
==== Front
Iran J Public Health
Iran. J. Public Health
IJPH
IJPH
Iranian Journal of Public Health
2251-6085 2251-6093 Tehran University of Medical Sciences 

IJPH-48-1405
Review Article
Efficacy of Ezetimibe/Simvastatin (10/10 mg) versus High Dose Statin in Dyslipidemia Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
YANG Gaoming 12 HAN Dengfeng 1 MA Jianhua 1 ZHANG Xiaoning 3* 1. Department of Neurology, First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, 830054, China
2. Department of Neurology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College (China National Nuclear Corporation 416 Hospital), Chengdu, 610000, China
3. Department of Neurology, Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, 830054, China
* Corresponding Author: Email: osbornekatherine@example.com
8 2019 
48 8 1405 1417
26 8 2018 11 12 2018 Copyright© Iranian Public Health Association & Tehran University of Medical Sciences2019This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Background:
The monotherapies of statin and ezetimibe had not successfully achieved their objectives in the management of lipid levels of dyslipidemia patients. We aimed to compare the effects of combined low-dose simvastatin and ezetimibe versus high-dose statin on the lipid-lowering treatment of dyslipidemia patients.

Methods:
We searched five databases published before May 2018, namely PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Completely published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of high-dose statin (S) with ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/10 mg; E/S) on the management of dyslipidemia patients were included.

Results:
A total of ten RCTs met the inclusion criteria, including 1,624 patients (E/S:691, S:933). Six outcomes underwent pooled analysis, including weighted mean difference (WMD) from baseline in total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), triglyceride (TG), and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C). No significant gap was found between high-dose statin and ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/10 mg) in LDL-C (−1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −4.42∼1.31, P=0 .29), HDL-C (1.05; 95%CI: −0.21∼2.3, P=0 .1), TG (4.03; 95%CI: −4.53∼12.58, P=0.36), and hs-CRP (0.14; 95%CI: −0.50∼0.78, P=0.67). However, there was significant difference found between the two lipid-lowering treatments in TC (−0.45; 95%CI: −9.07∼−0.83, P=0.02) and non-HDL-C (−4.97; 95%CI −8.46∼−1.49, P=0.005).

Conclusion:
Ezetimibe co-administered with simvastatin (10 mg) and high-dose statin monotherapy may show similar effects in reducing LDL-C, TG, and hs-CRP levels and in increasing HDL-C levels. However, the results suggest that there was greater TC and non-HDL-C lowering through high-dose statin monotherapy as compared with ezetimibe/simvastatin co-administration.

EzetimibeStatinCholesterolInflammationMeta-analysis
==== Body
Introduction
Ischemic stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) were called atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) (1). The data suggested the age-standardized death rate attributable to all ASCVD in the US population was 223.9 per 100,000 in 2013 (2). Meanwhile, stroke is the first and the third leading cause of death in rural and urban areas in China (3). In 2005, ASCVD is the most common cause of death in the UK, in which 49% of deaths are due to CHD and about 28% are due to stroke (4). Dyslipidemia, particularly, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), is a major contributor to the formation and development of atherosclerotic plaques (5). Inflammation is a key participant in atherosclerosis formation by intervening or modulating systemic and local inflammatory responses. Evidences from experimental model studies support the viewpoint that inflammation is a driver of atherosclerosis. High sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) is an indicator of subclinical inflammation. Furthermore, all these factors can lead to the development of ASCVD.

The management of dyslipidemia or hypercholesterolemia is constantly evolving. The treatment aims to prevent or reduce the risk and complications of ASCVD (6). There are two primary ways to manage hypercholesterolemia: through lifestyle changes, such as proper diet, exercise, and weight management, and through medication (7). The 3-hydroxy-3-methylgutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors or statins are recommended as the first-line drug to treat hypercholesterolemia (1, 8, 9). Aside from its lipid-lowering efficacy, statins can also reduce infarct volume and increase neurological function through its anti-inflammatory, antithrombotic, anti-oxidant, anti-apoptotic, and neuroprotective properties (1). Statin is a well-established and effective medication to lower lipid levels. It can increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels from 2.3 to 7.9%, and it can decrease LDL-C, non-HDL-C, triglyceride (TG) levels within ranges of 27–55%, 25–50%, 9–25%, respectively (10, 11). Although statin is proven to be beneficial in the management of hypercholesterolemia, some patients given the highest doses of statin still fail to achieve their LDL-C target levels (10). However, statin has numerous adverse effects (AEs) such as myalgia, myopathy, rhabdomyolysis, pathoglycemia, hepatotoxicity, etc (5, 10, 12, 13). High-intensity statin (atorvastatin 40–80 mg, rosuvastatin 20–40 mg, and simvastatin 80 mg) was able to reduce LDL-C about > 50% from the untreated baseline (14). However, there is a close relationship between high dosage of statins and increased risk of AEs (10).

Ezetimibe is an epoch-making inhibitor of intestinal cholesterol absorption (15). The inhibition of absorption of bile acid-derived reabsorbed and food-derived cholesterols is associated with the mechanism of ezetimibe. It could significantly reduce levels of postprandial TG, reduce LDL-C rate by 23%, and increase the effect of statin to reduce serum TG (16, 17). Ezetimibe and statin have some similar effects, and they are both involved in ameliorating oxidative stress, insulin resistance, and athero-sclerotic and inflammatory markers (9). Over the past years, the Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) on ezetimibe plus statin and/or statin monotherapy constantly evolved, and example of such studies are Ezetimibe and Simvastatin in Hypercholesterolemia Enhances Atherosclerosis Regression (ENHANCE), Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS), Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP), and Improved Reduction of Outcoms: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT) (18–21).

Some studies and guides recommended ezetimibe in combination with a statin to reduce the risk of ASCVD events for at-risk patients (22, 23). However, it is still controversial whether there is a difference in the effects of combined, low-dose simvastatin and ezetimibe as compared with high-dose statin on lipid-lowering treatment.

Hence, we performed the meta-analysis to compare the effect of the combination of low-dose simvastatin and ezetimibe (defined as daily dose of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10 mg) with high-dose statin (defined as a daily dose of atorvastatin 40–80 mg, rosuvastatin 20–40 mg, and simvastatin 80 mg) on lipid-lowering treatment in dyslipidemia patients.

Methods
Our meta-analysis was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) Statement (24). However, the data based on published studies, there are no ethical issues in this systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data Searching
This systematic review and meta-analysis can be found in four common databases and one web-site: Clinicaltrials.gov
. We searched Medline by PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov for completed or ongoing trials with the keywords "ezetimibe", "simvastatin", "atorvastatin", "rosuvastatin", and "statin". The boolean logic and wildcard and truncation symbols were used in bibliographic retrieval. The final search was completed on May 2018. Through manual search, the references of the original manuscripts, review, and meta-analysis were useful in bibliographic retrieval. The search strategy for Medline by Pubmed is shown in detail in the electronic supplementary material (ESM 2).

Study Selection
Two reviewers (G.M.Y. and D.F.H) searched and filtered the related articles, and disagreement was resolved by conformable discussion. The third reviewer (X.N.Z.) contributed to solve the discrepancies through discussion with the two previous reviewers.

Inclusion criteria: 1) RCTs; 2) comparison of low-dose simvastatin plus ezetimibe (defined as a daily dose of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10 mg) and high-dose statin (defined as a daily dose of atorvastatin 40–80 mg, rosuvastatin 20–40 mg, and simvastatin 80 mg); 3) assessment of the therapeutic effect of changes in LDL-C levels in hypercholesterolemia; and 4) reporting data (means and standard deviations [SD]) regarding pre-intervention and post-intervention LDL-C or change from baseline LDLC. Exclusion criteria: 1) non-human studies, 2) incomplete papers, 3) reviews, 4) observational studies, 5) post-hoc studies, 6) pooled analysis, 7) subgroup analysis, 8) letters, 9) conference summaries/ papers, 10) non-English papers.

Data Extraction
Two reviewers (G.M.Y. and D.F.H) achieved data extraction from complete papers that passed the inclusion criteria, and disagreement was resolved through conformable discussion. The third reviewer (X.N.Z.) contributed to solve the discrepancies through discussion with the two previous reviewers. The following data were extracted: 1) the primary information: author, publication time, and study design; 2) profile of participant: headcount, gender, age, body mass index (BMI), diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), hypertension, CHD, PAD, stroke, smoking habits; 3) intervention: type of drug, dosage, and duration of therapy; 4) outcome: pre-/post-intervention or change from the baseline values of LDL-C, HDL-C, total cholesterol (TC), TG, non-HDL-C, and hs-CRP.

Risk of Bias Assessment
A systematic quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool in the included RCTs. The study quality was independently evaluated by two reviewers (G.M.Y. and D.F.H), and the differences were settled through mutual discussion. The third reviewer (X.N.Z.) contributed to solve the discrepancies through discussion with the two previous reviewers. The risk of bias assessment included: 1) random sequence generation (selection bias); 2) allocation concealment (selection bias); 3) blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias); 4) blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias); 5) incomplete outcome data (attrition bias); 6) selective reporting (reporting bias); and 7) other biases. According to Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool, a judgment of 'yes' revealed low risk of bias, whereas 'no' revealed high risk of bias, and 'unclear' revealed an unclear or unknown risk of bias (9, 25).

Statistical analysis
The pre- and post-interventions or change from the baseline of LDL-C acted as the primary outcome, and the pre- and post-interventions or change from the baseline of HDL-C, TC, TG, non-HDL-C, and hs-CRP acted as the secondary outcome. The non-HDL-C was calculated as TC minus HDL-C, and this was assessed as mean or median± SD. The data extraction and count were applied to the change (mean or median±SD) in response to pre-/post-therapy. However, we failed to use SD in some (26–29). Thus, we utilized SD of baseline instead of SD of change.

RevMan 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) was used for the statistical analysis of the paper. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) played an important role in the pooled effect. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochrane's Q test. If the p value is greater than 0.10, low heterogeneity was considered. In addition, the I2 statistic was applied to assess heterogeneity as well. We considered levels of heterogeneity as follows: 1) I2 < 20%: low heterogeneity; 2) I2: 20–50%: evident heterogeneity; 3) I2: 50–75%: material heterogeneity; and 4) I2 > 75%: considerable heterogeneity. Low heterogeneity or I2 < 20% was determined using the mean of fixed effect model as calculated by RevMan 5.3. Other heterogeneities were determined using a random effect model.

We performed data merging based on heterogeneity levels. If the heterogeneity was not low, sensitive analysis or subgroup analysis was then applied. Publication bias was assessed through visual inspection of the funnel plots.

Results
Study Searching
We accepted a total of ten studies included in 13 literatures through database and manual searching (Fig. 1). In those literatures, three studies have two reduplicative literatures. Finally, we included ten studies. A total of 691 patients in the ezetimibe/simvastatin group and a total of 933 patients in the high-dose statin group were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. These studies were conducted within 4 to 14 weeks and included four parallel, three factorial, and three crossover studies.

Fig. 1: Process of literature searching

Study characteristics
The ten studies included in our meta-analysis (26–38) (Table 1). Among them, some had two reduplicative literatures including (31, 32), (27, 37), and (29, 38). The mean±SD or median±SD and change from baseline were widely used to the field of numerical variable. The sample sizes of the studies included 10 to 232 participants. The reported mean age of the participants in each study ranged from 41 to 74 years old. Data conversion was also a key procedure in the statistical analysis. However, the SD of change from baseline of some studies were not obtained; thus, SD in baseline was obtained instead (26, 27, 29).

Table 1: Summary details for included studies

Studies	Participants	Intervention	Duration time, week	Sample size	Age, Year	Male, %	Race, %	
Araujo 2010 (30)	Hypercholesterolemia	E/S	4	11	NA	NA	NA	
10/10						
S 80		12				
Settergren 2009 (31, 32)	Diabetes or IGT, stable CAD	E/S	6	15	74 (66–77)a	60	NA	
10/10						
S 80		17	70 (67–74)a	76.47		
Olijhoek 2008 (33)	Metabolic syndrome	E/S	6	19	54±7	100	NA	
10/10						
S 80		19				
Carcia 2016 (34)	Excess weight	E/S	8	16	48.0±8.1	0	NA	
10/10						
S 80		16	41.0±8.6			
Goldberg 2004 (26)	Hypercholesterolemia	E/S	12	87	NA	48	White 83%, Black 3%, Hispanic 9%, Others 5%	
10/10						
S 80		87		49	White 79%, Black 4%, Hispanic 10%, Others 7%	
Rudofsky 2012 (35)	Diabetes	E/S	8	11	65±9	45.45	NA	
10/10						
S 80		10	56±10	40		
Westerink 2013 (36)	Metabolic syndrome, abdominally obese patients	E/S	6	90	57±9	59	NA	
10/10						
S 80		91				
Ose 2007 (27, 37)	Hypercholesterolemia	E/S	14	151	56 (22–80)b	46	White 88%, Black 3%, Hispanic 1%, Others 8%	
10/10						
S 80		156	55 (22–83)b	48	White 88%, Black 3%, Hispanic 3%, Others 7%	
Ballantyne 2005 (28)	Hypercholesterolemia	E/S	6	230	E/S, 59.0±10.6	E/S, 52.2	E/S:White 86.3%, Black 7.6%, Hispanic 4.4%, Others 1.7%	
10/10						
A 40		232	A, 58.5±10.2	A, 52.4	A:White 86.0%, Black 7.5%, Hispanic 4.7%, Others 1.8%	
A 80		230				
Davidson 2002 (29, 38)	Hypercholesterolemia	E/S	12	61	57.6 (27–83)b	46	White 91%, Black 4%, Hispanic 3%, Asian 2%, American Indian 0	
10/10						
S 80		63	56.4 (25–87)b	42	White 90%, Black 5%, Hispanic 5%, Asian < 1%, American Indian 0	
Studies	Araujo 2010 (30)	Settergren 2009 (31,32)	Olijhoek 2008 (33)	Carcia 2016 (34)	Goldberg 2004 (26)	Rudofsky 2012 (35)	Westerink 2013 (36)	Ose 2007 (27,37)	Ballantyne 2005 (28)	Davidson 2002 (29,38)	
BMI, kg/m2	NA	E/S ,29 (27–30)a : S ,28 (26–30)a	30.1±2.7	E/S ,36.0±4.4;S ,35.0±4.3	NA	NA	30.0±2.7	E/S ,27.9±4.8 ; S ,28.4±4.9	E/S, 29.8±5.5; A, 30.1±5.6	29±5	
BP, mmHg or Hypertension, %	NA	E/S ,150 (150–162)/60 (60–65)a S ,145 (120–160)/60 (57–70))a	138±13/89±6	E/S ,38%; S ,31%	NA	E/S ,54.5; S ,70	140±14/85±9	NA	NA	E/S ,30; S ,29	
Diabetes or IGT, %	0	E/S ,15; S ,17	NA	E/S ,6.3; S ,0	NA	100	0	NA	NA	E/S ,3; S ,3	
CAD, %	NA	100	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	E/S ,8; S ,6	
PAD and Stroke, %	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	
Smoker,%	NA	E/S ,20; S ,17.65	0	E/S ,6.3; S ,6.3	NA	NA	0	NA	NA	E/S ,14; S ,16	
Data reported in the form of mean±SD unless indicated.

* mg/dl;

** umol/l;

# u/l;

## mg/dl.

a Data reported in the form of median (quartiles);

b Data reported in the form of mean (range);

Abbreviation: A, atorvastatin; BMI, body mass index; BP, blood pressure; CAD, coronary artery disease; E, ezetimibe; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; NA, not available; PAD, peripheral arterial disease; RCT, Randomized Controlled Trial; S, simvastatin

Risk of Bias
The systematic quality assessment was performed for the included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. The overall quality of the included studies was moderate. The methods of random sequence generation were described in four studies (26, 27, 29, 35). Allocation concealment was performed in three studies (28, 33, 35). Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were associated with low selection bias. Only one study was high risk for performance bias (30). Two studies with high risk of bias and eight studies with low risk of bias were key participants in incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) (26–38). However, a half of the included studies were high risk for selective reporting (reporting bias) (26–29, 35). The summary of the risk of bias is shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2: Risk of bias summary

Quantitative Data Analysis
Effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment and high-dose statin treatment on serum LDL-C
Overall, 10 comparisons with 691 patients in the ezetimibe/simvastatin group and 933 patients in the high-dose statin group were included in the meta-analysis. There might be low heterogeneity in the LDL-C levels between the included studies (χ2=5.74, I2=0%, P=0.77; Fig. 3). The fixed effect model and the pooled WMD were performed with Revman 5.3, and an overall mean LDL-C change from baseline of −1.55 mg/dl (95%CI: −4.42∼1.31, P=0.29; Fig. 3) was found in two groups.

Fig. 3: Forest plots showing WMD from baseline in (a) LDL-C, (b) HDL-C;E/S (daily dose of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10mg); S, high-dose statin

Effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment and high-dose statin treatment on serum HDL-C
There might be low heterogeneity in the HDL-C levels between the included studies (χ2=5.63, I2=0%, P=0.58; Fig. 3).Therefore, the fixed effect model was applied. The pooled WMD of HDL-C was 1.05 (95%CI: −0.21∼2.30, P=0.10; Fig. 3) between ezetimibe/simvastatin group and high-dose statin monotherapy group.

Effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin and high-dose statin on serum TC and non-HDL-C
No significant heterogeneity or low heterogeneity in TC and non-HDL-C were detected for the included studies (χ2=2.84, I2=0%, P=0.83, andχ2=2.29, I2=0%, P=0.89; Fig. 4). The fixed effect model and pooled WMD were applied with Revman 5.3. In ezetimibe/simvastatin group and high-dose statin group, there was significant difference in TC and non-HDL-C change from baseline of −4.95 mg/dl and −4.97 (95%CI: −9.07∼−0.83, P=0.02; 95%CI: −8.46∼−1.49, P=0.005; Fig. 4), respectively.

Fig. 4: Forest plots showing WMD from baseline in (a) TC, (b) non-HDL-C; E/S (daily dose of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10 mg); S, high-dose statin

Effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin and high-dose statin on serum TG and hs-CRP
The heterogeneity of TG and hs-CRP levels in the included studies was low (χ2=3.66, I2=0%, P=0.82, and χ2=0.50, I2=0%, P=1.00; Fig. 5). The fixed effect model was used to pool the data. The pooled result suggested that there is close relationship between the ezetimibe/simvastatin group and high-dose statin group, as seen in change from baseline on TG and hs-CRP (WMD: 4.03; 95% CI, −4.53∼12.58; P= 0.36; WMD: 0.14; 95% CI, −0.50∼0.78; P=0.67; Fig. 5). The sensitive analysis was performed in the pooled result of hs-CRP, because the data from one study (34) presented with significant difference. However, the result of sensitive analysis was not different.

Fig. 5: Forest plots showing WMD from baseline in (a) TG, (b) hs-CRP; E/S (daily dose of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10mg); S, high-dose statin

Publication bias
Assessment of publication bias using the funnel plot by visual inspection was symmetrical (Fig. 6), and it revealed that there is no significant publication bias.

Fig. 6: Funnel plot for the evaluation of publication bias. WMD, weighed mean difference; SE, standard error

Discussion
In general, there was an equal overall mean LDL-C, HDL-C, TG, and hs-CRP change from baseline in the ezetimibe plus simvastatin (10 mg/10 mg/d) and high-dose statin groups. However, there was significant difference in TC and non-HDL-C in the two groups, thus showing that the high-dose statin has a more advantageous result. The system review and meta-analysis included ten original studies. The white, Hispanic, black, and Asian races were important participants of these studies, but most of the participants belong to the white, black, and Hispanic races. The basic indices of the original studies, as mentioned before, included BMI, diabetes mellitus or IGT, blood pressure, ischemic stroke, CHD, PAD, liver and renal functions, etc. The sample of terminal outcome in included studies was defined as the sample for system review and meta-analysis. The relationship between the change of LDL-C and hs-CRP from baseline in this meta-analysis and another one (9) was similar in the combined low-dose simvastatin and ezetimibe (ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10mg) versus high-dose statin groups. Greater LDL-C lowering may be achieved with ezetimibe plus statin as compared with statin. Because, statin was the different dosages and drug species (39).

High-dose statin has many benefits in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and inflammation, although it has numerous side effects as well. The combination of ezetimibe and low-dose simvastatin contributed to the similar outcome. Similarly, as compared with statin monotherapy, a meta-analysis based on 18 trials of 14,497 patients indicated that the addition of ezetimibe to statin did not increase the risk of increased levels of liver enzymes and CK, myalgia, myopathy, rhabdomyolysis, statin-associated gastrointestinal discomfort, and discontinuations due to AEs (40, 41).

Limitation of the system review and meta-analysis
The studies included in this system review and meta-analysis had limitations on methodology, particularly the inclusion of a large sample, as seen in some studies (27–29). Hence, the standard grading using GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) resulted in middle rank (Table 2). The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching for studies in English language. Studies not in English were excluded, such as those in Chinese, Russian, German, and Hungarian. Albeit the funnel plots of these non-English studies were symmetrical (Fig. 6), they were still excluded from our meta-analysis. The review had searched a part of the grey literatures, in which was not the formal journal articles. However, due to the presumption of incompleteness of data, the meta-analysis excluded letters, conference summaries/papers, etc. Moreover, the system review and meta-analysis failed to find full papers, particularly, in the grey literature. Thus, some data might be missed.

Table 2: The standards grading of GRADE in outcome indicator

Quality assessment	
Outcome indicator	Included study	Design	Quality of methodology	Circumstantial evidence	Heterogeneity	Precision	Publication bias	Hierarchy of evidence quality	
Ldl-c	10	Rcts	Middle rank1	No	High rank	High rank	Middle rank2	Middle rank	
Hdl-c	8	Rcts	Middle rank1	No	High rank	High rank	Middle rank2	Middle rank	
Tc	7	Rcts	Middle rank1	No	High rank	High rank	Middle rank2	Middle rank	
Tg	8	Rcts	Middle rank1	No	High rank	High rank	Middle rank2	Middle rank	
Non-hdl-c	7	Rcts	Middle rank1	No	High rank	High rank	Middle rank2	Middle rank	
Hs-crp	7	Rcts	Middle rank1	No	High rank	High rank	Middle rank2	Middle rank	
1 Selective reporting (reporting bias);

2 Publication bias; RCTs: Randomized Controlled Trials

In the stage of study selection, the change in LDL-C was necessary. Thus, included studies with other objectives might be decreased, and selective bias should be considered.

The included studies used ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10 mg, simvastatin 80 mg, and atorvastatin 40/80 mg. The ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10 mg and simvastatin 80 mg were the primary medications. However, high-dose rosuvastatin was not included. Therefore, the pooled result might be partial to ezetimibe/simvastatin and high-dose simvastatin. Risk of bias was assessed through the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. The GRADE was used in the quality assessment of the outcome indicator of the included studies. The system review and meta-analysis was performed by different reviewers. The search strategy can be repeated as needed.

Conclusion
Ezetimibe co-administered with simvastatin (10mg) and high-dose statin monotherapy may provide similar effects in reducing levels of LDL-C, TG, and hs-CRP and in increasing HDL-C. However, the results also suggest that greater TC and non-HDL-C lowering may be achieved with a high-dose statin monotherapy as compared with ezetimibe/simvastatin co-administration. The study determined the efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/10 mg) versus high-dose statin. We recommend that more studies should be aimed to determine the efficacy and side effects of ezetimibe co-administered with statin at different dosages and drug species. Moreover, there should be more future studies focusing on the comparison of ezetimibe co-administered with statin versus ezetimibe co-administered with non-statin drugs, particularly PCSK9 inhibitors.

Ethical considerations
Ethical issues (Including plagiarism, informed consent, misconduct, data fabrication and/or falsification, double publication and/or submission, redundancy, etc.) have been completely observed by the authors.

Acknowledgements
No financial support was reived for this study.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.
==== Refs
References
1. Dandapat S Robinson JG   (2016 ). Guidelines for Management of Hyperlipidemia: Implications for Treatment of Patients with Stroke Secondary to Atherosclerotic Disease
. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep , 16 :24 .26838351 
2. Mozaffarian D Benjamin EJ Go AS   (2016 ). Heart isease and Stroke Statistics-2016 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
. Circulation , 133 :e38 –360
.26673558 
3. Zhang Y Bai L Shi M   (2017 ). Features and risk factors of carotid atherosclerosis in a population with high stroke incidence in China
. Oncotarget , 8 :620-794-3276
.28915687 
4. Pandor A Ara RM Tumur I   (2009 ). Ezetimibe monotherapy for cholesterol lowering in 2,722 people: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
. J Intern Med , 265 :568 –80
.19141093 
5. Shapiro MD Fazio S   (2016 ). From Lipids to Inflammation: New Approaches to Reducing Atherosclerotic Risk
. Circ Res , 118 :732 –49
.26892970 
6. Isles CG Paterson JR   (2000 ). Identifying patients at risk for coronary heart disease: implications from trials of lipid-lowering drug therapy
. QJM , 93 :567 –74
.10984551 
7. Eckel RH Jakicic JM Ard JD   (2014 ). 2013 AHA/ACC guideline on lifestyle management to reduce cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines
. J Am Coll Cardiol , 63 :2960 –84
.24239922 
8. Noma K Higashi Y   (2012 ). How to use ezetimibe as an anti-atherogenic agent via inhibition of rho-Kinase
. Circ J , 76 :1836 –1837
.22785339 
9. Ye Y Zhao X Zhai G Guo L   (2012 ). Effect of high-dose statin versus low-dose statin plus ezetimibe on endothelial function: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther , 17 :357 –65
.22710021 
10. Catapano AL Farnier M Foody JM   (2014 ). Combination therapy in dyslipidemia: where are we now?

Atherosclerosis , 237 :319 –35
.25299967 
11. Barter PJ Brandrup-Wognsen G Palmer MK Nicholls SJ   (2010 ). Effect of statins on HDL-C: a complex process unrelated to changes in LDL-C: analysis of the VOYAGER Database
. J Lipid Res , 51 :1546 –53
.19965573 
12. Preiss D Seshasai SR Welsh P   (2011 ). Risk of incident diabetes with intensive-dose compared with moderate-dose statin therapy: a meta-analysis
. JAMA , 305 :2556 –64
.21693744 
13. Chatzizisis YS Koskinas KC Misirli G   (2010 ). Risk factors and drug interactions predisposing to statin-induced myopathy: implications for risk assessment, prevention and treatment
. Drug Saf , 33 :171 –87
.20158283 
14. Stone NJ Robinson JG Lichtenstein AH   (2014 ). 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
. J Am Coll Cardiol , 63 :2889 –934
.24239923 
15. Yamaoka-Tojo M Tojo T Takahira N   (2011 ). Ezetimibe and reactive oxygen species
. Curr Vasc Pharmacol , 9 :109 –20
.21044015 
16. Capps N   (2006 ). Total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol responses to ezetimibe in clinical practice
. Int J Clin Pract , 60 :867 –9
.16858759 
17. Nakamura K Miyoshi T Yunoki K Ito H   (2016 ). Postprandial hyperlipidemia as a potential residual risk factor
. J Cardiol , 67 :335 –9
.26744235 
18. Kastelein JJ Akdim F Stroes ES   (2008 ). Simvastatin with or without ezetimibe in familial hypercholesterolemia
. N Engl J Med , 358 :1431 –43
.18376000 
19. Rossebo AB Pedersen TR Boman K   (2008 ). Intensive lipid lowering with simvastatin and ezetimibe in aortic stenosis
. N Engl J Med , 359 :1343 –56
.18765433 
20. Baigent C Landray MJ Reith C   (2011 ). The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with simvastatin plus ezetimibe in patients with chronic kidney disease (Study of Heart and Renal Protection): a randomised placebo-controlled trial
. Lancet , 377 :2181 –2192
.21663949 
21. Cannon CP Blazing MA Giugliano RP   (2015 ). Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes
. N Engl J Med , 372 :2387 –97
.26039521 
22. Lyseng-Williamson KA   (2012 ). Ezetimibe/simvastatin: a guide to its clinical use in hypercholesterolemia
. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs , 12 :49 –56
.22208355 
23. Khavandi M Duarte F Ginsberg HN Reyes-Soffer G   (2017 ). Treatment of Dyslipidemias to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes
. Curr Cardiol Rep , 19 :7 .28132397 
24. Moher D Liberati A Tetzlaff J Altman DG   (2009 ). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
. PLoS Med , 6 :e1000097 .19621072 
25. Sahebkar A Simental-Mendia LE Guerrero-Romero F   (2015 ). Effect of statin therapy on plasma proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin 9 (PCSK9) concentrations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials
. Diabetes Obes Metab , 17 :1042 –55
.26183252 
26. Goldberg AC Sapre A Liu J   (2004 ). Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe coadministered with simvastatin in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
. Mayo Clin Proc , 79 :620 –629
.15132403 
27. Ose L Johnson-Levonas A Reyes R   (2007 ). A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind 14-week extension study examining the long-term safety and efficacy profile of the ezetimibe/simvastatin combination tablet
. Int J Clin Pract , 61 :1469 –80
.17655686 
28. Ballantyne CM Abate N Yuan Z   (2005 ). Dose-comparison study of the combination of ezetimibe and simvastatin (Vytorin) versus atorvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia: the Vytorin Versus Atorvastatin (VYVA) study
. Am Heart J , 149 :464 –73
.15864235 
29. Davidson MH McGarry T Bettis R   (2002 ). Ezetimibe coadministered with simvastatin in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia
. J Am Coll Cardiol , 40 :2125 –2134
.12505224 
30. Araujo DB Bertolami MC Ferreira WP   (2010 ). Pleiotropic effects with equivalent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction: comparative study between simvastatin and simvastatin/ezetimibe coadministration
. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol , 55 :1 –5
.19770669 
31. Settergren M Bohm F Ryden L Pernow J   (2008 ). Cholesterol lowering is more important than pleiotropic effects of statins for endothelial function in patients with dysglycaemia and coronary artery disease
. Eur Heart J , 29 :1753 –60
.18441323 
32. Settergren M Bohm F Ryden L   (2009 ). Lipid lowering versus pleiotropic effects of statins on skin microvascular function in patients with dysglycaemia and coronary artery disease
. J Intern Med , 266 :492 –8
.19563393 
33. Olijhoek JK Hajer GR van der Graaf Y   (2008 ). The effects of low-dose simvastatin and ezetimibe compared to high-dose simvastatin alone on post-fat load endothelial function in patients with metabolic syndrome: A randomized double-blind crossover trial
. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol , 52 :145 –150
.18670365 
34. Garcia MMO Varela CG Silva PF   (2016 ). Endothelial effect of statin therapy at a high dose versus low dose associated with ezetimibe
. Arq Bras Cardiol , 106 :279 –288
.27142792 
35. Rudofsky G Reismann P Groener JB   (2012 ). Identical LDL-cholesterol lowering but non-identical effects on NF-kappaB activity: High dose simvastatin vs combination therapy with ezetimibe
. Atherosclerosis , 223 :190 –6
.22633472 
36. Westerink J Deanfield J Imholz B   (2013 ). High-dose statin monotherapy versus low-dose statin/ezetimibe combination on fasting and postprandial lipids and endothelial function in obese patients with the metabolic syndrome: The PANACEA study
. Atherosclerosis , 227 :118 –24
.23261174 
37. Bays HE Ose L Fraser N   (2004 ). A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, factorial design study to evaluate the lipid-altering efficacy and safety profile of the ezetimibe/simvastatin tablet compared with ezetimibe and simvastatin monotherapy in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia
. Clin Ther , 26 :1758 –73
.15639688 
38. Sager PT Melani L Lipka L   (2003 ). Effect of coadministration of ezetimibe and simvastatin on high-sensitivity C-reactive protein
. Am J Cardiol , 92 :1414 –8
.14675576 
39. Angelopoulos J Krassakopoulos N Nathanson R   (2009 ). Co-administration of ezetimibe and a statin in management of dyslipidemias: a meta-analysis of clinical trials
. Arch Med Sci , 5 :347 –363
.
40. Kashani A Sallam T Bheemreddy S   (2008 ). Review of side-effect profile of combination ezetimibe and statin therapy in randomized clinical trials
. Am J Cardiol , 101 :1606 –13
.18489938 
41. Toth PP Morrone D Weintraub WS   (2012 ). Safety profile of statins alone or combined with ezetimibe: a pooled analysis of 27 studies including over 22,000 patients treated for 6–24 weeks
. Int J Clin Pract , 66 :800 –812
.22805272


{'source': 'PubMedDataset'}