Cargando…
Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review
INTRODUCTION: Currently available omega-3 (OM-3) fatty acid products in the US are either nonprescription dietary supplements (e.g., fish oils) or prescription (Rx) medications. As such, we aimed to describe critical therapeutic differences among the OM-3 fatty acids, focusing on differences between...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6999166/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31919792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01211-1 |
_version_ | 1783493934485340160 |
---|---|
author | Hilleman, Daniel E. Wiggins, Barbara S. Bottorff, Michael B. |
author_facet | Hilleman, Daniel E. Wiggins, Barbara S. Bottorff, Michael B. |
author_sort | Hilleman, Daniel E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Currently available omega-3 (OM-3) fatty acid products in the US are either nonprescription dietary supplements (e.g., fish oils) or prescription (Rx) medications. As such, we aimed to describe critical therapeutic differences among the OM-3 fatty acids, focusing on differences between fish oil supplements and Rx OM-3s. METHODS: A narrative review of known papers salient to this topic was conducted. RESULTS: Despite the multiple purported clinical benefits, the published evidence for OM-3 dietary supplements is generally insufficient, inconsistent, or negative. Rx OM-3 products are indicated as an adjunct to diet to reduce triglycerides (TG) in adults with severe hypertriglyceridemia (TG ≥ 500 mg/dl). Recently, the Rx eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)-only OM-3, icosapent ethyl, demonstrated cardiovascular (CV) risk reduction among statin-treated patients at high risk of CV disease in a large CV outcomes trial (CVOT), and is now also indicated as an adjunct to maximally tolerated statin therapy to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and unstable angina requiring hospitalization in adult patients with elevated TG (≥ 150 mg/dL) and established CVD or diabetes mellitus and ≥ 2 additional risk factors for CVD. In contrast to the rigorous regulatory standards for safety, efficacy, and manufacturing of medications (whether Rx or over the counter), the Food and Drug Administration manages dietary supplements as food. Issues specific to OM-3 dietary supplements include variable content, labeling inconsistencies, and poor product quality/impurity. Given these issues, OM-3 dietary supplements should not be substituted for Rx OM-3 products. The efficacy of the EPA-only Rx OM-3 product in a large CVOT cannot be extrapolated to other OM-3 products. CONCLUSION: Consumers and health care providers need to recognize critical differences between Rx and OM-3 dietary supplements to ensure appropriate use of each OM-3 product. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6999166 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69991662020-02-19 Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review Hilleman, Daniel E. Wiggins, Barbara S. Bottorff, Michael B. Adv Ther Review INTRODUCTION: Currently available omega-3 (OM-3) fatty acid products in the US are either nonprescription dietary supplements (e.g., fish oils) or prescription (Rx) medications. As such, we aimed to describe critical therapeutic differences among the OM-3 fatty acids, focusing on differences between fish oil supplements and Rx OM-3s. METHODS: A narrative review of known papers salient to this topic was conducted. RESULTS: Despite the multiple purported clinical benefits, the published evidence for OM-3 dietary supplements is generally insufficient, inconsistent, or negative. Rx OM-3 products are indicated as an adjunct to diet to reduce triglycerides (TG) in adults with severe hypertriglyceridemia (TG ≥ 500 mg/dl). Recently, the Rx eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)-only OM-3, icosapent ethyl, demonstrated cardiovascular (CV) risk reduction among statin-treated patients at high risk of CV disease in a large CV outcomes trial (CVOT), and is now also indicated as an adjunct to maximally tolerated statin therapy to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and unstable angina requiring hospitalization in adult patients with elevated TG (≥ 150 mg/dL) and established CVD or diabetes mellitus and ≥ 2 additional risk factors for CVD. In contrast to the rigorous regulatory standards for safety, efficacy, and manufacturing of medications (whether Rx or over the counter), the Food and Drug Administration manages dietary supplements as food. Issues specific to OM-3 dietary supplements include variable content, labeling inconsistencies, and poor product quality/impurity. Given these issues, OM-3 dietary supplements should not be substituted for Rx OM-3 products. The efficacy of the EPA-only Rx OM-3 product in a large CVOT cannot be extrapolated to other OM-3 products. CONCLUSION: Consumers and health care providers need to recognize critical differences between Rx and OM-3 dietary supplements to ensure appropriate use of each OM-3 product. Springer Healthcare 2020-01-09 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC6999166/ /pubmed/31919792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01211-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Hilleman, Daniel E. Wiggins, Barbara S. Bottorff, Michael B. Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review |
title | Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review |
title_full | Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review |
title_fullStr | Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review |
title_short | Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review |
title_sort | critical differences between dietary supplement and prescription omega-3 fatty acids: a narrative review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6999166/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31919792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-01211-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hillemandaniele criticaldifferencesbetweendietarysupplementandprescriptionomega3fattyacidsanarrativereview AT wigginsbarbaras criticaldifferencesbetweendietarysupplementandprescriptionomega3fattyacidsanarrativereview AT bottorffmichaelb criticaldifferencesbetweendietarysupplementandprescriptionomega3fattyacidsanarrativereview |