyslipidemia [43-45].
Therefore, we hypothesized that co-administering fenofibrate and ezetimibe would yield clinical benefits for patients still deemed at a high residual risk despite ongoing statin treatment. Ezefeno is a fixed dose drug combination of fenofibrate and ezetimibe, facilitating the formation of triple combination therapy with statins more conveniently. Given the low incidence of side effects associated with fenofibrate and ezetimibe, coupled with their potential advantages in addressing microvascular complications, we anticipate that this treatment strategy may offer a more promising option than statin intensification therapy.

Notes

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

This study is supported by Hyundai Pharm.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conception or design: K.C.W., Y.S.C., S.G.K. Revision of study protocol: N.H.K., J.L., S.C., J.M.Y., I.K.J., S.L., W.J.K., K.S., H.C.C., H.M.Y., K.A.K., S.S.K., S.H.L., C.H.K., S.H.K., Y.L., C.H.C., S.L., H.Y.J., J.H.L., G.K., S.Y.K., J.K., J.H.L., T.N.K., H.J.J., J.H.L., J.H.J., H.J.Y., H.K.K., H.K.P., I.S.N.G., S.H., C.W.A., J.H.Y., J.H.P., K.G.P., C.H.P., K.H.J., O.H.R., K.Y.P., E.G.H., B.S.C., K.C.W., Y.S.C., S.G.K. Drafting the work or revising: N.H.K., J.L., K.C.W., Y.S.C., S.G.K. Final approval of the manuscript: K.C.W., Y.S.C., S.G.K.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The ENSEMBLE trial is an investigator-initiated trial that was designed, conducted, analyzed, and had data interpreted independently of sponsor and is supported by the Korean Endocrine Society, the Korean Diabetes Association and the Big Data Steering Department of National Health Insurance Service.

REFERENCES

1. DeFronzo RA, Ferrannini E, Groop L, Henry RR, Herman WH, Holst JJ, et al. Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2015; 1:15019.
crossref
2. Goldberg IJ. Clinical review 124: diabetic dyslipidemia: causes and consequences. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001; 86:965–71.
3. Eid S, Sas KM, Abcouwer SF, Feldman EL, Gardner TW, Pennathur S, et al. New insights into the mechanisms of diabetic complications: role of lipids and lipid metabolism. Diabetologia. 2019; 62:1539–49.
crossref
4. Verbeek R, Hovingh GK, Boekholdt SM. Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol: current status as cardiovascular marker. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2015; 26:502–10.
5. Sniderman AD, Williams K, Contois JH, Monroe HM, McQueen MJ, de Graaf J, et al. A meta-analysis of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B as markers of cardiovascular risk. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011; 4:337–45.
crossref
6. van Deventer HE, Miller WG, Myers GL, Sakurabayashi I, Bachmann LM, Caudill SP, et al. Non-HDL cholesterol shows improved accuracy for cardiovascular risk score classification compared to direct or calculated LDL cholesterol in a dyslipidemic population. Clin Chem. 2011; 57:490–501.
crossref
7. Visseren FL, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Back M, et al. 2021 ESC guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur Heart J. 2021; 42:3227–337.
8. Yang YS, Kim HL, Kim SH, Moon MK; Committee of Clinical Practice Guideline; Korean Diabetes Association and Clinical Practice Guideline Committee, et al. Lipid management in Korean people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Korean Diabetes Association and Korean Society of Lipid and Atherosclerosis consensus statement. J Lipid Atheroscler. 2023; 12:12–22.
crossref
9. Garcia-Calvo M, Lisnock J, Bull HG, Hawes BE, Burnett DA, Braun MP, et al. The target of ezetimibe is Niemann-Pick C1-Like 1 (NPC1L1). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005; 102:8132–7.
crossref
10. Gebel T, Arand M, Oesch F. Induction of the peroxisome proliferator activated receptor by fenofibrate in rat liver. FEBS Lett. 1992; 309:37–40.
crossref
11. McKeage K, Keating GM. Fenofibrate: a review of its use in dyslipidaemia. Drugs. 2011; 71:1917–46.
12. Farnier M, Freeman MW, Macdonell G, Perevozskaya I, Davies MJ, Mitchel YB, et al. Efficacy and safety of the coadministration of ezetimibe with fenofibrate in patients with mixed hyperlipidaemia. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26:897–905.
crossref
13. McKenney JM, Farnier M, Lo KW, Bays HE, Perevozkaya I, Carlson G, et al. Safety and efficacy of long-term co-administration of fenofibrate and ezetimibe in patients with mixed hyperlipidemia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 47:1584–7.
crossref
14. Oikawa S, Yamashita S, Nakaya N, Sasaki J, Kono S; Effect of Fenofibrate and Ezetimibe Combination Treatment on Lipid (EFECTL) Study Investigators. Efficacy and safety of longterm coadministration of fenofibrate and ezetimibe in patients with combined hyperlipidemia: results of the EFECTL study. J Atheroscler Thromb. 2017; 24:77–94.
crossref
15. Giugliano RP, Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Nicolau JC, Corbalan R, Spinar J, et al. Benefit of adding ezetimibe to statin therapy on cardiovascular outcomes and safety in patients with versus without diabetes mellitus: results from IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial). Circulation. 2018; 137:1571–82.
crossref
16. Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Giugliano RP, McCagg A, White JA, Theroux P, et al. Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372:2387–97.
crossref
17. Kim BK, Hong SJ, Lee YJ, Hong SJ, Yun KH, Hong BK, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (RACING): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2022; 400:380–90.
crossref
18. Lee YJ, Cho JY, You SC, Lee YH, Yun KH, Cho YH, et al. Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe vs. high-intensity statin in patients with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the RACING trial. Eur Heart J. 2023; 44:972–83.
crossref
19. Keech AC, Mitchell P, Summanen PA, O’Day J, Davis TM, Moffitt MS, et al. Effect of fenofibrate on the need for laser treatment for diabetic retinopathy (FIELD study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007; 370:1687–97.
crossref
20. Chew EY, Davis MD, Danis RP, Lovato JF, Perdue LH, Greven C, et al. The effects of medical management on the progression of diabetic retinopathy in persons with type 2 diabetes: the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2014; 121:2443–51.
crossref
21. Kim NH, Choi J, Kim YH, Lee H, Kim SG. Addition of fenofibrate to statins is associated with risk reduction of diabetic retinopathy progression in patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome: a propensity-matched cohort study. Diabetes Metab. 2023; 49:101428.
crossref
22. Frazier R, Mehta R, Cai X, Lee J, Napoli S, Craven T, et al. Associations of fenofibrate therapy with incidence and progression of CKD in patients with type 2 diabetes. Kidney Int Rep. 2018; 4:94–102.
crossref
23. Kähm K, Laxy M, Schneider U, Rogowski WH, Lhachimi SK, Holle R. Health care costs associated with incident complications in patients with type 2 diabetes in Germany. Diabetes Care. 2018; 41:971–8.
crossref
24. Dal Canto E, Ceriello A, Ryden L, Ferrini M, Hansen TB, Schnell O, et al. Diabetes as a cardiovascular risk factor: an overview of global trends of macro and micro vascular complications. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2019; 26(2 suppl):25–32.
crossref
25. Savelieff MG, Callaghan BC, Feldman EL. The emerging role of dyslipidemia in diabetic microvascular complications. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2020; 27:115–23.
crossref
26. Wassmer G, Brannath W. Group sequential and confirmatory adaptive designs in clinical trials. Heidelberg: Springer;2016.
27. Fang M, Selvin E. Thirty-year trends in complications in U.S. adults with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2021; 44:699–706.
crossref
28. An J, Nichols GA, Qian L, Munis MA, Harrison TN, Li Z, et al. Prevalence and incidence of microvascular and macrovascular complications over 15 years among patients with incident type 2 diabetes. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2021; 9:e001847.
crossref
29. Fruchart JC, Sacks F, Hermans MP, Assmann G, Brown WV, Ceska R, et al. The residual risk reduction initiative: a call to action to reduce residual vascular risk in patients with dyslipidemia. Am J Cardiol. 2008; 102(10 Suppl):1K–34K.
crossref
30. Fox KM, Tai MH, Kostev K, Hatz M, Qian Y, Laufs U. Treatment patterns and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment among patients receiving high- or moderate-intensity statins. Clin Res Cardiol. 2018; 107:380–8.
crossref
31. Jin ES, Shim JS, Kim SE, Bae JH, Kang S, Won JC, et al. Dyslipidemia fact sheet in South Korea, 2022. Diabetes Metab J. 2023; 47:632–42.
crossref
32. Yun SJ, Jeong IK, Cha JH, Lee J, Cho HC, Choi SH, et al. Current status of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol target achievement in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Korea compared with recent guidelines. Diabetes Metab J. 2021; 46:464–75.
crossref
33. Banach M, Stulc T, Dent R, Toth PP. Statin non-adherence and residual cardiovascular risk: there is need for substantial improvement. Int J Cardiol. 2016; 225:184–96.
crossref
34. Bates TR, Connaughton VM, Watts GF. Non-adherence to statin therapy: a major challenge for preventive cardiology. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2009; 10:2973–85.
crossref
35. Wouters H, Van Dijk L, Geers HC, Winters NA, Van Geffen EC, Stiggelbout AM, et al. Understanding statin non-adherence: knowing which perceptions and experiences matter to different patients. PLoS One. 2016; 11:e0146272.
crossref
36. Bae JH, Jin ES, Kim SE, Kang S, Lee JY, Kim M, et al. Public awareness of dyslipidemia among the Korean population: a survey study. J Lipid Atheroscler. 2023; 12:307–14.
crossref
37. Gagne C, Bays HE, Weiss SR, Mata P, Quinto K, Melino M, et al. Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe added to ongoing statin therapy for treatment of patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Am J Cardiol. 2002; 90:1084–91.
crossref
38. Mikhailidis DP, Lawson RW, McCormick AL, Sibbring GC, Tershakovec AM, Davies GM, et al. Comparative efficacy of the addition of ezetimibe to statin vs statin titration in patients with hypercholesterolaemia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011; 27:1191–210.
39. Choi H, Kang SH, Jeong SW, Yoon CH, Youn TJ, Song WH, et al. Lipid-lowering efficacy of combination therapy with moderate-intensity statin and ezetimibe versus high-intensity statin monotherapy: a randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial from Korea. J Lipid Atheroscler. 2023; 12:277–89.
crossref
40. Miller M, Cannon CP, Murphy SA, Qin J, Ray KK, Braunwald E, et al. Impact of triglyceride levels beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol after acute coronary syndrome in the PROVE IT-TIMI 22 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 51:724–30.
crossref
41. Faergeman O, Holme I, Fayyad R, Bhatia S, Grundy SM, Kastelein JJ, et al. Plasma triglycerides and cardiovascular events in the Treating to New Targets and Incremental Decrease in End-Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering trials of statins in patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 2009; 104:459–63.
crossref
42. ACCORD Study Group, Ginsberg HN, Elam MB, Lovato LC, Crouse JR 3rd, Leiter LA, et al. Effects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 2010; 362:1563–74.
crossref
43. Saely CH, Rein P, Drexel H. Combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363:692.
crossref
44. Kim NH, Han KH, Choi J, Lee J, Kim SG. Use of fenofibrate on cardiovascular outcomes in statin users with metabolic syndrome: propensity matched cohort study. BMJ. 2019; 366:l5125.
crossref
45. Kim NH, Kim SG. Fibrates revisited: potential role in cardiovascular risk reduction. Diabetes Metab J. 2020; 44:213–21.
crossref

Fig. 1.
Overall study design. HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; AE, adverse event.
enm-2024-1995f1.tif
Table 1.
Key Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Inclusion criteria
 Patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes according to American Diabetes Association criteria
 Age ≥19 years
 Non-HDL-C ≥100 mg/dL, TG ≥200, <500 mg/dL on moderate-intensity statins
 Presence of cardiovascular disease or at least one of cardiovascular risk factorsa
Exclusion criteria
 Pregnant or breastfeeding women
 Uncontrolled hyperglycemia (HbA1c >12.0%)
 Serum creatinine >2.5 mg/dL or eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2
 Gall bladder disease, myopathy, or rhabdomyolysis requiring treatment
 Elevated liver enzymes (AST, ALT) >3 times the upper normal limit
 Hypersensitivity to study drugs

HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; HbA1c, glycosylated hemoglobin; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase.

a Cardiovascular diseases include coronary artery disease, ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, carotid artery disease, and peripheral artery disease. Cardiovascular risk factor includes abdominal aortic aneurysm, duration of diabetes ≥10 years, age (men ≥45 years, women ≥55 years), family history of premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, hypertension, smoking, low HDL-C level (<40 mg/dL), albuminuria, chronic kidney disease (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2), retinopathy, neuropathy, left ventricular hypertrophy.

Table 2.
Timetable of the Study
Variable Screening/baselinea (visit 1) Randomization Visit 2 (3 mo) Visit 3 (12 mo) Visit 4 (24 mo) Visit 5 (36 mo) Visit 6 (48 mo)
Visit windows, day ±1 mo ±3 mo ±3 mo ±3 mo ±3 mo
Written informed consent X
Demographicsb X
Physical examination X
Vital sign X X X X X X
Past medical history X X X X X X
12-lead ECG X X X X X X
Inclusion/exclusion criteria X
Randomization to treatment groups X
Laboratory testc X X X X X X
Assessment of trial outcomes/adverse events X X X X X X

ECG, electrocardiogram.

a Screening procedure and baseline measurements are conducted on the same day;

b Demographic information includes age, date of birth, sex, height, weight, waist circumference, smoking history, alcohol consumption, and physical activity level;

c Laboratory tests including hematology (red blood cell count, white blood cell [WBC] count, hemoglobin, hematocrit, platelet, WBC differential count, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein), blood chemistry tests (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, gamma glutamyl transpeptidase, creatinine phosphokinase, total bilirubin, creatinine), urinalysis (pH, specific gravity, protein, WBC), urine albumin/creatinine, blood glucose test (glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose, fasting insulin), lipid profile (total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], triglyceride, non-HDL-C) will be measured at the site visits or recorded from electronic medical records.

TOOLS
Similar articles