Randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlled comparison of the action of orlistat,fluvastatin, or both an anthropometric measurements,blood pressure,and lipid profile in obese patients with hypercholesterolemia prescribed a standardized diet

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess obese patients with hypercholesterolemia whom were prescribed a standardized diet, comparing the action of orlistat, fluvastatin, orlistat with fluvastatin, and placebo on anthropometric measurements, blood pressure (BP), and lipid profile. METHODS: This was a 1-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The patients were prescribed a controlled-energy diet and were randomly allocated to receive placebo, orlistat 120 mg TID (O group), fluvastatin 80 mg/d (F group), or olistat 120 mg TID with fluvastatin 80 mg/d (OF group). Clinical measurements (body weight, body mass index [BMI], waist circumference, and BP) and lipid profile assessment (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TGs]) were performed at baseline and after 6 months and 1 year of treatment. RESULTS: The study included 99 obese patients with hypercholesterolemia (48 men and 51 women; mean [SD] age, 51 [9] years). There were no significant differences between groups in baseline demographic, BP, or plasma lipid values. Three patients dropped out (2 women in the O group and 1 man in the OF group) due to adverse events related to orlistat treatment, including gastrointestinal events (oily spotting and fecal urgency). Ninety-six patients completed the study. There were significant differences from baseline (mean [SD]) in BMI, waist circumference reduction (WCR), and body weight loss (BWL) at 6 months in the OF group (29.9 [1.1] kg/m(2), 2.7 [0.8] cm, and 7.4 [0.9] kg, respectively; all P < 0.05), and BMI, WCR, and BWL at 1 year in the O group (29.0 [1.0] kg/m(2), 3.0 [1.0] cm, and 8.6 [1.0] kg, respectively; all P < 0.02), the F group (29.3 [1.6] kg/m(2), 2.4 [1.0] cm, and 8/0 [1.0] kg, respectively; all P < 0.05), and the OF group (28.4 [0.6] kg/m(2), 4.0 [0.6] cm, and 11.4 [1.0] kg, respectively; all P < 0.01). Significant reductions from baseline in systolic and diastolic BP were observed at 1 year in the O and F groups (all P < 0.05) and the OF group (both P < 0.01). At 6 months, there were significant reductions from baseline in TC and LDL-C in the F group (both P < 0.05) and in TC, LDL-C, and TGs in the OF group (P < 0.02, P < 0.02, and P < 0.05, respectively), as well as a significant increase in HDL-C in the OF group (P < 0.02). At 1 year, there were significant reduction from baseline in TC in the O, F, and OF groups (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively), LDL-C (P < 0.05, P < 0.02, and P < 0.01, respectively), and TGs (P < 0.02, P < 0.05, and P < 0.02, respectively). Also at 1 year, HDL-C was significantly higher than baseline in the F and OF groups (P < 0.02 and P < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Improvements in clinical and lipid-profile parameters were found at 1 year with all 3 treatments.     

An open-label, uncontrolled, prospective study of the effects of atorvastatin 10 mg on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in chinese adults with coronary artery disease and hypercholesterolemia

Background: A high level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a major risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). Evidence shows that lowering LDL-C improves the outcomes of patients with CAD. Atorvastatin is an established drug for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia.Objective: The purpose of this open-label, uncontrolled, prospective study was to assess the effectiveness of treatment with atorvastatin 10 mg/d for 18 weeks in achieving the target level of LDL-C (<2.6 mmol/L [<100 mg/dL]) established by the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) (United States) for patients with established CAD and hypercholesterolemia.Methods: Chinese patients with CAD, hypercholesterolemia (defined as a baseline LDL-C level between 3.4 and 5.2 mmol/L [131-201 mg/dL]), and body mass index <30 kg/m² were eligible. Atorvastatin 10 mg/d was given to each patient for 18 weeks. Lipid profiles were checked at 6, 12, and 18 weeks. To assess the extent of the achievement of NCEP LDL-C target levels, patients were categorized into 3 groups retrospectively according to baseline LDL-C level: group 1, 3.4 to 4.0 mmol/L (131-154 mg/dL); group 2, 4.01 to 4.6 mmol/L (155-178 mg/dL); and group 3, 4.61 to 5.2 mmol/L (179-201 mg/dL).Results: A total of 63 patients (50 men, 13 women; mean age, 64.3 years) were enrolled. Significant decreases in total cholesterol (31.3% at week 18), LDL-C (42.9% at week 18), and triglycerides (21.8% at week 18) from baseline levels were found at 6, 12, and 18 weeks of treatment (P < 0.001 for all). The changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were nonsignificant. In group 1, 83.3% of patients met the target level of LDL-C; group 2, 87.5%; group 3, 37.5%; groups 1 and 2 combined, 85.2%. Atorvastatin 10 mg/d was well tolerated. Clinical adverse events were mild and transient; no severe adverse events were reported. One patient (1.6%) developed an elevated alanine aminotransferase level and withdrew. Sixty-two of 63 patients (98.4%) completed the study.Conclusions: In this group of Chinese patients with CAD and hypercholesterolemia treated with atorvastatin 10 mg/d for 18 weeks, 85.2% of patients with a baseline LDL-C level of 3.4 to 4.6 mmol/L achieved the NCEP target LDL-C level of <2.6 mmol/L, suggesting that atorvastatin 10 mg/d is efficacious in preventing secondary CAD.     

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and tolerability of policosanol in adolescents with type II hypercholesterolemia

Background: Atherosclerosis begins in childhood and is influenced by risk factors for coronary heart disease (CHD), of which hypercholesterolemia is crucial. The rationale for treating hypercholesterolemia in childhood is to limit atherosclerosis development, for which adherence to a cholesterol-lowering diet is the first-choice therapy. Nevertheless, pharmacological intervention with bile acid-binding resins may be prescribed for patients older than 10 years, mainly those with family history of CHD, multiple risk factors, and/or severe hypercholesterolemia. Resins are effective and tolerable in this population, but their clinical use has been limited because of poor compliance due to unpalatability; other effective cholesterol-lowering drugs have not been recommended in this population because of the potential impact of drug-related adverse effects such as increases in transaminases, myopathies, and gastrointestinal disturbances. Thus, the need for safer, easy-to-take, and effective cholesterol-lowering agents for this population continues. Policosanol is a mixture of higher primary aliphatic alcohols purified from sugar cane wax with cholesterol-lowering effects proven in patients with type II hypercholesterolemia and dyslipidemia due to type 2 diabetes mellitus. Policosanol shows good safety and tolerability profiles, with no evidence of drug-related adverse events (AEs) to date. This background supports the idea that policosanol could be a good candidate for treating hypercholesterolemia in children and adolescents, but it requires clinical demonstration.Objective: This 12-week study was undertaken to investigate the cholesterol-lowering effects and tolerability of policosanol in hypercholesterolemic patients aged 11 to 19 years.Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, after 4 weeks of dietary stabilization, adolescents with type II hypercholesterolemia were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive placebo or policosanol 5-mg tablets once daily for 12 weeks. Physical examinations were performed, and lipid profiles and blood samples were obtained at baseline and after 6 and 12 weeks of therapy. The treatment was considered effective if mean reductions of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) were >15%. In addition, the percentages of patients reaching final values of LDL-C <3.4 mmol/L and optimal values of <2.8 mmol/L were also evaluated. The doses were doubled if LDL-C values were ≥3.4 mmol/L after 6 weeks of therapy. The incidence of AEs and compliance with study medications were also evaluated after 6 and 12 weeks of treatment.Results: Fifty-five patients were enrolled in the study (28 policosanol, 27 placebo). Twenty-three patients (17 placebo, 6 policosanol) required dose titration at 6 weeks. After 12 weeks of therapy, policosanol significantly decreased LDL-C with respect to baseline and placebo (both P < 0.001), showing a mean reduction of 32.6%. Total cholesterol (TC) and TC/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and LDL-C/HDL-C ratios were reduced by 21.9%, 27.8%, and 37.2%, respectively, in the policosanol group (P < 0.001, compared with baseline and placebo). HDL-C rose 10.1% (P < 0.001), compared with baseline and placebo. Triglycerides were unaffected by policosanol. LDL-C, TC, and both atherogenic ratios were reduced significantly in the policosanol group (P < 0.001), and significant increases in HDL-C values were observed at the 6-week interim checkup (P < 0.001 vs baseline, P < 0.01 vs placebo). Twenty-five (89.3%) of 28 patients in the policosanol group showed LDL-C reductions >15% compared with 2 (7.4%) of 27 patients in the placebo group (P < 0.001). In addition, 26 (92.8%) of 28 policosanol patients reached LDL-C values < 3.4 mmol/L compared with 4 (14.8%) of 27 patients in the placebo group (P < 0.001). Likewise, the response rate for achievement of optimal values (LDL-C < 2.8 mmol/L) was also larger in the policosanol group (20/28; 71.4%) than in the placebo group (0/27; 0.0%) (P < 0.001). Policosanol was well tolerated, with no drug-related effects found on physical examination. Blood biochemistry determinations revealed significantly lower alanine aminotransferase levels in the policosanol group after 6 weeks of therapy compared with placebo (P < 0.05), as well as significant reductions in aspartate aminotransferase levels at 6 weeks (P < 0.01) and 12 weeks (P < 0.05) compared with baseline. No patients withdrew from the study, and only 3 patients (2 placebo, 1 policosanol) experienced mild AEs during the study; the placebo patients reported abdominal pain and constipation (1 each), and the policosanol patient reported polyphagia.Conclusions: Policosanol 5 mg/d appears to be well tolerated and effective as short-term treatment of hypercholesterolemia in adolescents.     

Effects of a weight-reduction program with orlistat on serum leptin levels in obese women: A 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled study

Background: Leptin, which has been identified as an antiobesity hormone, regulates body weight by controlling food intake and energy expenditure via the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. It appears that leptin may be an important factor in obesity management. Orlistat, a pancreatic lipase inhibitor, could reduce fat absorption and promote weight loss due to leptin metabolism.Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of orlistat therapy on serum leptin levels.Methods: Obese women (body mass index [BMI], 30 kg/m²) aged 18 to 50 years were randomly assigned to receive 12 weeks of oral treatment with diet-orlistat (120 mg TID) (DO group) or diet-placebo (DP group). During the treatment period, patients were asked to eat a balanced diet of -1200 to 1600 kcal/d. Body composition was determined by bioelectrical impedance. Serum leptin levels were measured using radioimmunoassay at baseline and at study end.Results: A total of 24 patients entered the study; 14 patients (mean [SE] BMI, 37.7 [1.1] kg/m²) received orlistat and 10 patients (mean [SE] BMI, 39.4 [1.3] kg/m²) received placebo. Compared with baseline, mean percentages of loss of body weight and fat mass after 12 weeks of treatment were significant in the DO group (9.1% and 14.8%, respectively; both P = 0.001) and in the DP group (9.5% and 17.6%; both P = 0.005). The between-group differences were not statistically significant. Mean (SE) serum leptin levels also decreased significantly after treatment in the DO group (16.2 [1.2] vs 9.0 [1.0] ng/mL; P = 0.001) and in the DP group (19.3 [2.1] vs 9.7 [1.4] ng/mL; P = 0.005). The between-group difference was not statistically significant.Conclusions: In this study of obese women, orlistat treatment was associated with a similar decrease in body weight, fat mass, and serum leptin levels as placebo over a 12-week period. In this regard, short-term orlistat therapy may not provide an additional effect on serum leptin levels, and reduction in leptin levels were closely related to the decrease in fat mass.     

Antihypercholesterolemic effects of atorvastatin in patients previously receiving other 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme a reductase inhibitors: an open-label study

Background: Atorvastatin, a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor, was introduced in Japan in May 2000 with purportedly potent cholesterol-lowering effects. However, only a handful of studies have assessed its efficacy and tolerability in Japanese patients.Objective: This study was conducted to assess the efficacy and tolerability of atorvastatin in Japanese patients with hypercholesterolemia.Methods: Outpatients at the Hiramitsu Clinic who were receiving HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia were enrolled in this open-label study. Previous HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor therapy was discontinued, and patients were uniformly switched to atorvastatin 10 mg/d with no intervening washout period. Clinical laboratory values and serumlipid levels were used as safety indices, and achievement rates of target total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were used to assess efficacy. Target TC/HDL-C levels in patients with Japan Atherosclerosis Society category B hypercholesterolemia (patients with risk factors) and category C hypercholesterolemia (patients with coronary heart disease) were <200/<120 mg/dL and <180/<100 mg/dL, respectively.Results: Seventy-nine patients (23 men, 56 women; mean [±SD] age, 63.9 ± 11.2 years) completed the study. The mean duration of atorvastatin therapy was 62.7 ± 9.0 days. The switch to atorvastatin produced significant reductions in mean levels of TC (from 212.8 ± 29.0 mg/dL to 165.7 ± 24.8 mg/dL; P < 0.001) and LDL-C (from 135.2 ± 24.3 mg/dL to 92.2 ± 20.7 mg/dL; P < 0.001). Achievement rates of target TC and LDL-C levels dramatically improved in patients with Japan Atherosclerosis Society category B or C hypercholesterolemia. In patients with category B hypercholesterolemia, the achievement rate improved from 30.8% (20/65) at baseline to 87.7% (57/65) with regard to target TC levels and from 26.2% (17/65) to 92.3% (60/65) with regard to target LDL-C levels. In category C, the corresponding results were 30.0% (3/10) to 80.0% (8/10) and 10.0% (1/10) to 70.0% (7/10). No side effects sufficiently serious to warrant discontinuation of atorvastatin therapy were observed.Conclusion: In this study, atorvastatin was effective and well tolerated for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia in Japanese patients.     

Comparative efficacy of pitavastatin and simvastatin in high-risk patients: a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Despite the proven efficacy of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) in lowering total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), many patients do not reach recommended lipid targets. This study compared pitavastatin, a new and highly effective statin, and simvastatin in patients at high risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of pitavastatin to simvastatin.

Methods

The study was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, active-controlled study conducted at 37 centers in five European countries. Following a dietary run-in period of 6–8 weeks, patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or combined dyslipidemia and at least two CHD risk factors were randomized 2:1 to receive pitavastatin 4 mg or simvastatin 40 mg once daily for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the change in LDL-C from baseline.

Results

In total, 355 patients were randomized, 236 to pitavastatin and 119 to simvastatin; 330 patients (223 and 107, respectively) completed the study. In the pitavastatin group, mean (±SD) reduction in LDL-C concentrations from baseline was ?44.0±12.8% compared with ?43.8±14.4% in the simvastatin group. The adjusted mean treatment difference (simvastatin — pitavastatin) was 0.31% (95% confidence interval ?2.47, 3.09; P=0.829), which was within the predefined noninferiority range. More than 80% of patients in each group reached recommended LDL-C targets. Pitavastatin provided a greater increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; 6.8% vs. 4.5%; P=0.083) and a significantly greater decrease in triglycerides (?19.8% vs. ?14.8%; P=0.044) than simvastatin. Both treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusion

Pitavastatin 4 mg is as effective as simvastatin 40 mg in lowering LDL-C in dyslipidemic patients at high risk of CHD, with additional effects on HDL-C and triglycerides. Therefore, pitavastatin may be appropriate for the management of dyslipidemic patients at high cardiovascular risk.

     

A six-month, multicenter, open-label, noncomparative, prospective, observational study of the efficacy and tolerability of atorvastatin in the primary care setting(estudio del control de las hiperlipidemiasen atención primaria): the cheap study

Background: A close relationship exists between high levels of total cholesterol (TC) (particularly low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C]) and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), which is associated with an increased risk for arteriosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Evidence shows that atorvastatin produces significantly greater reductions in LDL-C and TC than other hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors. However, the results achieved in clinical studies could be different from those found in general clinical practice, where patient follow-up is less thorough and poorer compliance may reduce the effectiveness of the lipid-lowering therapy.Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of atorvastatin in achieving the LDL-C levels recommended by several Spanish scientific societies, as well as its tolerability in standard clinical use.Methods: This 6-month, open-label, noncomparative, prospective, observational study was conducted in 1351 primary care centers in Spain. All patients were aged 18 to 80 years and had primary hypercholesterolemia (TC >200 mg/dL and triglycerides [TG] <200 mg/dL) or combined hyperlipidemia (TC >200 mg/dL and fasting TG 200-400 mg/dL). All patients also had LDL-C levels higher than those established by the Spanish Society of Arteriosclerosis (Sociedad Española de Arteriosclerosis [SEA]) according to baseline cardiovascular risk and previous use of lipid-lowering therapy (for patients with low, moderate, or high cardiovascular risk, the recommended LDL-C goals are ≤175 mg/dL, ≤155 mg/dL, and ≤135 mg/dL, respectively; for patients with CVD, the LDL-C goal is ≤100 mg/dL). None of the patients had creatine kinase activity ≥540 U/L or alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels ≥60 U/L. Study visits occurred at months 0, 2, and 6 of treatment. Patients received atorvastatin calcium 10 mg/d for 2 months. The dosage was then doubled to 20 mg/d in patients who did not achieve the SEA LDL-C goal and also in those patients whose primary care physicians (PCPs) deemed this higher dosage necessary; this dosage was continued for at least 4 additional months, to complete at least a 6-month course of treatment. The percentage of patients who achieved their goals was used to measure atorvastatin effectiveness. Percentages of change in LDL-C, TC, TG, and HDL-C from baseline to the final study visit also were used as measures of effectiveness. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) per 10,000 patient-months was used for the primary tolerability analysis. A secondary tolerability analysis was performed in all patients treated with atorvastatin who had some recorded follow-up, regardless of whether the patient met inclusion criteria. Information was obtained from data recorded in the case-report forms.Results: A total of 5317 outpatients (2715 women, 2598 men, 4 sex unknown; mean [SD] age, 58.7 [10.5] years) were enrolled. Among patients receiving known dosages of atorvastatin, 1580 of 4033 (39.2%) and 2378 of 3585 (66.3%) patients met the SEA LDL-C goal after 2 and 6 months of therapy, respectively (P<0.001 for 2 months vs 6 months). Among the patients with low and moderate cardiovascular risk, 85.8% achieved the SEA LDL-C goal compared with 64.4% of high-risk patients (P<0.001). Mean LDL-C decreased by 36.2%. Mean reductions in TC and TG levels were 26.9% and 19.2%, respectively. Mean HDL-C increased 17.0%. One hundred forty-eight patients (2.9%) experienced at least 1 AE and 25 (0.5%) had serious AEs. Eighty-nine patients had 134 AEs considered treatment related. Two of the serious AEs (phlebitis and a severe increase in ALT and AST activity) were considered treatment related. A total of 98.5% and 97.2% of PCPs and patients, respectively, reported excellent or good tolerability with atorvastatin.Conclusions: In this study population, the use of atorvastatin in the primary care setting was associated with high achievement rates of the SEA LDL-C goals and with a substantial decrease in TG levels. In addition, a considerable increase in HDL-C levels occurred. Tolerability with atorvastatin was reported to be excellent or good by most of the patients and PCPs. The incidence of serious AEs was minimal, as reported by both patients and PCPs.     

Effect of simvastatin on apoprotein B—containing lipoproteins in patients with diabetic nephropathy

Background: Diabetic patients with nephropathy usually have a more atherogenic lipoprotein profile than those without nephropathy, which may be associated with the substantially higher incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) in this population. Simvastatin has been shown to significantly reduce the incidence of CHD events in diabetic patients.Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of simvastatin (10 mg/d) on atherogenic apoprotein (apo) B—containing lipoproteins in type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy.Methods: Diabetic patients with nephropathy and a group of healthy control subjects matched for age, sex, and body weight were enrolled. Diabetic patients were administered simvastatin 10 mg/d for 6 months. Apo B—containing lipoproteins were sequentially separated by ultracentrifugation to yield very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) (density <1.006 g/mL), intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL) (1.006-1.019 g/mL), light low-density lipoprotein (LDL) (1.019-1.044 g/mL), and dense LDL (1.044-1.063 g/mL) fractions. Apo B in lipoproteins was measured by a sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay at baseline and after 6 months of simvastatin treatment.Results: A total of 18 patients with diabetic nephropathy and 36 matched controls were enrolled. The diabetic patients had significantly higher levels (P < 0.01) of total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and apo B compared with age- and weight-matched control subjects at baseline. The diabetic patients also had significantly higher levels (P < 0.05) of cholesterol and apo B in the VLDL, light LDL, and dense LDL fractions. Treatment with simvastatin for 6 months significantly reduced plasma total cholesterol by 21%, LDL cholesterol by 30%, and apo B by 25% (P < 0.001), but did not affect urinary albumin excretion. Simvastatin significantly decreased both triglyceride and cholesterol levels in VLDL by 18% (P < 0.05), and cholesterol and apo B in IDL by 22% (P < 0.05) and 26% (P < 0.01). Simvastatin decreased both the light and dense LDL subfractions to a similar extent, reducing cholesterol and apo B in light LDL by 27% (P < 0.001) and in dense LDL by 28% (P < 0.01) and 18% (P < 0.05), respectively. The light LDL/dense LDL ratio for apo B and for cholesterol were not altered by simvastatin therapy.Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that simvastatin may reduce levels of atherogenic apo B—containing lipoproteins and small dense LDL in diabetic patients with nephropathy.     

An observational study of the effect of two thiazolidinediones on blood lipid levels: Rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in routine clinical practice

Background: Rosiglitazone maleate and pioglitazone hydrochloride are established antihyperglycemic agents that are effective when used as monotherapy or in combination with other medications. However, the data regarding the effects of these agents on blood lipid levels are contradictory.Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether the use of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in clinical practice is associated with any changes in blood lipid levels.Methods: A retrospective chart review using electronic medical record data was conducted of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were newly treated with either rosiglitazone or pioglitazone and had 1 lipid measurement within 6 months prior to and 12 months following initial thiazolidinedione (TZD) therapy. Outcome measures were mean changes in low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C and HDL-C, respectively). To control for differences in baseline characteristics and/or selection bias, the treatment cohorts were compared using multivariate statistical techniques.Results: A total of 371 patients were included in the study; the pioglitazone cohort comprised 148 patients (82 women, 66 men; mean [SD] age, 64.9 [10.8] years) and the rosiglitazone cohort comprised 223 patients (113 men, 110 women; mean [SD] age, 66.1 [11.9] years). Pioglitazone-treated patients had a statistically higher mean baseline LDL-C compared with rosiglitazone-treated patients (125.0 mg/dL vs 116.6 mg/dL; P = 0.04). On average, LDL-C levels decreased over the study period, with no significant differences between the 2 cohorts (9.9 mg/dL vs 4.3 mg/dL for pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, respectively), although changes in both cohorts were statistically significant (P < 0.001).Conclusions: TZD therapy appears to be associated with a small decrease in LDL-C within the first 6 months after initiation. No differences in changes in LDL-C or HDL-C could be discerned between patients treated with rosiglitazone compared with pioglitazone.     

Effects of low doses of simvastatin and atorvastatin on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in patients with hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND: Simvastatin 40 to 80 mg/d has been found to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels significantly more than atorvastatin at equipotent doses (ie, 20-80 mg/d). Data on the effects of lower doses of the 2 drugs on HDL-C levels are conflicting. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of simvastatin 20 mg/d and atorvastatin 10 mg/d on HDL-C levels in patients with hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: Patients with primary hypercholesterolemia (total cholesterol [TC] >250 mg/dL) who were not taking any lipid-lowering agents and who were following a low-fat diet were randomized to receive 1 of 2 treatments: simvastatin 20 mg/d or atorvastatin 10 mg/d. Serum TC, triglycerides (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and HDL-C levels were measured using standard methods after 2 months of therapy. In a secondary analysis, lipids and lipoprotein cholesterol were measured after 1 year in patients who continued treatment. RESULTS: Of the 240 patients enrolled (108 men and 132 women; age range, 23-77 years, mean [SEM] 56.7 [0.69]), 235 completed the study. After 2 months of therapy, TC, LDL-C, and serum TG levels decreased significantly versus baseline in both groups (P < 0.001), with no significant differences between treatment groups. HDL-C levels increased by 9.0% (P < 0.001 vs baseline) in the simvastatin group and by 4.3% (P < 0.02) in the atorvastatin group. The difference between the 2 groups in the percentage increase in HDL-C was statistically significant (P < 0.05). In 113 patients who continued treatment, HDL-C levels at 1 year were still significantly higher than baseline levels in the simvastatin group (6.3%, P = 0.034), but not in the atorvastatin group (2.8%, P = 0.587). CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study suggest that the HDL-C-increasing effect of simvastatin 20 mg is significantly greater than that of atorvastatin 10 mg. Since increasing HDL-C levels is thought to lower the risk for atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease, these results warrant further investigation.     

Hemostatic effects of atorvastatin versus simvastatin

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on hemostatic parameters. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with primary hypercholesterolemia without coronary heart disease were treated with atorvastatin 10-20 mg/d or simvastatin 10-20 mg/d. At baseline, 4, 12, and 24 weeks, lipid levels such as low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C), triglycerides (TGs), and hemostatic parameters such as platelet counts, partial thromboplastin time (PTT) prothrombin time (PT), and fibrinogen levels were measured. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, the doses of the statins were increased to 20 mg/d in 10 of 35 (28.5%) patients treated with atorvastatin and 18 of 26 (69.2%) patients treated with simvastatin when the target level of LDL-C (130 mg/dL) was not reached. Mean doses were atorvastatin 12.8 mg/d and simvastatin 16.9 mg/d. After 24 weeks, 5 patients (14.3%) in the atorvastatin group and 4 patients (15.3%) in the simvastatin group had not reached the goal. In patients with diabetes, target level (LDL-C <100 mg/dL) was not reached in 35.7% of patients in the atorvastatin group and 44.4% of patients in the simvastatin group. Both simvastatin and atorvastatin were effective in lowering TC and LDL-C levels (p < 0.001). Atorvastatin lowered TGs significantly (p < 0.01). Neither atorvastatin nor simvastatin significantly reduced VLDL-C levels. HDL-C levels increased with atorvastatin, but there was no significant difference between the 2 groups. Platelet counts decreased with both statins nonsignificantly. Moreover, fibrinogen levels decreased with simvastatin and atorvastatin, but these reductions were significant only for simvastatin (p < 0.05). We detected prolongation of the PT with both drugs (p < 0.05); however, prolongation of the PTT was significant only with simvastatin (p < 0.001). Effectiveness of both statins on lipid and hemostatic parameters was dose related. Adverse effects were seen in 5 patients (14.2%) treated with atorvastatin and 3 patients (11.5%) treated with simvastatin. Elevations in serum transaminase levels >3 times the upper limit of normal and in creatine phosphokinase >5 times the upper limit of normal were not observed in any group. CONCLUSIONS: Atorvastatin was more effective than simvastatin on lipid parameters, although statistically insignificantly, while simvastatin produced more significant changes than atorvastatin on hemostatic parameters. The mean dose of simvastatin was greater than that of atorvastatin. Both statins had increased effects on lipid and hemostatic parameters when doses were increased. Atorvastatin and simvastatin were well tolerated. Different effects of statins on lipid levels and on coagulation parameters should be considered in patients with hypercholesterolemia and tendency to coagulation, especially in preventing thrombotic events. Further studies in larger trials are needed to confirm these observations.     

Effects of simvastatin on blood pressure in hypercholesterolemic patients: An open-label study in patients with hypertension or normotension

Background

Simvastatin has been reported to improve endotheliumdependent vascular relaxation in patients with hypercholesterolemia. The consequent decrease in arterial stiffness might be associated with a decrease in blood pressure (BP).

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine whether simvastatin 20 and 40 mg/d have an effect on systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP, respectively) in patients with hypercholesterolemia, and, if so, whether the effect is dose dependent and/or is related to the changes in the serum lipid profile.

Methods

This 6-month, open-label study was conducted at the Lipid Clinics of the Department of Internal Medicine, University of Milan, Maggiore Hospital IRCCS, and of the Department of Internal Medicine 1, G. Salvini Hospital, Garbagnate Milanese (Milan, Italy). Patients aged 18 to 80 years with primary hypercholesterolemia who were following a low-fat, low-cholesterol diet for >2 months before the study were enrolled. Patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), according to the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel II guidelines, were given simvastatin 20 mg (tablet) QD for 3 months, and those at low risk for CVD continued with diet only for 3 months (controls). Efficacy variables included body weight, SBP, DBP, and serum lipid levels (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TG]). At 3 months, patients in the simvastatin + diet group who reached their therapeutic goal continued to receive simvastatin 20 mg/d for 3 additional months. In simvastatintreated patients who were normotensive at baseline or who became normotensive at 3 months but who did not reach the therapeutic goal, the simvastatin dosage was increased to 40 mg/d. Patients in both groups who remained hypertensive at 3 months were switched to hypotensive therapy. In the diet-only group, patients who were formerly normotensive or who became normotensive at 3 months but who did not reach their therapeutic goal continued with diet only or started lipid-lowering therapy. All other patients in the diet-only group continued to be treated with diet only, for 3 additional months. Efficacy variables were measured again at 6 months. Tolerability of simvastatin was assessed at each visit using patient interview and measurement of serum aminotransferase and creatine phosphokinase levels.

Results

The study population comprised 222 patients (132 women, 90 men; mean [SEM] age, 53.9 [0.95] years [range, 23-76 years]); 115 high-risk patients (57 with untreated stage 1 hypertension) were assigned to the simvastatin + diet group, and 107 low-risk patients (29 with untreated stage 1 hypertension) were assigned to the diet-only group. In the simvastatin group, after 3 months of therapy, mean SBP was decreased by 3.9 (1.49) mm Hg (change, −2.9%), mean DBP decreased by 3.0 (0.87) mm Hg (change, −3.7%), mean TC decreased by 90.6 (3.98) mg/dL (change, −27.0%), mean LDL-C decreased by 88.9 (3.88) mg/dL (change, −35.6%), and mean TG decreased by 26.3 (7.34) mg/dL (change, −15.8%) (all, P < 0.001). Mean HDL-C increased by 3.6 (1.16) mg/dL (change, 6.9%; P < 0.001). The BP-lowering effect was found only in patients with hypertension at baseline (n = 57); in these patients, mean SBP decreased by 7.2 (2.44) mm Hg (change, −4.8%; P < 0.005 vs baseline) and DBP decreased by 4.8 (1.29) mm Hg (change, −5.6%; P < 0.001 vs baseline). Also in the simvastatin group, 26 patients (22.6%) achieved their target SBP/DBP. In patients with normotension at baseline (n = 58), neither SBP nor DBP was changed significantly (changes, −0.8 [1.65] and −1.4 [1.15] mm Hg, respectively [−0.6% and −1.8%, respectively]). The changes in serum lipid levels were similar between hypertensive and normotensive patients in the simvastatin group. Forty-one patients (18 hypertensive and 23 normotensive at baseline) were treated with simvastatin 40 mg/d plus diet between months 3 and 6. At 6 months, no further significant decrease was observed in mean BP. In contrast, the expected dose-dependent response was observed for TC and LDL-C levels. In the diet-only group, no significant changes occurred in BP or serum lipid levels. Changes in BP, TC, LDL-C, TG, and HDL-C were significantly greater in the simvastatin + diet group than in the diet-only group (all, P < 0.001). Body weight did not change significantly in either group.

Conclusions

In this group of patients with hypercholesterolemia, the starting dosage of simvastatin (20 mg/d) was associated with reductions in SBP and DBP within 3 months of treatment in patients with hypertension, and this effect was independent of the lipid-lowering properties of the drug. Although the decrease in BP was modest, it is likely clinically relevant. Further studies on this topic are advisable.     

辛伐他汀对高胆固醇血症患者动脉弹性的影响

目的探讨辛伐他汀对高胆固醇血症患者动脉弹性的影响。方法采用动脉弹性功能测定仪检测52例高胆固醇血症患者使用辛伐他汀前和使用4周后大动脉弹性（C1）、小动脉弹性（C2）和血浆总胆固醇（TC）、甘油三酯（TG）、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇（HDL-C）、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇（LDL-C）。结果用药4周后，TC和LDL-C均较用药前明显下降（均为P〈0．01），C1和C2较用药前明显升高（均为P〈0．01）。结论辛伐他汀可明显降低高胆固醇血症患者TC和LDL-C，同时显著改善动脉弹性。     

Effects of fosinopril on blood pressure, lipid profile, and lipoprotein(a) levels in normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria: An open-label, uncontrolled study

Background: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus often have other cardiovascular risk factors, and alterations in lipid profile play an important role. The angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are often used in these patients, particularly those with type 2 diabetes and proteinuria.Objective: This study evaluated the effects of fosinopril therapy on fasting plasma glucose (FPG), lipid profile, and lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), levels in normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and microalbuminuria.Methods: Normotensive (systolic blood pressure [SBP] <130 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure [DBP] <85 mm Hg) patients with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria and a normal lipid profile were enrolled. Patients had their diabetes controlled by diet alone or diet plus oral hypoglycemic agents. Fosinopril 10 mg/d was administered for 6 months and then interrupted for 1 month. FPG, glycosylated hemoglobin, SBP, DBP, lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides), Lp(a), albumin excretion rate (AER), and creatinine levels were evaluated at baseline; 1, 3, and 6 months after initiation of treatment; and 1 month after interruption of treatment.Results: A total of 120 patients were enrolled (63 men, 57 women; mean age ± SD, 54 ± 10 years; duration of diabetes, 7 ± 2 years). Significant decreases versus baseline were observed in the following parameters at month 6: SBP (122 ± 7 vs 117 ± 9.1 mm Hg, P < 0.01), DBP (80 ± 4.8 vs 74 ± 4.5 mm Hg, P < 0.05), TC (186 ± 11 vs 176 ± 10 mg/dL, P < 0.05), LDL-C (124 ± 10 vs 114 ± 11 mg/dL, P < 0.05), Lp(a) (24 ± 10 vs 19 ± 7.5 mg/dL, P < 0.05), and AER (103 ± 45 vs 48 ± 21 mg/24 hours, P < 0.01). When fosinopril therapy was interrupted for 1 month, the values for all these parameters tended to return to baseline values; SBP, TC, and Lp(a) values were significantly different from month 6 values, whereas DBP, LDL-C, and AER did not change significantly during the washout period.Conclusions: Fosinopril therapy for 6 months resulted in a reduction of microalbuminuria and an improvement in lipid profile and Lp(a) levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. This suggests that fosinopril may improve lipid profile and reduce Lp(a) levels by lowering proteinuria or by other more direct actions on lipid and Lp(a) metabolism. Additional controlled studies are needed to confirm these results.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin from a Canadian health system perspective

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the most commonly prescribed doses of rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin for managing various lipid parameters in patients with hypercholesterolemia over a 1-year time horizon from a Canadian health care perspective. METHODS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated for branded rosuvastatin compared with branded atorvastatin, generic simvastatin, and generic pravastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia in terms of percent reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and total cholesterol (TC)/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio, as well as in TC, HDL-C, triglycerides (TG), apolipoprotein (Apo) B, the ApoB/ApoA-I ratio, and attainment of the Canadian LDL-C goal. The pharmacoeconomic model was constructed for a 1-year time horizon using efficacy data from a randomized, open-label trial including 2268 adults and the wholesale acquisition costs of branded rosuvastatin and atorvastatin and generic simvastatin and pravastatin in British Columbia. RESULTS: The most commonly prescribed doses of each of the 4 statins in British Columbia were as follows: rosuvastatin 10 mg (75.8% of all rosuvastatin doses); atorvastatin 10 and 20 mg (46.4% and 35.3%, respectively, of all atorvastatin doses); simvastatin 20 and 40 mg (42.5% and 31.8%, respectively, of all simvastatin doses); and pravastatin 20 and 40 mg (55.0% and 34.1%, respectively, of all pravastatin doses). Rosuvastatin 10 mg was dominant (ie, was more effective at a lower cost) relative to atorvastatin 10 and 20 mg, simvastatin 20 and 40 mg, and pravastatin 40 mg in terms of reductions in LDL-C, TC/ HDL-C ratio, TC, ApoB, and ApoB/ApoA-I ratio, increases in HDL-C, and attainment of the LDL-C goal. Compared with pravastatin 20 mg, the ICER per percent reduction in LDL-C, TC/HDL-C ratio, TC, TG, ApoB, or ApoB/ApoA-I or increase in HDL-C ranged from $3.89 to $26.07; the value for 1 additional patient achieving the LDL-C goal was $419.75. When the statin doses were aggregated based on the Canadian statin-utilization pattern, rosuvastatin was dominant relative to atorvastatin on all effectiveness measures evaluated. When rosuvastatin was compared with generic simvastatin and pravastatin, the annual costs for 1 additional patient achieving the LDL-C goal were $144.51 and $373.91, respectively. Based on the sensitivity analysis, rosuvastatin was associated with the highest probability of cost-effectiveness compared with the other statins over a broad range of monetary values per unit of clinical effect. CONCLUSION: When percent changes in lipid parameters and rates of LDL-C goal attainment were considered in patients with hypercholesterolemia in British Columbia, rosuvastatin 10 mg was more cost-effective than the most frequently used doses of atorvastatin (10 and 20 mg), generic simvastatin (20 and 40 mg), and generic pravastatin (20 and 40 mg).     

Effects of atorvastatin 10 mg and fenofibrate 200 mg on the low-density lipoprotein profile in dyslipidemic patients: A 12-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study

Background: Elevated plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations are highly atherogenic, especially the small, dense LDL (sdLDL) species. Fenofibrate has been reported to shift the LDL profile by decreasing the sdLDL subfraction and increasing larger LDL subclasses. Atorvastatin, anantihyperlipidemic agent, has been reported to reduce plasma total cholesterol (TC) and triglyceride (TG) concentrations and thus could modify the LDL profile.Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of fenofi brate and atorvastatin on standard lipid concentrations and the LDL profile.Methods: In this randomized, open-label, parallel-group study, men and women aged 18 to 79 years with type II primary dyslipidemia, defined as LDL-C ≥160 and TG 150 to 400 mg/dL, after a 4- to 6-week washout period while eating an appropriate diet, were randomized to receive either atorvastatin 10 mg once daily or fenofi-brate 200 mg once daily. Plasma lipid concentrations and cholesterol and apolipoprotein (apo) B (reflecting the LDL particle number) in each LDL subfraction prepared by ultracentrifiigation were determined at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment. Tolerability was assessed using adverse events (AEs) obtained on laboratory analysis and vital sign measurement. Adherence was assessed by counting unused drug supplies.Results: A total of 165 patients (117 men, 48 women; mean [SD] age, 50.1 [10.7] years; mean TC concentration, 289 mg/dL) were randomized to receive atorvastatin (n = 81) or fenofibrate (n = 84). Compared with fenofibrate, atorvastatin was associated with a significantly greater mean (SD) percentage decrease in TC (27.0% [12.3%] vs 16.5% [12.9%]; P < 0.001), calculated LDL-C (35.4% [15.8%] vs 17.3% [17.2%]; P < 0.001), TC/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio (29.1% [16.3%] vs 22.9% [15.9%]; P = 0.001), and apoB (30.3% [12.7%] vs 19.6% [15.5%]; P < 0.001). Compared with atorvastatin, fenofibrate was associated with a significantly greater decrease in TG (37.2% [25.9%] vs 20.2% [27.3%]; P < 0.001) and a significantly greater increase in HDL-C concentration (10.4% [15.7%] vs 4.6% [12.1%]; P = 0.017). Fibrinogen concentration was significantly different between the 2 groups (P = 0.002); it was decreased with fenofibrate use (4.6% [23.7%]) and was increased with atorvastatin use (5.7% [23.5%]). Atorvastatin did not markedly affect the LDL distribution; it was associated with a homogeneous decrease in cholesterol and apoB concentrations in all subfractions, whereas fenofibrate was associated with a marked movement toward a normalized LDL profile, shifting the sdLDL subfractions toward larger and less atherogenic particles, particularly in those patients with baseline TG ≥200 mg/dL. No serious AEs related to the study treatments were reported. A total of 5 AEs were observed in 8 patients, including: abdominal pain, 3 patients (2 in the atorvastatin group and 1 in the fenofibrate group); abnormal liver function test results, 1 (fenofibrate); increased creatine Phosphokinase activity, 2 (atorvastatin); gastrointestinal disorders, 1 (fenofibrate); and vertigo, 1 (fenofibrate).Conclusion: In these dyslipidemic patients, fenofibrate treatment was associated with an improved LDL subfraction profile beyond reduction in LDL-C, particularly in patients with elevated TG concentration, whereas atorvastatin was associated with equally reduced concentrations of cholesterol and apoB in all LDL subfractions independent of TG concentrations.     

The Effects of a Standardized Herbal Remedy Made from a Subtype of Rosa canina in Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Background: A standardized rose-hip powder produced from the seeds and husks of fruit from a subtype of Rosa canina has been reported to inhibit leukocyte functions that cause cell injury in osteoarthritis.Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of standardized rose-hip powder on mobility of the hip and knee joints, activities of daily living, quality of life, and pain in patients with osteoarthritis.Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis of either the hip or knee, verified on radiography, participated in this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Half of the patients were given five 0.5-g capsules of standardized rose-hip powder twice daily for 4 months, and the other half received identical placebo capsules twice daily for the same period. Mobility of the hip or knee was measured in both groups after the initial screening and again after 4 months of therapy.Results: One hundred patients (65 women, 35 men; mean [SD] age, 65.2 [11.1] years) were divided into 2 treatment groups of 50 patients each. Hip joint mobility improved significantly in the treatment group compared with the placebo group (P = 0.033). Similarly, pain decreased significantly in the treatment group compared with the placebo group (P = 0.035). Two patients (4%) from each group withdrew during the early stages of the trial for reasons not related to treatment.Conclusions: In this study population, standardized rose-hip powder reduced symptoms of osteoarthritis, as 64.6% of patients reported at least some reduction of pain while receiving treatment. Standardized rose-hip powder may improve hip flexion and reduce pain in patients with osteoarthritis.     

Effects of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin on non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoproteins, and lipid ratios in patients with hypercholesterolemia: additional results from the STELLAR trial

BACKGROUND: Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), apolipoprotein (apo) B, and lipid and apolipoprotein ratios that include both atherogenic and antiatherogenic lipid components have been found to be strong predictors of coronary heart disease risk. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to examine prospectively the effects of rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin across dose ranges on non-HDL-C, apo B, apo A-I, and total cholesterol (TC):HDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C):HDL-C, non-HDL-C:HDL-C, and apo B:apo A-I ratios in patients with hypercholesterolemia (LDL-C > or =160 mg/dL and <250 mg/dL and triglycerides <400 mg/dL) in the Statin Therapies for Elevated Lipid Levels compared Across doses to Rosuvastatin (STELLAR) trial. METHODS: In this randomized, Multicenter, parallel-group, open-label trial (4522IL/0065), patients > or =18 years of age received rosuvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; simvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; or pravastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg for 6 weeks. Pairwise comparisons were prospectively planned and performed between rosuvastatin 10, 20, and 40 mg and milligram-equivalent or higher doses of comparators. RESULTS: A total of 2268 patients were randomized to the rosuvastatin 10- to 40-mg, atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin groups. Fifty-one percent of patients were women, the mean (SD) age was 57 (12) years, and 19% had a documented history of atherosclerotic disease. Over 6 weeks, rosuvastatin significantly reduced non-HDL-C, apo B, and all lipid and apolipoprotein ratios assessed, compared with milligram-equivalent doses of atorvastatin and milligram-equivalent or higher doses of simvastatin and pravastatin (all, P < 0.002). Rosuvastatin reduced non-HDL-C by 42.0% to 50.9% compared with 34.4% to 48.1% with atorvastatin, 26.0% to 41.8% with simvastatin, and 18.6% to 27.4% with pravastatin. Rosuvastatin reduced apo B by 36.7% to 45.3% compared with 29.4% to 42.9% with atorvastatin, 22.2% to 34.7% with simvastatin, and 14.7% to 23.0% with pravastatin. The highest increase in apo A-I (8.8%) was observed in the rosuvastatin 20-mg group, and this increase was significantly greater than in the atorvastatin 40-mg and 80-mg groups (both, P < 0.002). CONCLUSION: Rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg was more efficacious in improving the lipid profile of patients with hypercholesterolemia than milligram-equivalent doses of atorvastatin and milligram-equivalent or higher doses of simvastatin and pravastatin.     

Poster 28: Comparison of hemi-field fresnel prisms versus patching for visual neglect after stroke

Objective: To assess the effect of bilateral hemi-field prisms versus patches for treatment of visual neglect after stroke. Design: Randomized, prospective, controlled trial. Setting: Inpatient stroke unit. Participants: 38 patients with stroke, visual neglect defined by the Behavioral Inattention Test (BIT), and visual acuity ≥20/200. Interventions: The prism group received 15 diopter Fresnel prisms over the affected hemi-field bilaterally; patch group received black tape of the unaffected visual hemi-field bilaterally; controls received no visual intervention. The interventions lasted 14 days. Main Outcome Measures: 3 subtests of BIT were recorded at baseline and on days 2, 7, 14, and 16. Results: Admissions demographic were similar for all 3 groups. There were no significant differences in BIT scores while wearing the optical devices. The prism group showed a trend for improvement in all 3 BIT scores 2 days after removal of the optical device. This reached statistical significance for the line bisection scores (prism group ± SEM, 1.5±0.3; patch group, .12±.12; controls, .33±.33; P=.004). Dropouts were highest for prism group (10/16) versus patch group (4/12) and controls (1/10) (P=0.2). Conclusion: Hemi-field Fresnel prisms showed a beneficial effect on visual neglect 2 days after their removal.     

Effects of Verapamil Slow Release Plus Trandolapril Combination Therapy on Essential Hypertension

Background: Fixed-dose combination antihypertensive therapy has been recommended for patients with essential hypertension who are unresponsive to monotherapy or as a first-line treatment.Objective: We investigated the effects of a fixed-dose combination of the phenylalkylamine-type calcium channel blocker verapamil slow release (SR)plus the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor trandolapril on blood pressure (BP), serum lipid profile, urinary albumin excretion (UAE), left ventricular mass (LVM), and LVM index (LVMI), as well as the adverse events associated with this treatment.Methods: Patients aged 30 to 65 years with mild to moderate essential hypertension were included in the study. All of the patients received capsules containing combination treatment with verapamil SR 180 mg plus trandolapril 2 mg orally, daily for 12 weeks. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), and heart rate (HR) were measured at baseline and at 4, 8, and 12 weeks of treatment. Serum lipid profile, UAE, LVM, LVMI, and body mass index (BMI) were determined at baseline and at the end of the study period. All patients underwent electrocardiography and echocardiography at baseline and week 12. The primary end point of the study was to achieve an SBP/DBP ≤140/≤90 mm Hg (ie, normotensive) during week 12. All adverse events were assessed as mild, moderate, or severe at each visit. According to the response rate at week 12, patients were divided into 2 groups: those who became normotensive (responders) or those who remained hypertensive (SBP/DBP >140/>90 mm Hg; nonresponders).Results: Forty-one patients (29 women, 12 men; mean [SD] age, 47.7 [7.8] years; mean [SD] BMI, 29.4 [3.5] kg/m²) were enrolled. The median durationof hypertension prior to enrollment was 5 months. Mean MAP, SBP, DBP, UAE, total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), LDL-C/highdensity lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ratio, LVM, LVMI, and BMI decreased significantly after 12 weeks of combination treatment; HR and triglyceride level did not change significantly. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 31.7% of patients, and none were severe or caused any patient to withdraw from the study. The most common adverse events were cough, constipation, headache, and dryness in the throat. Microalbuminuria, which may be a marker of endothelial dysfunction, was found in 7 (17.1%) patients at baseline and regressed significantly after 12 weeks.Conclusions: In this study population, the fixed-dose combination of verapamil-trandolapril was an effective and well-tolerated antihypertensive therapy. This combination significantly reduced MAP, BP, TC, LDL-C, LDL-C/HDL-C ratio, UAE, LVM, and LVMI. Also, microalbuminuria decreased after this treatment. Verapamil-trandolapril may be useful in preventing microalbuminuria and left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with essential hypertension.