Atom - My bet is that they get exactly the population that R-It included:
1) Existing CVD, on statins, with TGs>150 (or 135)
2) T2DM, on statins, with CV risk, and TGs>150 (or 135)
There are no data to support a broad primary prevention label (R-It did not include any non-diabetic primary prevention), so this would be highly unlikely.
A label less than R-It ignores a solid statistical argument for including both, and in the end, I think the scientists and statisticians will agree on this.