3.8 Review

Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors: challenges and perspectives

Journal

EXPERT REVIEW OF CARDIOVASCULAR THERAPY
Volume 14, Issue 8, Pages 953-962

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/14779072.2016.1189327

Keywords

Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors; cardiovascular disease; torcetrapib; dalcetrapib; evacetrapib; anacetrapib; TA-8995

Funding

  1. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  2. Pfizer
  3. Eli-Lilly
  4. Abbott
  5. Amgen
  6. AstraZeneca
  7. Novartis
  8. Vianex
  9. TEVA
  10. MSD
  11. Schering Plough
  12. Merck
  13. Solvay
  14. Boehringer-Ingelheim
  15. Fournier

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitors substantially increase the concentration of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), which may have a possible beneficial effect for cardiovascular disease risk reduction. Areas covered: Current data regarding the effects of CETP inhibitors on cardiovascular disease risk and possible mechanisms for their effects and safety are presented in this review. Expert commentary: The first CETP inhibitor, torcetrapib, was discontinued because of increased off-target adverse effects (increased serum aldosterone and blood pressure levels). The development program of dalcetrapib and evacetrapib, which were not associated with increased blood pressure, was terminated due to futility (insufficient efficacy) concerning cardiovascular outcomes. Although the failure of torcetrapib has been attributed to specific off-target effects, there are some common characteristics between CETP inhibitors pointing to the possibility that certain adverse effects may be class-specific. The newer CETP inhibitors anacetrapib and TA-8995 have promising effects on lipid profile and metabolism (increase of HDL-C and reduction of both low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lipoprotein (a) levels), but their cardiovascular effects and safety profile have not yet been confirmed in large outcome trials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available