Evaluation of Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of ETC-1002 in High-Risk Patients With Hyperlipidemia and High CV Risk (CLEAR Harmony)

• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02666664
• Recruitment Status: Completed
• First Posted: January 28, 2016
• Results First Posted: April 20, 2020
• Last Update Posted: May 11, 2020
• Sponsor: Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.
• Information provided by (Responsible Party): Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.

Study Description

Brief Summary:

The purpose of this study is to see if ETC-1002 (bempedoic acid) is safe and well-tolerated versus placebo in patients with high cardiovascular risk and elevated LDL cholesterol that is not adequately controlled by their current therapy.

Condition or disease	Intervention/treatment	Phase
Hypercholesterolemia; Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases	Drug: ETC-1002; Drug: Placebo	Phase 3

Study Design

• Study Type: Interventional (Clinical Trial)
• Actual Enrollment: 2230 participants
• Allocation: Randomized
• Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Official Title: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Long-term Safety and Tolerability Study of ETC-1002 in Patients With Hyperlipidemia at High Cardiovascular Risk Who Are Not Adequately Controlled by Their Lipid-Modifying Therapy
• Actual Study Start Date: January 21, 2016
• Actual Primary Completion Date: February 21, 2018
• Actual Study Completion Date: March 28, 2018

Arms and Interventions

Arm	Intervention/treatment
Experimental: ETC-1002; ETC-1002 180 mg/day	Drug: ETC-1002; ETC-1002 180 mg tablets taken orally, once per day. Patients remain on ongoing statin therapy (not study provided); Other Name: bempedoic acid
Placebo Comparator: Placebo; Placebo control	Drug: Placebo; Matching placebo tablets taken orally, once per day. Patients remain on ongoing statin therapy (not study provided)

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures :

1. Percentage of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   TEAEs, defined as adverse events (AEs) that began or worsened in severity after the first dose of double-blind study drug and up to 30 days after receiving the last dose of double-blind study drug, were collected and reported.
2. Percentage of Participants With Adjudicated Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   TEAEs, defined as AEs that began or worsened in severity after the first dose of double-blind study drug and up to 30 days after receiving the last dose of double-blind study drug, were collected and reported. Cardiovascular events were considered as adverse events of special interest. Treatment-emergent = TE.
3. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: Creatine Kinase Elevations [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   TEAEs of special interest (AESIs) were predefined and monitored throughout the study. Creatine kinase elevations were assessed using the following preferred term: Blood creatine phosphokinase increased (system organ class: investigations).
4. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: Hepatic Disorders [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   Treatment-emergent AESIs were predefined and monitored throughout the study. TEAEs potentially related to hepatic events were assessed using the following preferred terms and laboratory abnormalities: aspartate aminotransferase (AST) increased, Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increased, Hepatic enzyme increased, Blood bilirubin increased, liver function test (LFT) abnormal, LFT increased, hepatic enzyme abnormal, transaminases increased, potential Hy's Law cases (PHLC) [AST and (&)/or ALT >3 x upper limit of normal (ULN) with concurrent total bilirubin >2 x ULN], AST and/or ALT >3 x ULN, and total bilirubin >2 x ULN (system organ class: investigations). AST and ALT values were repeated and confirmed. "Repeated and confirmed" was defined as a participant having the last on-study LFT > x ULN, the last on-treatment LFT > x ULN, or LFT > x ULN followed by another LFT > x ULN.
5. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: Hypoglycemia [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   Treatment-emergent AESIs were predefined and monitored throughout the study. Hypoglycemia was assessed using the following preferred terms: hypoglycaemia (system organ class: metabolism and nutrition disorders); blood glucose abnormal and blood glucose decreased (system organ class: investigations). The percentage of unique participants is reported in the "Overall hypoglycemia AESIs" category; a participant could have been represented in more than one of the individual hypoglycemia AESIs.
6. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: Metabolic Acidosis [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   Treatment-emergent AESIs were predefined and monitored throughout the study. Metabolic acidosis was assessed using the preferred term metabolic acidosis (system organ class: metabolism and nutrition disorders).
7. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: Muscular Disorder [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   Treatment-emergent AESIs were predefined and monitored throughout the study. Muscular safety was assessed using the following preferred terms and laboratory abnormalities: myalgia, muscle spasms, pain in extremity, muscular weakness (system organ class: musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders), and creatine kinase >5 ULN (repeated and confirmed). The percentage of unique participants is reported in the "Overall muscular disorder AESIs" category; a participant could have been represented in more than one of the individual muscular disorder AESIs.
8. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: Neurocognitive Disorder [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   Treatment-emergent AESIs were predefined and monitored throughout the study. Neurocognitive disorder was assessed using the following preferred terms: memory impairment, amnesia, and cognitive disorder (system organ class: nervous system disorders); confusional state and disorientation (system organ class: psychiatric disorders). The percentage of unique participants is reported in the "Overall neurocognitive disorder AESIs" category; a participant could have been represented in more than one of the individual neurocognitive disorder AESIs.
9. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: New Onset or Worsening Diabetes Mellitus [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
   Treatment-emergent AESIs were predefined and monitored throughout the study. New onset or worsening diabetes was assessed using the following preferred terms: type 2 diabetes mellitus, diabetes mellitus, hyperglycaemia, glucose tolerance impaired, diabetes mellitus inadequate control, and impaired fasting glucose (system organ class: metabolism and nutrition disorders); blood glucose increased, glycosylated haemoglobin increased, blood glucose abnormal, and glucose urine present (system organ class: investigations); and glycosuria (system organ class: renal and urinary disorders). The percentage of unique participants is reported in the "Overall new onset/worsening diabetes mellitus AESIs" category; a participant could have been represented in more than one of the individual new onset/worsening diabetes mellitus AESIs.
10. Percentage of Participants With the Indicated Event of Special Interest: Renal Disorder [ Time Frame: Up to approximately 52 weeks ]
    Treatment-emergent AESIs were predefined and monitored throughout the study. TEAEs potentially related to renal events were assessed using the following preferred terms: renal failure, renal impairment, acute kidney injury (system organ class: renal and urinary disorders); blood creatinine increased, glomerular filtration rate decreased, blood urea increased, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 milliliter per minute per 1.73 square meter (ml/min/1.73m^2), and change from baseline in creatinine >1 mg/dL (system organ class: investigations); and gout (system organ class: metabolism and nutrition disorders). The percentage of unique participants is reported in the "Overall renal disorder AESIs" category; a participant could have been represented in more than one of the individual renal disorder AESIs.
11. Change From Baseline to Week 52 in Uric Acid (Urate) Level [ Time Frame: Baseline and Week 52 ]
    Blood samples were drawn at defined time points during the course of the study to monitor uric acid (urate) levels.
12. Change From Baseline to Week 52 in Creatinine Level [ Time Frame: Baseline and Week 52 ]
    Blood samples were drawn at defined time points during the course of the study to monitor creatinine levels.
13. Change From Baseline to Week 52 in Hemoglobin Level [ Time Frame: Baseline and Week 52 ]
    Blood samples were drawn at defined time points during the course of the study to monitor hemoglobin levels.

Secondary Outcome Measures :

1. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 12 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for LDL-C. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(LDL-C value at Week 12 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Missing data were imputed with the use of a pattern-mixture model to account for adherence to the trial regimen. Least Square mean= LS mean. Percent change was analyzed using the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) method, which included treatment, randomization stratum as factors, and baseline value as covariate.
2. Absolute Change From Baseline to Week 12 in LDL-C [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 12 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for LDL-C. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Absolute change from baseline was calculated as: LDL-C value at Week 12 minus Baseline value. Missing data were imputed with the use of a pattern-mixture model to account for adherence to the trial regimen.

Other Outcome Measures:

1. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 24 in LDL-C [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 24 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for LDL-C. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(LDL-C value at Week 24 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Missing data were imputed with the use of a pattern-mixture model to account for adherence to the trial regimen. Percent change was analyzed using the ANCOVA method, which included treatment, randomization stratum as factors, and baseline value as covariate.
2. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Non-high-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (Non-HDL-C) [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 12 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for non-HDL-C. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(non-HDL-C value at Week 12 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Missing data were imputed with the use of a pattern-mixture model to account for adherence to the trial regimen. Percent change was analyzed using the ANCOVA method, which included treatment, randomization stratum as factors, and baseline value as covariate.
3. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Total Cholesterol (TC) [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 12 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for TC. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(TC value at Week 12 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Missing data were imputed with the use of a pattern-mixture model to account for adherence to the trial regimen. Percent change was analyzed using the ANCOVA method, which included treatment, randomization stratum as factors, and baseline value as covariate.
4. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 12 in Apolipoprotein B (apoB) [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 12 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for apoB. Baseline was defined as the last value prior to first dose of study drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(apoB value at Week 12 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Missing data were imputed with the use of a pattern-mixture model to account for adherence to the trial regimen. Percent change was analyzed using the ANCOVA method, which included treatment, randomization stratum as factors, and baseline value as covariate.
5. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 12 in High-sensitivity C-reactive Protein (hsCRP) [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 12 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for hsCRP. Baseline was defined as the last value prior to first dose of study drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(hsCRP value at Week 12 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed. Percent change was analyzed using the ANCOVA method, which included treatment, randomization stratum as factors, and baseline value as covariate.
6. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 52 in LDL-C [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 52 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for LDL-C. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(LDL-C value at Week 52 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed. Percent change was analyzed using the ANCOVA method, which included treatment, randomization stratum as factors, and baseline value as covariate.
7. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Non-HDL-C [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 24 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for non-HDL-C. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(non-HDL-C value at Week 24 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.
8. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 52 in Non-HDL-C [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 52 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for non-HDL-C. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(non-HDL-C value at Week 52 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.
9. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 24 in TC [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 24 ]
   Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for TC. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(TC value at Week 24 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.
10. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 52 in TC [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 52 ]
    Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for TC. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(TC value at Week 52 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.
11. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 24 in apoB [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 24 ]
    Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for apoB. Baseline was defined as the last value prior to first dose of study drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(apoB value at Week 24 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed
12. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 52 in apoB [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 52 ]
    Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for apoB. Baseline was defined as the last value prior to first dose of study drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(apoB value at Week 52 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.
13. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 24 in hsCRP [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 24 ]
    Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for hsCRP. Baseline was defined as the last value prior to first dose of study drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(hsCRP value at Week 24 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.
14. Percent Change From Baseline to Week 52 in hsCRP [ Time Frame: Baseline; Week 52 ]
    Blood samples were drawn after a minimum 10-hour fast (water was allowed) at pre-specified intervals. Samples were collected and analyzed for hsCRP. Baseline was defined as the last value prior to first dose of study drug. Percent change from baseline was calculated as: [(hsCRP value at Week 52 minus Baseline value) divided by (Baseline Value)] multiplied by 100. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.
15. Percentage of Participants Achieving LDL-C <70 mg/dL at Week 12, 24, and 52 [ Time Frame: Week 12, Week 24, and Week 52 ]
    The percentage of participants who achieved lowering in lipid values of LDL-C below 70 mg/dL have been reported. Baseline was defined as the mean of the values at screening (Week -2) and predose Day 1/Week 0. Observed data was used for the analysis, no imputation for the missing data was performed.

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 Years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Sexes Eligible for Study: All
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

• Fasting LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL
• High cardiovascular risk (diagnosis of HeFH or ASCVD)
• Be on maximally tolerated lipid-modifying therapy

Exclusion Criteria:

• Total fasting triglyceride ≥500 mg/dL
• Renal dysfunction or nephrotic syndrome or history of nephritis
• Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥50kg/m2
• Significant cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular event in the past 3 months

Contacts and Locations

Locations

United States, Alabama

Huntsville, Alabama, United States

United States, Arizona

Cottonwood, Arizona, United States

Phoenix, Arizona, United States

United States, California

Canoga Park, California, United States

Santa Rosa, California, United States

United States, Connecticut

Bridgeport, Connecticut, United States

Hartford, Connecticut, United States

United States, Florida

Atlantis, Florida, United States

Boca Raton, Florida, United States

Crestview, Florida, United States

Crystal River, Florida, United States

Daytona Beach, Florida, United States

Lake Worth, Florida, United States

Miami Lakes, Florida, United States

Tampa, Florida, United States

United States, Illinois

Park Ridge, Illinois, United States

United States, Iowa

Iowa City, Iowa, United States

United States, Kansas

Overland Park, Kansas, United States

United States, Kentucky

Covington, Kentucky, United States

Louisville, Kentucky, United States

United States, Louisiana

Minden, Louisiana, United States

Monroe, Louisiana, United States

Shreveport, Louisiana, United States

United States, Maine

Auburn, Maine, United States

United States, Michigan

Midland, Michigan, United States

Saginaw, Michigan, United States

United States, Minnesota

Saint Cloud, Minnesota, United States

United States, Mississippi

Tupelo, Mississippi, United States

United States, Missouri

Jefferson City, Missouri, United States

United States, New Hampshire

Nashua, New Hampshire, United States

United States, New Jersey

Bridgewater, New Jersey, United States

United States, North Carolina

Cary, North Carolina, United States

Mount Airy, North Carolina, United States

Raleigh, North Carolina, United States

Rocky Mount, North Carolina, United States

Wilmington, North Carolina, United States

United States, Ohio

Cincinnati, Ohio, United States

Sandusky, Ohio, United States

Willoughby, Ohio, United States

United States, Oregon

Hillsboro, Oregon, United States

United States, Texas

Fort Worth, Texas, United States

Houston, Texas, United States

Katy, Texas, United States

Kingwood, Texas, United States

United States, Utah

Orem, Utah, United States

United States, Virginia

Richmond, Virginia, United States

United States, Washington

Puyallup, Washington, United States

Tacoma, Washington, United States

Canada, British Columbia

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

Canada, Ontario

Gatineau, Ontario, Canada

Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

Oshawa, Ontario, Canada

Peterborough, Ontario, Canada

Scarborough, Ontario, Canada

Canada, Quebec

Chicoutimi, Quebec, Canada

Gatineau, Quebec, Canada

Longueuil, Quebec, Canada

Montréal, Quebec, Canada

Québec, Quebec, Canada

Saint-Jean-Sur-Richelieu, Quebec, Canada

St-Charles-Borromee, Quebec, Canada

Germany

Berlin, Germany

Bochum, Germany

Dresden, Germany

Essen, Germany

Frankfurt, Germany

Leipzig, Germany

Muenchen, Germany

Netherlands

Amsterdam, Netherlands

Arnhem, Netherlands

Eindhoven, Netherlands

Goes, Netherlands

Groningen, Netherlands

Hardenberg, Netherlands

Leiden, Netherlands

Rotterdam, Netherlands

Tilburg, Netherlands

Venlo, Netherlands

Zutphen, Netherlands

Poland

Gdansk, Poland

Gdynia, Poland

Katowice, Poland

Kraków, Poland

Poznań, Poland

Puławy, Poland

Toruń, Poland

Wroclaw, Poland

Łowicz, Poland

Łódź, Poland

United Kingdom

Bexhill-on-Sea, United Kingdom

Birmingham, United Kingdom

Cardiff, United Kingdom

Chesterfield, United Kingdom

Chichester, United Kingdom

Chippenham, United Kingdom

Chorley, United Kingdom

Glasgow, United Kingdom

Hexham, United Kingdom

Hull, United Kingdom

Ipswich, United Kingdom

Liverpool, United Kingdom

Manchester, United Kingdom

Reading, United Kingdom

Sponsors and Collaborators

Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.

Investigators

• Study Director: Ron Haberman, MD; Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.

  Study Documents (Full-Text)

Documents provided by Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.:

Statistical Analysis Plan  [PDF] March 22, 2018

Study Protocol  [PDF] May 10, 2017

More Information

Additional Information:

World Health Organization Fact Sheet No. 317 

Familial Hypercholesterolemia Foundation 

National Organization for Rare Disorders - Familial Hypercholesterolemia 

Publications of Results:

Ray KK, Bays HE, Catapano AL, Lalwani ND, Bloedon LT, Sterling LR, Robinson PL, Ballantyne CM; CLEAR Harmony Trial. Safety and Efficacy of Bempedoic Acid to Reduce LDL Cholesterol. N Engl J Med. 2019 Mar 14;380(11):1022-1032. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1803917.

Other Publications:

Pinkosky SL, Newton RS, Day EA, Ford RJ, Lhotak S, Austin RC, Birch CM, Smith BK, Filippov S, Groot PHE, Steinberg GR, Lalwani ND. Liver-specific ATP-citrate lyase inhibition by bempedoic acid decreases LDL-C and attenuates atherosclerosis. Nat Commun. 2016 Nov 28;7:13457. doi: 10.1038/ncomms13457.

Stone NJ, Robinson JG, Lichtenstein AH, Bairey Merz CN, Blum CB, Eckel RH, Goldberg AC, Gordon D, Levy D, Lloyd-Jones DM, McBride P, Schwartz JS, Shero ST, Smith SC Jr, Watson K, Wilson PW, Eddleman KM, Jarrett NM, LaBresh K, Nevo L, Wnek J, Anderson JL, Halperin JL, Albert NM, Bozkurt B, Brindis RG, Curtis LH, DeMets D, Hochman JS, Kovacs RJ, Ohman EM, Pressler SJ, Sellke FW, Shen WK, Smith SC Jr, Tomaselli GF; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2014 Jun 24;129(25 Suppl 2):S1-45. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000437738.63853.7a. Epub 2013 Nov 12. No abstract available. Erratum In: Circulation. 2014 Jun 24;129(25 Suppl 2):S46-8. Circulation. 2015 Dec 22;132(25):e396.

Goldberg AC, Hopkins PN, Toth PP, Ballantyne CM, Rader DJ, Robinson JG, Daniels SR, Gidding SS, de Ferranti SD, Ito MK, McGowan MP, Moriarty PM, Cromwell WC, Ross JL, Ziajka PE; National Lipid Association Expert Panel on Familial Hypercholesterolemia. Familial hypercholesterolemia: screening, diagnosis and management of pediatric and adult patients: clinical guidance from the National Lipid Association Expert Panel on Familial Hypercholesterolemia. J Clin Lipidol. 2011 Jun;5(3 Suppl):S1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacl.2011.04.003. Epub 2011 Apr 12.

Pollex RL, Joy TR, Hegele RA. Emerging antidyslipidemic drugs. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 2008 Jun;13(2):363-81. doi: 10.1517/14728214.13.2.363.

Sharrett AR, Ballantyne CM, Coady SA, Heiss G, Sorlie PD, Catellier D, Patsch W; Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study Group. Coronary heart disease prediction from lipoprotein cholesterol levels, triglycerides, lipoprotein(a), apolipoproteins A-I and B, and HDL density subfractions: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. Circulation. 2001 Sep 4;104(10):1108-13. doi: 10.1161/hc3501.095214.

Publications automatically indexed to this study by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number):

Ballantyne CM, Bays HE, Louie MJ, Smart J, Zhang Y, Ray KK. Factors Associated With Enhanced Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Lowering With Bempedoic Acid. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022 Aug 2;11(15):e024531. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.024531. Epub 2022 Aug 2.

Banach M, Duell PB, Gotto AM Jr, Laufs U, Leiter LA, Mancini GBJ, Ray KK, Flaim J, Ye Z, Catapano AL. Association of Bempedoic Acid Administration With Atherogenic Lipid Levels in Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials of Patients With Hypercholesterolemia. JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Oct 1;5(10):1124-1135. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.2314.

• Responsible Party: Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.
• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02666664
• Other Study ID Numbers: 1002-040; 2015-004136-36 ( EudraCT Number )
• First Posted: January 28, 2016
• Results First Posted: April 20, 2020
• Last Update Posted: May 11, 2020
• Last Verified: April 2020

Keywords provided by Esperion Therapeutics, Inc.:

hyperlipidemia; cholesterol; heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia; atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; ASCVD; HeFH; LDL

Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Cardiovascular Diseases; Atherosclerosis; Hypercholesterolemia; Hyperlipidemias; Hyperlipoproteinemias; Dyslipidemias; Lipid Metabolism Disorders; Metabolic Diseases; Arteriosclerosis; Arterial Occlusive Diseases; Vascular Diseases; 8-hydroxy-2,2,14,14-tetramethylpentadecanedioic acid; Hypolipidemic Agents; Antimetabolites; Molecular Mechanisms of Pharmacological Action; Lipid Regulating Agents; Enzyme Inhibitors; Hypoglycemic Agents; Physiological Effects of Drugs