scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Evan A. Stein

Bio: Evan A. Stein is an academic researcher from Medpace. The author has contributed to research in topics: Familial hypercholesterolemia & Cholesterol. The author has an hindex of 80, co-authored 340 publications receiving 36392 citations. Previous affiliations of Evan A. Stein include Cornell University & Memorial Hospital of South Bend.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
27 May 1998-JAMA
TL;DR: Lovastatin reduces the risk for the first acute major coronary event in men and women with average TC and LDL-C levels and below-average HDL- C levels and supports the inclusion of HDL-C in risk-factor assessment and the need for reassessment of the National Cholesterol Program guidelines.
Abstract: 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.79;P,.001), myocardial infarction (95 vs 57 myocardial infarctions; RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.83; P = .002), unstable angina (87 vs 60 first unstable angina events; RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.95;P = .02), coronary revascularization procedures (157 vs 106 procedures; RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.520.85; P = .001), coronary events (215 vs 163 coronary events; RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.92; P = .006), and cardiovascular events (255 vs 194 cardiovascular events; RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.91; P = .003). Lovastatin (20-40 mg daily) reduced LDL-C by 25% to 2.96 mmol/L (115 mg/dL) and increased HDL-C by 6% to 1.02 mmol/L (39 mg/dL). There were no clinically relevant differences in safety parameters between treatment groups. Conclusions.— Lovastatin reduces the risk for the first acute major coronary event in men and women with average TC and LDL-C levels and below-average HDL-C levels. These findings support the inclusion of HDL-C in risk-factor assessment, confirm the benefit of LDL-C reduction to a target goal, and suggest the need for reassessment of the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines regarding pharmacological intervention.

5,301 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of CHD among generally healthy postmenopausal women, especially during the first year after the initiation of hormone use.
Abstract: Background Recent randomized clinical trials have suggested that estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). In this report, we provide the final results with regard to estrogen plus progestin and CHD from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI). Methods The WHI included a randomized primary-prevention trial of estrogen plus progestin in 16,608 postmenopausal women who were 50 to 79 years of age at base line. Participants were randomly assigned to receive conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg per day) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg per day) or placebo. The primary efficacy outcome of the trial was CHD (nonfatal myocardial infarction or death due to CHD). Results After a mean follow-up of 5.2 years (planned duration, 8.5 years), the data and safety monitoring board recommended terminating the estrogen-plus-progestin trial because the overall risks exceeded the benefits. Combined hormone therapy was associated with a hazard ratio for CHD of 1.24 (nominal 95 percent confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.54; 95 percent confidence interval after adjustment for sequential monitoring, 0.97 to 1.60). The elevation in risk was most apparent at one year (hazard ratio, 1.81 [95 percent confidence interval, 1.09 to 3.01]). Although higher base-line levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were associated with an excess risk of CHD among women who received hormone therapy, higher base-line levels of C-reactive protein, other biomarkers, and other clinical characteristics did not significantly modify the treatment-related risk of CHD. Conclusions Estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of CHD among generally healthy postmenopausal women, especially during the first year after the initiation of hormone use. This treatment should not be prescribed for the prevention of cardiovascular disease.

1,980 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a 6-week, parallel-group, open-label, randomized, multicenter trial was conducted to compare rosuvastatin with comparators for other lipid modifications and achievement of National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and Joint European Task Force LDL cholesterol goals.
Abstract: The primary objective of this 6-week, parallel-group, open-label, randomized, multicenter trial was to compare rosuvastatin with atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin across dose ranges for reduction of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. Secondary objectives included comparing rosuvastatin with comparators for other lipid modifications and achievement of National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and Joint European Task Force LDL cholesterol goals. After a dietary lead-in period, 2,431 adults with hypercholesterolemia (LDL cholesterol ≥160 and <250 mg/dl; triglycerides <400 mg/dl) were randomized to treatment with rosuvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; simvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; or pravastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg. At 6 weeks, across-dose analyses showed that rosuvastatin 10 to 80 mg reduced LDL cholesterol by a mean of 8.2% more than atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg, 26% more than pravastatin 10 to 40 mg, and 12% to 18% more than simvastatin 10 to 80 mg (all p <0.001). Mean percent changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the rosuvastatin groups were +7.7% to +9.6% compared with +2.1% to +6.8% in all other groups. Across dose ranges, rosuvastatin reduced total cholesterol significantly more (p <0.001) than all comparators and triglycerides significantly more (p <0.001) than simvastatin and pravastatin. Adult Treatment Panel III LDL cholesterol goals were achieved by 82% to 89% of patients treated with rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg compared with 69% to 85% of patients treated with atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg; the European LDL cholesterol goal of <3.0 mmol/L was achieved by 79% to 92% in rosuvastatin groups compared with 52% to 81% in atorvastatin groups. Drug tolerability was similar across treatments.

1,382 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In patients with familial hypercholesterolemia, combined therapy with ezetimibe and simVastatin did not result in a significant difference in changes in intima-media thickness, as compared with simvastatin alone, despite decreases in levels of LDL cholesterol and C-reactive protein.
Abstract: The primary outcome, the mean (±SE) change in the carotid-artery intima–media thickness, was 0.0058±0.0037 mm in the simvastatin-only group and 0.0111±0.0038 mm in the simvastatin-plus-ezetimibe (combined-therapy) group (P = 0.29). Secondary outcomes (consisting of other variables regarding the intima–media thickness of the carotid and femoral arteries) did not differ significantly between the two groups. At the end of the study, the mean (±SD) LDL cholesterol level was 192.7±60.3 mg per deciliter (4.98±1.56 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin group and 141.3±52.6 mg per deciliter (3.65±1.36 mmol per liter) in the combined-therapy group (a between-group difference of 16.5%, P<0.01). The differences between the two groups in reductions in levels of triglycerides and C-reactive protein were 6.6% and 25.7%, respectively, with greater reductions in the combined-therapy group (P<0.01 for both comparisons). Side-effect and safety profiles were similar in the two groups. Conclusions In patients with familial hypercholesterolemia, combined therapy with ezetimibe and simvastatin did not result in a significant difference in changes in intima–media thickness, as compared with simvastatin alone, despite decreases in levels of LDL cholesterol and C-reactive protein. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00552097.)

1,162 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
28 May 2003-JAMA
TL;DR: Excess risk for all strokes attributed to estrogen plus progestin appeared to be present in all subgroups of women examined, and excess risk of all stroke was apparent in all age groups, in all categories of baseline stroke risk, and in women with and without hypertension, prior history of cardiovascular disease, use of hormones, statins, or aspirin.
Abstract: ContextThe Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial of estrogen plus progestin was stopped early because of adverse effects, including an increased risk of stroke in the estrogen plus progestin group.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of estrogen plus progestin on ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke and in subgroups, and to determine whether the effect of estrogen plus progestin was modified by baseline levels of blood biomarkers.DesignMulticenter double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial involving 16 608 women aged 50 through 79 years with an average follow-up of 5.6 years. Baseline levels of blood-based markers of inflammation, thrombosis, and lipid levels were measured in the first 140 centrally confirmed stroke cases and 513 controls.InterventionsParticipants received 0.625 mg/d of conjugated equine estrogen plus 2.5 mg/d of medroxyprogesterone acetate (n = 8506) or placebo (n = 8102).Main Outcome MeasuresOverall strokes and stroke subtype and severity were centrally adjudicated by stroke neurologists.ResultsOne hundred fifty-one patients (1.8%) in the estrogen plus progestin and 107 (1.3%) in the placebo groups had strokes. Overall 79.8% of strokes were ischemic. For combined ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, the intention-to-treat hazard ratio (HR) for estrogen plus progestin vs placebo was 1.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.68); with adjustment for adherence, the HR was 1.50 (95% CI, 1.08-2.08). The HR for ischemic stroke was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.09-1.90) and for hemorrhagic stroke, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.43-1.56). Point estimates of the HRs indicate that excess risk of all stroke was apparent in all age groups, in all categories of baseline stroke risk, and in women with and without hypertension, prior history of cardiovascular disease, use of hormones, statins, or aspirin. Other risk factors for stroke, including smoking, blood pressure, diabetes, lower use of vitamin C supplements, blood-based biomarkers of inflammation, higher white blood cell count, and higher hematocrit levels did not modify the effect of estrogen plus progestin on stroke risk.ConclusionsEstrogen plus progestin increases the risk of ischemic stroke in generally healthy postmenopausal women. Excess risk for all strokes attributed to estrogen plus progestin appeared to be present in all subgroups of women examined.

1,052 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In those older than age 50, systolic blood pressure of greater than 140 mm Hg is a more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP, and hypertension will be controlled only if patients are motivated to stay on their treatment plan.
Abstract: The National High Blood Pressure Education Program presents the complete Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Like its predecessors, the purpose is to provide an evidence-based approach to the prevention and management of hypertension. The key messages of this report are these: in those older than age 50, systolic blood pressure (BP) of greater than 140 mm Hg is a more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, CVD risk doubles for each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; those who are normotensive at 55 years of age will have a 90% lifetime risk of developing hypertension; prehypertensive individuals (systolic BP 120-139 mm Hg or diastolic BP 80-89 mm Hg) require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent the progressive rise in blood pressure and CVD; for uncomplicated hypertension, thiazide diuretic should be used in drug treatment for most, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes; this report delineates specific high-risk conditions that are compelling indications for the use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers); two or more antihypertensive medications will be required to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg) for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease; for patients whose BP is more than 20 mm Hg above the systolic BP goal or more than 10 mm Hg above the diastolic BP goal, initiation of therapy using two agents, one of which usually will be a thiazide diuretic, should be considered; regardless of therapy or care, hypertension will be controlled only if patients are motivated to stay on their treatment plan. Positive experiences, trust in the clinician, and empathy improve patient motivation and satisfaction. This report serves as a guide, and the committee continues to recognize that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

14,975 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: This book by a teacher of statistics (as well as a consultant for "experimenters") is a comprehensive study of the philosophical background for the statistical design of experiment.
Abstract: THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTS. By Oscar Kempthorne. New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1952. 631 pp. $8.50. This book by a teacher of statistics (as well as a consultant for \"experimenters\") is a comprehensive study of the philosophical background for the statistical design of experiment. It is necessary to have some facility with algebraic notation and manipulation to be able to use the volume intelligently. The problems are presented from the theoretical point of view, without such practical examples as would be helpful for those not acquainted with mathematics. The mathematical justification for the techniques is given. As a somewhat advanced treatment of the design and analysis of experiments, this volume will be interesting and helpful for many who approach statistics theoretically as well as practically. With emphasis on the \"why,\" and with description given broadly, the author relates the subject matter to the general theory of statistics and to the general problem of experimental inference. MARGARET J. ROBERTSON

13,333 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FAHA Michael J. Reeves, PhD Matthew Ritchey, PT, DPT, OCS, MPH Carlos J. Jiménez, ScD, SM Lori Chaffin Jordan,MD, PhD Suzanne E. Judd, PhD
Abstract: WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FAHA Michael J. Blaha, MD, MPH Stephanie E. Chiuve, ScD Mary Cushman, MD, MSc, FAHA Sandeep R. Das, MD, MPH, FAHA Rajat Deo, MD, MTR Sarah D. de Ferranti, MD, MPH James Floyd, MD, MS Myriam Fornage, PhD, FAHA Cathleen Gillespie, MS Carmen R. Isasi, MD, PhD, FAHA Monik C. Jiménez, ScD, SM Lori Chaffin Jordan, MD, PhD Suzanne E. Judd, PhD Daniel Lackland, DrPH, FAHA Judith H. Lichtman, PhD, MPH, FAHA Lynda Lisabeth, PhD, MPH, FAHA Simin Liu, MD, ScD, FAHA Chris T. Longenecker, MD Rachel H. Mackey, PhD, MPH, FAHA Kunihiro Matsushita, MD, PhD, FAHA Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, FAHA Michael E. Mussolino, PhD, FAHA Khurram Nasir, MD, MPH, FAHA Robert W. Neumar, MD, PhD, FAHA Latha Palaniappan, MD, MS, FAHA Dilip K. Pandey, MBBS, MS, PhD, FAHA Ravi R. Thiagarajan, MD, MPH Mathew J. Reeves, PhD Matthew Ritchey, PT, DPT, OCS, MPH Carlos J. Rodriguez, MD, MPH, FAHA Gregory A. Roth, MD, MPH Wayne D. Rosamond, PhD, FAHA Comilla Sasson, MD, PhD, FAHA Amytis Towfighi, MD Connie W. Tsao, MD, MPH Melanie B. Turner, MPH Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, FAHA Jenifer H. Voeks, PhD Joshua Z. Willey, MD, MS John T. Wilkins, MD Jason HY. Wu, MSc, PhD, FAHA Heather M. Alger, PhD Sally S. Wong, PhD, RD, CDN, FAHA Paul Muntner, PhD, MHSc On behalf of the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update

7,190 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Preamble and Transition to ACC/AHA Guidelines to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk S2 The goals of the …
Abstract: Preamble and Transition to ACC/AHA Guidelines to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk S2 The goals of the …

7,184 citations