Potential therapeutic uses for ezetimibe beyond lowering LDL‐c to decrease cardiovascular events

Ezetimibe is a relatively new drug that inhibits the absorption of dietary cholesterol in the small intestine. It is a low density lipoprotein‐cholesterol (LDL‐C) lowering medication that acts directly on the intestine by inhibiting Niemann‐Pick C1 Like1 (NPC1L1). Recently, results of the ARBITER 6–HALTS trial (Arterial Biology for the Investigation of the Treatment Effects of Reducing Cholesterol 6–HDL and LDL Treatment Strategies) and the ENHANCE trial (Ezetimibe and Simvastatin in Hypercholesterolemia Enhances Atherosclerosis Regression) showed that ezetimibe had no effect on atherosclerosis despite producing a marked decrease in LDL‐C. Recent studies show a potential benefit of ezetimibe in treating insulin resistance, non‐alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), gallstones and dyslipidaemia associated with chronic renal failure and organ transplantation. All of these conditions are known to be associated with an increase in risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and further studies are needed to assess the potential benefits of ezetimibe in these therapeutics areas.     

Effect of Low‐Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Lowering by Ezetimibe/Simvastatin on Outcome Incidence: Overview,Meta‐Analyses,and Meta‐Regression Analyses of Randomized Trials

This analysis investigated the extent of different outcome reductions from low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) lowering following ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment and the proportionality of outcome to LDL‐C reductions. The authors searched PubMed between 1997 and mid‐June 2015 (any language) and the Cochrane Library to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing ezetimibe/simvastatin with placebo or less intensive LDL‐C lowering. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), standardized to 20 mg/dL LDL‐C reduction, were calculated for 5 primary outcomes (fatal and nonfatal) and 4 secondary outcomes (non‐cardiovascular [CV] death, cancer, myopathy, and hepatopathy). Five ezetimibe/simvastatin RCTs (30 051 individuals) were eligible, 2 comparing ezetimibe/simvastatin vs placebo and 3 vs less intensive treatment. Outcomes reduced almost to the same extent were stroke (RR: ?13%, 95% CI: ?21% to ?3%), coronary heart disease (CHD; RR: ?12%, 95% CI: ?19% to ?5%), and composite of stroke and CHD (RR: ?14%, 95% CI: ?20% to ?8%). Absolute risk reductions: 5 strokes, 10 CHD events, and 16 stroke and CHD events prevented for every 1000 patients treated for 5 years. Residual risk was almost 7× higher than absolute risk reduction for all the above outcomes. All death outcomes were not reduced, and secondary outcomes did not differ between groups. Logarithmic risk ratios were not associated with LDL‐C lowering. Our meta‐analysis provides evidence that, in patients with different CV disease burden, major CV events are safely reduced by LDL‐C lowering with ezetimibe/simvastatin, while raising the hypothesis that the extent of LDL‐C lowering might not be accompanied by incremental clinical‐event reduction.     

Ezetimibe: A First‐in‐Class,Novel Cholesterol Absorption Inhibitor

Significant numbers of patients at risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) fail to reach National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP)‐designated low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) goals in spite of the wide range of currently available treatments, including combination therapies. Ezetimibe, the first in a class of novel cholesterol absorption inhibitors, demonstrated lipid‐lowering and antiatherosclerotic activity in experimental and clinical hypercholesterolemia. Studies in hypercholesterolemic dogs showed that ezetimibe coadministered with statins caused greater lipid‐lowering effects compared to either drug alone. These effects were confirmed in clinical studies of patients with primary hypercholesterolemia where initiation of treatment with ezetimibe plus a statin, or addition of ezetimibe to ongoing statin therapy, produced significant incremental reductions in LDL‐C, as well as incremental increases in high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐C) and reductions in triglyceride levels. Combination therapy also significantly increased the number of patients attaining LDL‐C goal at the end of treatment, compared to statin monotherapy. In studies using simvastatin, atorvastatin, pravastatin, and lovastatin, addition of ezetimibe to low dose statin was as effective as a 2‐ to 3‐fold upward titration of the corresponding statin dose. Ezetimibe‐statin combination therapy provided similar improvements in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia, as well as with heterozygous and homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. Ezetimibe monotherapy effectively reduced plasma campesterol and sitosterol in patients with homozygous sitosterolemia. Clinical studies showed that ezetimibe was well tolerated, with a safety profile comparable to placebo when administered as monotherapy and comparable to statin alone when coadministered with a statin. These data provide strong evidence that, through their complementary lipid‐lowering mechanisms, ezetimibe coadministered with a statin offers an effective combination treatment option for patients with hypercholesterolemia, including those with genetically inherited disease.     

Guia prático para a utilização dos inibidores da PCSK9 em Portugal

Reducing low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) levels is one of the most important strategies for reducing the risk of cardiovascular events. However, in clinical practice, a high proportion of patients do not achieve recommended LDL‐C levels through lifestyle and lipid‐lowering therapy with statins and ezetimibe. PCSK9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) are a new therapeutic option that significantly (50‐60%) reduces LDL‐C levels, which in clinical trials translates into an additional reduction in risk for cardiovascular events, and has a good safety profile. However, it is a high‐cost therapy, and therefore its use in clinical practice should take its cost‐effectiveness into account. Priority should be given to use in patients at higher cardiovascular risk and those in whom high LDL‐C levels persist despite optimal lipid‐lowering therapy.This consensus document aims to summarize the main data on the clinical use of PCSK9i and to make recommendations for Portugal on the profile of patients who may benefit most from this therapy.     

The role of ezetimibe in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: Where do we stand after ARBITER 6-HALTS

Ezetimibe, a selective inhibitor of intestinal cholesterol absorption, rapidly became one of the most widely drugs in the US following its approval by the FDA in 2002. Due to its capacity to significantly lower LDL-C with few side effects, ezetimibe has been very useful in enabling patients who were statin intolerant to reach their recommended therapeutic goal for LDL-C. In addition, ezetimibe also reduces non-HDL-C and raises HDL-C, further enhancing its effectiveness in clinical practice. A significant preponderance of evidence supports the reduction of LDL-C and non-HDL-C as the most effective therapy to prevent or reverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However 3 recent clinical trials, ENHANCE, SEAS, and ARBITER 6-HALTS have raised questions about the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and have led to a re-examination of its clinical use as a drug for managing lipid risk factors to prevent or manage ASCVD. An in-depth analysis of these three trials reveals methodological deficiencies and concerns with the statistical methods used which significantly diminish their indictment of the clinical utility of ezetimibe. In contrast, The SANDS trial has confirmed the effectiveness of ezetimibe in managing both LDL-C and non-HDL-C, and also demonstrated this drug’s ability to improve carotid atherosclerosis by producing regression of CIMT. One of the important conclusions of the SANDS Trail is that ezetimibe remains an effective adjunctive medication for use in patients who do not reach their LDL-C goals on statin monotherapy. However, as a significant residual risk for ASCVD remains even after aggressive goals for LDL-C and non-HDL-C are reached, current treatment strategies should emphasize managing of all cardiac risk factors and increasing HDL in addition to the attainment and maintenance of recommended goals for LDL-C and non-HDL-C. Hence, ezetimibe should be considered as an important component of broad-spectrum management of lipid risk factors with therapy that includes statins, niacin, bile acid sequestrants, fibrates and Omega 3 fatty acids in appropriate combinations in addition to therapeutic life change.     

Comparison of PCSK9 Inhibitor Evolocumab vs Ezetimibe in Statin‐Intolerant Patients: Design of the Goal Achievement After Utilizing an Anti‐PCSK9 Antibody in Statin‐Intolerant Subjects 3 (GAUSS‐3) Trial

Statins are the accepted standard for lowering low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C). However, 5% to 10% of statin‐treated patients report intolerance, mostly due to muscle‐related adverse effects. Challenges exist to objective identification of statin‐intolerant patients. Evolocumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9), resulting in marked LDL‐C reduction. We report the design of Goal Achievement After Utilizing an Anti‐PCSK9 Antibody in Statin‐Intolerant Subjects 3 (GAUSS‐3), a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, ezetimibe‐controlled study to compare effectiveness of 24 weeks of evolocumab 420 mg monthly vs ezetimibe 10 mg daily in hypercholesterolemic patients unable to tolerate an effective statin dose. The study incorporates a novel atorvastatin‐controlled, double‐blind, crossover phase to objectively identify statin intolerance. Eligible patients had LDL‐C above the National Cholesterol Education Project Adult Treatment Panel III target level for the appropriate coronary heart disease risk category and were unable to tolerate ≥3 statins or 2 statins (one of which was atorvastatin ≤10 mg/d) or had a history of marked creatine kinase elevation accompanied by muscle symptoms while on 1 statin. This trial has 2 co‐primary endpoints: mean percent change from baseline in LDL‐C at weeks 22 and 24 and percent change from baseline in LDL‐C at week 24. Key secondary efficacy endpoints include change from baseline in LDL‐C, percent of patients attaining LDL‐C <70 mg/dL (1.81 mmol/L), and percent change from baseline in total cholesterol, non–high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B. Recruitment of 511 patients was completed on November 28, 2014.     

Design and Rationale of the GAUSS‐2 Study Trial: A Double‐Blind,Ezetimibe‐Controlled Phase 3 Study of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Evolocumab (AMG 145) in Subjects With Hypercholesterolemia Who Are Intolerant of Statin Therapy

Statins effectively lower low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C), reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Most patients tolerate statins well, but approximately 10% to 20% experience side effects (primarily muscle‐related) contributing to diminished compliance or discontinuation of statin therapy and subsequent increase in cardiovascular risk. Statin‐intolerant patients require more effective therapies for lowering LDL‐C. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) is a compelling target for LDL‐C–lowering therapy. Evolocumab (AMG 145) is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds PCSK9, inhibiting its interaction with the LDL receptor to preserve LDL‐receptor recycling and reduce LDL‐C. Phase 2 studies have demonstrated the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of subcutaneous evolocumab in diverse populations, including statin‐intolerant patients. This article describes the rationale and design of the Goal Achievement After Utilizing an anti‐PCSK9 Antibody in Statin‐Intolerant Subjects 2 (GAUSS‐2) trial, a randomized, double‐blind, ezetimibe‐controlled, multicenter phase 3 study to evaluate the effects of 12 weeks of evolocumab 140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg every month in statin‐intolerant patients with hypercholesterolemia. Eligible subjects were unable to tolerate effective doses of ≥2 statins because of myalgia, myopathy, myositis, or rhabdomyolysis that resolved with statin discontinuation. The primary objective of the study is to assess the effects of evolocumab on percentage change from baseline in LDL‐C. Secondary objectives include evaluation of safety and tolerability, comparison of the effects of evolocumab vs ezetimibe on absolute change from baseline in LDL‐C, and percentage changes from baseline in other lipids. Recruitment of approximately 300 subjects was completed in August 2013.     

Effect of ezetimibe/simvastatin compared with atorvastatin on lipoprotein subclasses in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypercholesterolaemia

Aim: To evaluate the effects of the usual starting and next higher doses of ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin on the cholesterol content of lipoprotein subclasses in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypercholesterolaemia. Methods: This post hoc analysis compared the effects of treatment with ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg vs. atorvastatin 10 and 20 mg/day and ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/40 mg/day vs. atorvastatin 40 mg/day on the cholesterol content of lipoprotein subclasses in the modified intent‐to‐treat (mITT) population (n = 1013) and in subgroups of patients with triglyceride (TG) levels <200 mg/dl (n = 600) and ≥200 mg/dl (2.6 mmol/l) (n = 413). Results: Ezetimibe/simvastatin significantly reduced low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) subclasses LDL₁‐C, LDL₂‐C and LDL₃‐C; real LDL‐C (LDL‐C^r); intermediate‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (IDL‐C), IDL₁‐C, IDL₂‐C; very low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL‐C), VLDL₃‐C; and remnant‐like lipoprotein cholesterol (RLP‐C) from baseline more than atorvastatin at all dose comparisons (p < 0.01) in the mITT population. Significant improvements were also observed in high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐C) subclass HDL₃‐C at the ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg vs. atorvastatin 20 mg and highest dose comparisons (p < 0.001) and in VLDL_{1 + 2}‐C at the lowest and highest dose comparisons (p < 0.001). Changes in LDL₄‐C and LDL‐C subclass patterns (A, B and I) were comparable for both treatments. Generally, similar results were observed for patients with TG levels <200 and ≥200 mg/dl (2.3 mmol). For both treatments, notable differences between TG subgroups were that patients with elevated TGs had smaller reductions in LDL₂‐C, slightly smaller decreases in all IDL subclasses and greater decreases in all VLDL‐C subclasses than those with lower TG levels. Frequency of pattern B was also reduced more in patients with higher TGs for both treatments. Conclusions: Ezetimibe/simvastatin reduced the cholesterol content of most lipoprotein subclasses from baseline with generally similar efficacy in patients with low and high TGs. Despite the different mechanism of action of ezetimibe, the response to ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin treatment related to these lipoprotein subclasses was generally consistent with the overall effects of these therapies on the major lipid/lipoprotein classes. The clinical significance of these results awaits further study.     

Effect of ezetimibe on low-density lipoprotein subtype distribution: results of a placebo-controlled, double-blind trial in patients treated by regular low-density lipoprotein apheresis and statins

Ezetimibe, a cholesterol absorption inhibitor, can be combined with statins to lower low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. We have previously shown that ezetimibe can decrease LDL cholesterol by 16% even in patients treated by regular LDL apheresis and statins (Atherosclerosis. 2005;180:107-112). However, it is unclear whether ezetimibe decreases all LDL subfractions equally in patients with hypercholesterolemia. We therefore evaluated the effect of ezetimibe (5 weeks, 10 mg/d) on LDL subtype distribution in a placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized crossover study in 20 patients (age, 56+/-9 years; body mass index, 27.5+/-4 kg/m2) with severe hyperlipoproteinemia and coronary heart disease who are treated by statins and regular LDL apheresis. Both treatment periods (placebo and ezetimibe) were separated by a 5-week washout period. Low-density lipoprotein subtype distribution was determined at the end of each treatment period before apheresis by density gradient ultracentrifugation (LDL1, 1.020-1.024; LDL2, 1.025-1.029; LDL3, 1.030-1.034; LDL4, 1.035-1.040; LDL5, 1.041-1.047; LDL6, 1.048-1.057; LDL7, 1.058-1.066 g/mL). Overall, the LDL subtype distribution did not change significantly (large-buoyant LDL [LDL1+LDL2], 17.2%+/-6.4% vs 16.3%+/-7.1%; intermediate LDL [LDL3+LDL4], 49.3%+/-4.5% vs 48.2%+/-5.2%; small-dense LDL [LDL5+LDL6+LDL7], 33.5%+/-8.0% vs 35.5%+/-10% during placebo and ezetimibe treatments, respectively). With respect to the individual LDL subfractions, cholesterol was significantly (P<.05, Wilcoxon test) reduced by ezetimibe in LDL1 to LDL5 with a somewhat more pronounced reduction in larger LDL (mean+/-SD, -20%+/-28%, -17%+/-32%, -14%+/-25%, -13%+/-27%, -11%+/-21%, -7%+/-21%, -4%+/-19%; median, -28%, -12%, -18%, -16%, -4%, -4%, -2% for LDL subfractions 1-7, respectively). We therefore conclude that ezetimibe decreases cholesterol in nearly all LDL subfractions. Although this was established in patients concomitantly treated with statins and apheresis, this may also hold true in other clinically relevant situations.     

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe co-administered with simvastatin compared with atorvastatin in adults with hypercholesterolemia

This study compared the efficacy and safety of co-administered ezetimibe + simvastatin with atorvastatin monotherapy in adults with hypercholesterolemia. Seven hundred eighty-eight patients were randomized 1:1:1 to 3 treatment groups; each group was force-titrated over four 6-week treatment periods: (1) 10 mg of atorvastatin as the initial dose was titrated to 20, 40, and 80 mg; (2) co-administration of 10 mg of ezetimibe and 10 mg of simvastatin (10/10 mg) was titrated to 10/20, 10/40, and 10/80 mg of ezetimibe + simvastatin; and (3) co-administration of 10/20 mg of ezetimibe + simvastatin was titrated to 10/40 mg (for 2 treatment periods) and 10/80 mg of ezetimibe + simvastatin. Key efficacy measures included percent changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL) from baseline to the ends of (1) treatment periods 1 and 2 (for LDL cholesterol) comparing co-administration of 10/20 mg and 10/10 mg of ezetimibe + simvastatin with 10 mg of atorvastatin and (2) treatment period 4 (for LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol) comparing co-administration of 10/80 mg of ezetimibe + simvastatin with 80 mg of atorvastatin. Baseline LDL and HDL cholesterol levels were comparable between treatment groups. At the end of treatment period 1, the mean decrease of LDL cholesterol was significantly (p ≤0.001) greater for co-administration of 10/10 mg and 10/20 mg of ezetimibe + simvastatin than for 10 mg of atorvastatin. At the end of treatment period 4 and after comparing maximum doses, co-administration of 10/80 mg of ezetimibe + simvastatin was superior to 80 mg of atorvastatin in the percent LDL cholesterol decrease (−59.4% vs −52.5%, p <0.001) and HDL cholesterol increase (12.3% vs 6.5%; p <0.001). All treatments were well tolerated. Thus, a greater LDL cholesterol decrease and HDL cholesterol increase were attained by treating patients with co-administration of ezetimibe and simvastatin than with atorvastatin.     

Efficacy and safety of alirocumab among individuals with diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the ODYSSEY phase 3 trials

Aims

Individuals with both diabetes mellitus (DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) are at very high risk of cardiovascular events. This post‐hoc analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab among 984 individuals with DM and ASCVD pooled from 9 ODYSSEY Phase 3 trials.

Materials and methods

Changes in low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) and other lipids from baseline to Week 24 were analysed (intention‐to‐treat) in four pools by alirocumab dosage (150 mg every 2 weeks [150] or 75 mg with possible increase to 150 mg every 2 weeks [75/150]), control (placebo/ezetimibe) and background statin usage (yes/no).

Results

At Week 24, LDL‐C changes from baseline in pools with background statins were ?61.5% with alirocumab 150 (vs ?1.0% with placebo), ?46.4% with alirocumab 75/150 (vs +6.3% with placebo) and ?48.7% with alirocumab 75/150 (vs ?20.6% with ezetimibe), and ?54.9% with alirocumab 75/150 (vs +4.0% with ezetimibe) without background statins. A greater proportion of alirocumab recipients achieved LDL‐C < 70 and < 55 mg/dL at Week 24 vs controls. Alirocumab also resulted in significant reductions in non‐high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B and lipoprotein(a) vs controls. Alirocumab did not appear to affect glycaemia over 78‐104 weeks. Overall safety was similar between treatment groups, with a higher injection‐site reaction frequency (mostly mild) with alirocumab.

Conclusion

Alirocumab significantly reduced LDL‐C and other atherogenic lipid parameters, and was generally well tolerated in individuals with DM and ASCVD.     

Efficacy and tolerability of fluvastatin XL 80 mg alone, ezetimibe alone, and the combination of fluvastatin XL 80 mg with ezetimibe in patients with a history of muscle-related side effects with other statins

Although statin treatment is generally well tolerated, it is estimated that 5% to 10% of patients develop muscle-related side effects (MRSEs), resulting in less effective nonstatin alternatives or cessation of lipid-lowering therapy completely. This study was designed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of extended-release fluvastatin (fluvastatin XL) and ezetimibe alone or in combination in patients with previous MRSEs with other statins. This was a double-blinded, double-dummy trial of 199 mostly moderate- or high-risk dyslipidemic patients randomized to fluvastatin XL 80 mg/day (n = 69), ezetimibe 10 mg/day (n = 66), or fluvastatin XL 80 mg/day plus ezetimibe 10 mg/day (n = 64) for 12 weeks. Fluvastatin XL lowered low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol by 32.8% compared with 15.6% with ezetimibe (between-group difference -17.1%, 95% confidence interval -23.6 to -10.7, p <0.0001); the fluvastatin XL/ezetimibe combination lowered LDL cholesterol by 46.1% (between-group difference vs ezetimibe -30.4%, 95% confidence interval -37.0 to -23.8, p <0.0001). Proportions of patients achieving their National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III target LDL cholesterol were 84% with the fluvastatin XL/ezetimibe combination, 59% with fluvastatin XL, and 29% with ezetimibe (p <0.001 for fluvastatin XL monotherapy or combination therapy vs ezetimibe monotherapy). Incidences of MRSEs were 24% in the ezetimibe group, 17% in the fluvastatin XL group, and 14% in the combination group. There were no instances of creatine kinase increases >or=10 times upper limit of normal. In conclusion, in patients with a history of statin-associated MRSEs, fluvastatin XL alone or in combination with ezetimibe offers an effective and well-tolerated lipid-lowering option.     

Ezetimibe added to atorvastatin compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose in patients at high risk for coronary heart disease with diabetes mellitus,metabolic syndrome or neither

Aim: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and metabolic syndrome (MetS) are both associated with increased risk for atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD). Thus, it is useful to know the relative efficacy of lipid‐altering drugs in these patient populations. Methods: A double‐blind, parallel group trial of adult patients with hypercholesterolaemia at high‐CHD risk receiving atorvastatin 40 mg/day compared atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg (ezetimibe) vs. doubling atorvastatin to 80 mg. This post hoc analysis reports lipid efficacy results in patients grouped by diagnosis of T2DM, MetS without T2DM or neither. Per cent change from baseline at week 6 was assessed for LDL‐C, total cholesterol, HDL‐C , non‐HDL‐C , Apo A‐I, Apo B and triglycerides. Safety was monitored through clinical and laboratory adverse events (AEs). Results: Compared with doubling atorvastatin, atorvastatin plus ezetimibe resulted in greater reductions in LDL‐C, triglycerides, Apo B, non‐HDL‐C, total cholesterol and lipid ratios in the T2DM, MetS and neither groups. Treatment effects were of similar magnitude across patient groups with both treatments, except triglycerides, which were slightly greater in the T2DM and MetS groups vs. neither group. Changes in HDL‐C , Apo A‐I and high sensitivity C‐reactive protein (hs‐CRP) were comparable for both treatments in all three groups. Safety and tolerability profiles were generally similar between treatments and across patient groups, as were the incidence of liver and muscle AEs. Conclusions: Compared with doubling atorvastatin to 80 mg, addition of ezetimibe to atorvastatin 40 mg produced greater improvements in multiple lipid parameters in high‐CHD risk patients with T2DM, MetS or neither, consistent with the significantly greater changes observed in the full study cohort (clinical trial # NCT00276484).     

Hypercholesterinämie – Wo stehen wir heute? Wo wollen wir hin?

Hypercholesterolemia is one of the major modifiable risk factors for the development of atherosclerosis. Increasing LDL cholesterol is associated with an increased risk of developing cardiovascular diseases as well as cardiovascular ischemic complications. Studies with statins and ultimately with ezetimibe have been able to impressively demonstrate that lowering LDL cholesterol contributes to a significant reduction of cardiovascular ischemic complications.Based on the results of randomized trials for lipid lowering, the practice guidelines developed by the professional societies have defined LDL cholesterol goals. High-risk patients, such as patients with clinically manifest cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, type 1 diabetes with organ damage, moderate or severe chronic kidney disease or a risk of SCORE ≥10?%, should reach LDL cholesterol values <70 mg/dl. Data from observational trials demonstrated that in daily practice only about 20?% of treated high-risk patients reached this recommended LDL cholesterol goal. The therapeutic options are not yet exhausted; patients are treated mainly with low or at most average statin dosages. There should be more potent and high-dose statins used as well as the combination therapy of statin and ezetimibe to achieve the recommended LDL cholesterol goals. Specific cardiac rehabilitation and prevention programs with regular benchmarking could support improved goal-achievement. The new therapeutic option of PCSK9 inhibitors, which significantly and safely lower LDL cholesterol on top of statins and ezetimibe, is currently investigated in large randomized outcome trials.     

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe coadministered with lovastatin in primary hypercholesterolemia

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study assessed the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe administered with lovastatin in primary hypercholesterolemia. After dietary stabilization, a 2- to 12-week washout period, and a 4-week single-blind placebo lead-in period, 548 patients with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol > or =145 mg/dl (3.75 mmol/L) and < or =250 mg/dl (6.47 mmol/L) and triglycerides < or =350 mg/dl (3.99 mmol/L) were randomized to one of the following, administered daily for 12 weeks: ezetimibe 10 mg; lovastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg; ezetimibe 10 mg plus lovastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg; or placebo. The primary efficacy variable was percentage decrease in direct LDL cholesterol from baseline to end point for pooled ezetimibe plus lovastatin versus pooled lovastatin alone. Ezetimibe plus lovastatin significantly improved concentrations of LDL cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and triglycerides compared with lovastatin alone (p <0.01). The coadministration of ezetimibe provided an incremental 14% LDL cholesterol decrease, a 5% HDL cholesterol increase, and a 10% decrease in triglycerides compared with pooled lovastatin alone. Ezetimibe plus lovastatin provided mean LDL cholesterol decreases of 33% to 45%, median triglyceride decreases of 19% to 27%, and mean HDL cholesterol increases of 8% to 9%, depending on the statin dose. The coadministration of ezetimibe 10 mg plus the starting dose of lovastatin (10 mg) provided comparable efficacy to high-dose lovastatin (40 mg) across the lipid profile (LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides). Ezetimibe plus lovastatin was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to both lovastatin alone and placebo. The coadministration of ezetimibe and lovastatin may offer a new treatment option in lipid management of patients with hypercholesterolemia.     

Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin 40 mg alone or in combination with ezetimibe in patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease (results from the EXPLORER study)

Patients at risk of coronary heart disease may not achieve recommended low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol goals on statin monotherapy. This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin 40 mg alone or in combination with ezetimibe 10 mg in patients at high risk of coronary heart disease. Four hundred sixty-nine patients were randomly assigned to rosuvastatin alone or in combination with ezetimibe for 6 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage of patients achieving the Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) LDL cholesterol goal (<100 mg/dl) at week 6. Secondary end points included the percentage of patients achieving other ATP III and 2003 European lipid goals, changes from baseline in lipid, lipoprotein, and inflammatory parameters, and safety and tolerability. Significantly more patients receiving rosuvastatin/ezetimibe than rosuvastatin alone achieved their ATP III LDL cholesterol goal (<100 mg/dl, 94.0% vs 79.1%, p <0.001) and the optional LDL cholesterol goal (<70 mg/dl) for very high-risk patients (79.6% vs 35.0%, p <0.001). The combination of rosuvastatin/ezetimibe reduced LDL cholesterol significantly more than rosuvastatin (-69.8% vs -57.1%, p <0.001). Other components of the lipid/lipoprotein profile were also significantly (p <0.001) improved with rosuvastatin/ezetimibe. Both treatments generally were well tolerated. Rosuvastatin 40 mg was effective at improving the atherogenic lipid profile in this high-risk population. Combination rosuvastatin with ezetimibe 10 mg enabled greater decreases in LDL cholesterol and allowed more patients to achieve LDL cholesterol goals. In conclusion, rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe may improve the management of high-risk patients who cannot achieve goal on maximal statin monotherapy.     

Efficacy and safety of a potent new selective cholesterol absorption inhibitor,ezetimibe, in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia

The efficacy and safety of ezetimibe, a new cholesterol absorption inhibitor, was evaluated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 892 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. After > or =2 weeks on the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Step I or a stricter diet and a 4- to 8-week single-blind placebo lead-in, patients with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol 130 to 250 mg/dl and triglycerides < or =350 mg/dl were randomized 3:1 to receive ezetimibe 10 mg or placebo orally each morning for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the percent reduction in direct plasma LDL cholesterol from baseline to end point. A total of 434 men and 458 women (ages 18 to 85 years) received randomized treatment (666 ezetimibe 10 mg, 226 placebo). Demographics and baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups. Ezetimibe significantly reduced direct LDL cholesterol by a mean of 16.9%, compared with an increase of 0.4% with placebo (p <0.01). Subgroup analysis indicated that response to ezetimibe was generally consistent across all subgroups, regardless of risk-factor status, gender, age, race, or baseline lipid profile. Ezetimibe effects on LDL cholesterol occurred early (2 weeks) and persisted throughout the 12-week treatment period. Compared with placebo, ezetimibe 10 mg also significantly improved calculated LDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and HDL(3) cholesterol (p <0.01). Ezetimibe was well tolerated. There were no differences in laboratory or clinical safety parameters, or gastrointestinal, liver, or muscle side effects from that of placebo. Ezetimibe 10 mg/day is well tolerated, reduces LDL cholesterol approximately 17%, and improves other key lipid parameters.     

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe added to ongoing statin therapy for treatment of patients with primary hypercholesterolemia

Ezetimibe is a lipid-lowering drug that inhibits the intestinal absorption of dietary and biliary cholesterol by blocking passage across the intestinal wall. The efficacy and safety of adding ezetimibe to ongoing statin therapy in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia was evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The study group included 769 adults (aged > or =18 years) with primary hypercholesterolemia who had not achieved National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel II goals with dietary alteration and statin monotherapy. Patients receiving a stable dose of a statin for > or =6 weeks were randomized to receive concurrent treatment with placebo (n = 390) or ezetimibe (n = 379), 10 mg/day, in addition to continuing their open-label statin for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the percent change in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol from baseline with statin monotherapy to end point after intervention (secondary variables: high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol and triglycerides). Ongoing statin therapy plus ezetimibe led to changes of -25.1% for LDL cholesterol (HDL cholesterol +2.7%; triglycerides -14.0%) compared with LDL cholesterol -3.7% (p <0.001), HDL cholesterol +1.0% (p <0.05), and triglycerides -2.9% (p <0.001) for placebo added to ongoing statin therapy. Among patients not at LDL cholesterol goal at on-statin baseline, 71.5% receiving statin plus ezetimibe versus 18.9% receiving statin plus placebo reached goal at end point (odds ratio 23.7; p <0.001). The co-administration of statin and ezetimibe was generally well tolerated. Adding ezetimibe to ongoing statin therapy led to substantial additional reduction in LDL cholesterol levels, facilitating attainment of NCEP goals. Ezetimibe offers a new therapeutic option for patients receiving statins who require further reduction in LDL cholesterol.     

Comparison of effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin versus simvastatin versus atorvastatin in reducing C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels

The lowering effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin combination therapy on low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP) were compared with those of simvastatin or atorvastatin monotherapy in a large cohort of patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. To compare ezetimibe/simvastatin with simvastatin, data were combined from 3 identical, prospective 12-week trials in which patients were randomized to receive placebo; ezetimibe 10 mg; ezetimibe 10 mg added to simvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; or simvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg. To compare ezetimibe/simvastatin with atorvastatin, data were analyzed from a phase III double-blind, active-controlled study in which patients were randomized equally to receive ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/10, 10/20, 10/40, or 10/80 mg or atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg for 6 weeks. When averaged across doses, ezetimibe/simvastatin produced significantly greater reductions compared with simvastatin alone in LDL cholesterol (52.5% vs 38.0%, respectively) and CRP levels (31.0% vs 14.3%, respectively). At each individual simvastatin dose, co-administration with ezetimibe produced significant further CRP reductions versus simvastatin alone. Ezetimibe/simvastatin was significantly more effective at lowering LDL cholesterol than atorvastatin when pooled across doses (53.4% vs 45.3%, respectively) and in each milligram-equivalent dose comparison. Reductions in CRP of similar magnitude were observed with ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin when averaged across doses and at each milligram-equivalent statin dose comparison. In conclusion, the lipid-modulating and anti-inflammatory effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin provide additional benefits not realized by statin monotherapy alone.     

Effectiveness of ezetimibe alone or in combination with twice a week Atorvastatin (10 mg) for statin intolerant high-risk patients

This study was undertaken to investigate the effect of ezetimibe (10 mg/day) alone or in combination with atorvastatin (10 mg twice a week) on hypercholesterolemia in 56 high-risk patients intolerant to daily statin use. Ezetimibe monotherapy was well tolerated (2 withdrawals) and induced a mean reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol of 20% (p <0.05) at the third month. However, of the 54 patients still taking ezetimibe, only 5 (9%) were at their LDL cholesterol targets. Atorvastatin 10 mg twice a week was then added to ezetimibe and was well tolerated (3 withdrawals). This combination reduced LDL cholesterol (in a treatment-based analysis) by 37% compared with baseline (p <0.001), with 43 (84%) patients reaching their LDL cholesterol goals. When patients (n = 34, 25 men) with baseline serum creatinine values in the upper 2 tertiles were analyzed separately, there was a significant (p = 0.041) decrease in serum creatinine levels after 6 months of treatment. In conclusion, the combination of ezetimibe plus atorvastatin 10 mg twice a week might be a therapeutic option for high-risk patients intolerant to daily statin monotherapy.