"In this summary of the ASSERT, ASSURE, & SUSTAIN trials,....  it seems to combine all 3 trials to see how to the BETonMACE trial should be designed,... is that the case,..?"

There were many news releases in 2013 and 2014 regarding post-hoc analyses of ASSURE responder populations for plaque reduction and of SUSTAIN and ASSURE combined data for MACE reduction. Borne out of this were the findings that low-HDL, high baseline hsCRP, diabetes, treated with apabetalone + rosuvastatin seemed to be the best responder populations for plaque reduction and/or MACE reduction elicited by apabetalone. These post-hoc analyses definitely informed how BETonMACE should be designed. ASSERT was only 3 months long and these patients probably didn't contribute too many more MACE than were already reported in the ASSURE and SUSTAIN combined analysis in the 2016 Atherosclerosis paper. I don't have access to the American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs paper that also included ASSERT, so I don't know the ASSERT MACE contribution for sure. At the very least, I'm guessing that also including ASSERT only strengthened these post-hoc conclusions for MACE as well as strengthen the observations of apabetalone-mediated changes in apo-AI, HDL-C, HDL-particle size and hsCRP data for that paper.

BearDownAZ