Cited by 18Fatty Acid Research and HealthLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthNutritional Studies and Diet

Eicosapentaenoic acid vs. docosahexaenoic acid for the prevention of cardiovascular disease

Sweeney, Ty E., Gaine, Sean P., Michos, Erin D.·2023·Current Opinion in Endocrinology, Diabetes & Obesity

Abstract

Purpose of review: Populations with greater fatty fish intake have lower risk of coronary heart disease. However, trials testing omega-3 fatty acids (FA) on cardiovascular outcomes have yielded inconsistent results. In this review, we summarize the major cardiovascular trials examining omega-3 FA supplementation, and compare differences with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) alone vs. docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) combined with EPA. Recent findings: The JELIS and REDUCE-IT trials both demonstrated significant reduction in cardiovascular events with high dose EPA in the form of icosapent ethyl (IPE), with a similar trend seen in the RESPECT-EPA trial. In contrast, the ASCEND, VITAL, STRENGTH, and OMEMI trials examining EPA+DPA combinations failed to demonstrate benefit. Beyond the difference in omega-3 FA formulations (IPE vs. omega-3 carboxylic acid), other differences between REDUCE-IT and STRENGTH include the achieved EPA levels, differing properties that EPA and DHA have on membrane stabilization, and the comparator oils tested in the trials. Summary: The totality of evidence suggests EPA alone, administered in a highly-purified, high-dose form, improves cardiovascular outcomes among patients with elevated triglycerides at high cardiovascular risk, but EPA and DHA together does not. Current guidelines endorse the use of IPE in statin-treated patients at high cardiovascular risk who have triglycerides >135 mg/dl.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/med.0000000000000796

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sweeney, T. E., Gaine, S. P., & Michos, E. D.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Michos, Erin D.
Venue
Current Opinion in Endocrinology, Diabetes & Obesity
Published
2022-12-23
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
87-93
ISSN
  • 1752-296X (ISSN-L)
  • 1752-2978
OpenAlex
W4312113548
Cited by
18
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4
FWCI
0.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Endocrinology Diabetes and Obesity (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Fatty Acid Research and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
eicosapentaenoic acid, docosahexaenoic acid, omega-3 fatty acids, cardiovascular disease prevention, icosapent ethyl, statin-treated patients, REDUCE-IT trial, ASCEND trial, VITAL trial, coronary artery disease
MeSH terms
Animals, Cardiovascular Diseases, Docosahexaenoic Acids, Humans, Triglycerides, Eicosapentaenoic Acid, Hypertriglyceridemia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review