Co-administration of ezetimibe and simvastatin in acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND: Recent trials in acute myocardial infarction indicate that intensive and early statin therapy that lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to < or = 70 mg dL(-1) is beneficial. The combination of statins with ezetimibe, a newly developed cholesterol-absorption inhibitor, can lead to a further reduction in LDL-C of up to 26%. In this study, we examined the rapidity and intensity of the lipid-lowering effect of ezetimibe co-administered with simvastatin immediately after myocardial infarction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction were randomized to receive either simvastatin 40 mg (SIMVA), a combination of simvastatin 40 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg (EZE/SIMVA), or no lipid-lowering drugs (NLLD) and had their lipid levels assessed 2, 4 and 7 days later. RESULTS: At baseline, cardiovascular risk factors were similar in all three groups [mean (SD) LDL-C of 141 (36) mg dL(-1)]. At days 2 , 4 and 7 there was no significant change in mean LDL-C levels in the NLLD group (-10%, -6%, and -9%, all P > 0.09), while there were significant reductions with SIMVA (-15%, -27%, and -25%, respectively, all P < 0.001 vs. day 0) and even greater reductions with co-administration of EZE/SIMVA (-27%, -41%, and -51%, respectively, all P < 0.001 vs. day 0). The percentages of patients achieving LDL-C below 70 mg dL(-1) at days 4 and 7 were substantially greater with EZE/SIMVA (45% and 55%, respectively) than with SIMVA (5% and 10%, respectively), while no NLLD patient reached this goal. Triglyceride levels showed a progressive increase in the NLLD group (+45% at day 7, P < 0.05 vs. day 0), no change in the SIMVA group, but a decrease in the EZE/SIMVA group (-17% at day 7, P < 0.05 vs. day 0). No significant difference in HDL-C levels, tolerability, or clinical events was observed between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The co-administration of ezetimibe 10 mg with simvastatin 40 mg, by inhibiting cholesterol absorption and production, allowed more patients with acute myocardial infarction to reach LDL-C < or = 70 mg dL(-1) as early as the fourth day of treatment. The effects of such rapid and intense reduction in LDL-C on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality need to be evaluated in future clinical endpoint studies.     

Comparison of the lipid-modifying efficacy and safety profiles of ezetimibe coadministered with simvastatin in older versus younger patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: a post Hoc analysis of subpopulations from three pooled clinical trials

BACKGROUND: Despite the need for effective and well-tolerated lipid-lowering therapies for primary hypercholesterolemia in older patients, there is a relative paucity of published data on such treatments in this population. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a post hoc analysis to examine the lipid-modifying efficacy and safety profile of simvastatin (SIMVA) monotherapy, and the coadministration of ezetimibe (EZE) and SIMVA (EZE/SIMVA) in older (ie, aged>or=65 years) versus younger (ie, aged<65 years) patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: We analyzed pooled data from 3 previously published, similarly designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. After a 6- to 8-week washout, a 4-week dietary stabilization period, and a 4-week placebo run-in period, patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of 145 to 250 mg/dL were randomized to EZE/SIMVA 10/10, 10/20, 10/40, or 10/80 mg; SIMVA 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; EZE 10 mg; or placebo for 12 weeks. In this post hoc analysis, the percent change from baseline to week 12 in LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B (apo B), triglycerides (TG), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) for EZE/SIMVA (pooled across doses) versus SIMVA alone (pooled across doses) was compared between older and younger patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Tolerability was assessed by adverse event reports and laboratory and vital signs assessments throughout the study. RESULTS: A total of 3083 patients aged 20 to 87 years were included in the 3 studies (2320 were aged<65 years and 763 were aged>or=65 years). Baseline lipid values and patient characteristics were similar among all treatment groups for patients aged<65 years versus those aged>or=65 years except that there was a higher percentage of females (62% vs 50%) and patients with hypertension (46% vs 29%) in the older versus younger subgroup (both, P<0.001). EZE/SIMVA was associated with greater improvements than SIMVA alone in LDL-C, non-HDL-C, apo B, TG, and hs-CRP (all, P<0.001); these effects did not appear to differ between the older and younger sub-groups (all, P=NS). Changes in HDL-C did not differ significantly between the EZE/SIMVA and SIMVA groups. More patients receiving EZE/SIMVA than SIMVA monotherapy achieved the target LDL-C level<100 mg/dL (P<0.001), regardless of age subgroup (77% vs 41% for patients aged<65 years and 85% vs 48% for patients aged>or=65 years). In the younger sub-group, the incidence of creatinine phosphokinase (CK) elevations>or=10x the upper limit of normal (ULN) was or=10x ULN were reported. In younger patients, the incidence of consecutive alanine amino-transferase or aspartate aminotransferase levels>or=3x ULN was 0% for placebo and EZE, <1% for SIMVA, and 2% for EZE/SIMVA; in older patients, it was 1% for placebo and EZE, <1% for SIMVA, and 0% for EZE/SIMVA. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis of pooled data from 3 previously published large clinical trials suggests that EZE/SIMVA was well tolerated and associated with improved lipid profiles in both older and younger patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.     

Long-term safety and, tolerability profiles and lipid-modifying efficacy of ezetimibe coadministered with ongoing simvastatin treatment: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 48-week extension study

BACKGROUND: Ezetimibe (EZE) is a cholesterol-lowering drug that inhibits absorption of dietary and biliary cholesterol across the intestinal wall without affecting absorption of bile acids, fatty acids, fat-soluble vitamins, or triglycerides. It has a complementary mechanism of action to the statins, which inhibit cholesterol synthesis in the liver. Coadministration of EZE and statins provides inhibition of 2 sources of cholesterol, leading to greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) than with either agent alone. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the long-term safety and tolerability profiles and lipid-modifying efficacy of treatment with EZE 10 mg/d plus simvastatin (SIMVA) 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg/d for 48 weeks in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: This was an extension of a multicenter, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled base study in which hypercholesterolemic patients were randomized to receive EZE 10 mg/d or PBO in addition to their current statin for 8 weeks. Patients who successfully completed the base study could enter the extension study if they were willing to switch from their current statin to an approximately equipotent dose of SIMVA for the 54-week study period. After a 6-week open-label SIMVA run-in phase, patients were rerandomized to receive EZE 10 mg/d or PBO in a 4:1 ratio, respectively, for 48 weeks. At each clinic visit, beginning at week 12, the dose of SIMVA was titrated upward until patients reached their National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel II LDL-C goal or the maximum SIMVA dose of 80 mg/d. Safety/tolerability and lipid efficacy parameters were assessed at 12-week intervals. RESULTS: Of 433 patients entering the extension study, 355 were randomized to receive EZE and 78 were randomized to receive PBO. Baseline demographic characteristics and lipid levels were similar between treatment groups. Overall, coadministration of EZE + SIMVA was well tolerated. There were no clinically meaningful differences between the EZE and PBO groups with regard to the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) (19% vs 17%, respectively), discontinuations due to AEs (7% vs 10%), serious AEs (12% vs 17%), consecutive elevations in liver function tests > or =3 times the upper limit of normal (ULN) (0.3% vs 0%), or elevations in creatine kinase > or =10 times the ULN (both, 0%). As in the base study, LDL-C levels were significantly lower with the addition of EZE to SIMVA compared with the addition of PBO (-24% vs 3%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In these patients with primary hypercholesterolemia, EZE 10 mg/d added to ongoing SIMVA treatment for 48 weeks had a favorable safety and tolerability profile and was more efficacious than SIMVA monotherapy.     

Lipid-altering efficacy of switching from atorvastatin 10 mg/day to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg/day compared to doubling the dose of atorvastatin in hypercholesterolaemic patients with atherosclerosis or coronary heart disease

This randomised, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) 10/20 mg tablet compared to doubling the atorvastatin (ATV) dose in hypercholesterolaemic patients with atherosclerotic or coronary heart disease (CHD). The study group included 435 male and female CHD patients (aged >or=18 years) who had not achieved their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal of <2.50 mmol/l while on a stable dose of ATV 10 mg for >or=6 weeks. After a 1-week diet/stabilisation period, patients with LDL-C >or=2.50 mmol/l and 相似文献   

A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind 14-week extension study examining the long-term safety and efficacy profile of the ezetimibe/simvastatin combination tablet

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) tablet and SIMVA monotherapy. This was an extension study of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia. Protocol-compliant patients who completed the 12-week base study were eligible to enter a randomised, double-blind, 14-week extension study and were administered 1 of 8 daily treatments: EZE/SIMVA 10/10-, 10/20-, 10/40- or 10/80-mg, or SIMVA 10-, 20-, 40- or 80-mg. Patients receiving these treatments during the base study remained on the same treatment in the extension. Patients administered placebo or EZE 10-mg monotherapy during the base study were re-randomised to EZE/SIMVA 10/10 mg or SIMVA 80 mg. The primary analysis was mean per cent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) from baseline to extension study end-point. Mean changes from baseline in LDL-C of -38.8% and -53.7% were observed for pooled SIMVA and pooled EZE/SIMVA respectively. The between treatment difference of -14.9% (95% confidence interval: -16.4, -13.3) was statistically significant (p < 0.001). The incremental LDL-C lowering effect of EZE/SIMVA compared with the corresponding dose of SIMVA alone was consistent across the dose range (p < 0.001 for each between-group comparison). More patients receiving EZE/SIMVA than SIMVA achieved LDL-C concentrations < 100 mg/dl and < 70 mg/dl (p < 0.001 for both goals). EZE/SIMVA was generally well tolerated with a safety profile similar to SIMVA monotherapy. There were no significant between-group differences in the incidences of clinically significant elevations in liver transaminase or creatine kinase levels. In conclusion, EZE/SIMVA had a comparable safety and tolerability profile and was more efficacious than SIMVA monotherapy for up to 6 months.     

Lipid‐altering efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg compared with rosuvastatin 10 mg in high‐risk hypercholesterolaemic patients inadequately controlled with prior statin monotherapy – The IN‐CROSS study

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy of switching from a previous statin monotherapy to ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) 10/20 mg vs. rosuvastatin (ROSUVA) 10 mg. Methods: In this randomised, double‐blind study, 618 patients with documented hypercholesterolaemia [low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) ≥ 2.59 and ≤ 4.92 mmol/l] and with high cardiovascular risk who were taking a stable daily dose of one of several statin medications for ≥ 6 weeks prior to the study randomisation visit entered a 6‐week open‐label stabilisation/screening period during which they continued to receive their prestudy statin dose. Following stratification by study site and statin dose/potency, patients were randomised to EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (n = 314) or ROSUVA 10 mg (n = 304) for 6 weeks. Results: EZE/SIMVA produced greater reductions in LDL‐C (?27.7% vs. ?16.9%; p ≤ 0.001), total cholesterol (?17.5% vs. ?10.3%; p ≤ 0.001), non‐high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐C) (?23.4% vs. ?14.0%; p ≤ 0.001) and apolipoprotein B (?17.9% vs. ?9.8%; p ≤ 0.001) compared with ROSUVA, while both treatments were equally effective at increasing HDL‐C (2.1% vs. 3.0%; p = 0.433). More patients achieved LDL‐C levels < 2.59 mmol/l (73% vs. 56%), < 2.00 mmol/l (38% vs. 19%) and < 1.81 mmol/l (25% vs. 11%) with EZE/SIMVA than ROSUVA (p ≤ 0.001). A borderline significantly greater reduction in triglycerides (p = 0.056) was observed for EZE/SIMVA (?11.0%) vs. ROSUVA (?5.3%). There were no between‐group differences in the incidences of adverse events or liver transaminase and creatine kinase elevations. Conclusion: EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg produced greater improvements in LDL‐C, total cholesterol, non‐HDL‐C and apoB with a similar safety profile as for ROSUVA 10 mg.     

Effects of ezetimibe/simvastatin on lipoprotein subfractions in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: an exploratory analysis of archived samples using two commercially available techniques

BACKGROUND: Cholesterol-rich lipoproteins, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), intermediate-density lipoprotein cholesterol (IDL-C), and very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C), are known to promote atherosclerosis. Ezetimibe/simvastatin (E/S) is an efficacious lipid-lowering treatment that inhibits both the intestinal absorption and biosynthesis of cholesterol. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current analysis was to compare the effects of ezetimibe and simvastatin monotherapy and E/S treatment on lipoprotein subfractions and LDL particle size in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: This was an exploratory (hypothesis generating) analysis of archived plasma samples drawn from patients in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm study. After a washout and diet/placebo run-in, patients with hypercholesterolemia (LDL-C, > or =145- < or =250 mg/dL; triglycerides, < or =350 mg/dL) were randomized equally to 1 of 10 daily treatments for 12 weeks: E/S (10/10, 10/20, 10/40, or 10/80 mg), simvastatin monotherapy (10, 20, 40, or 80 mg), ezetimibe monotherapy (10 mg), or placebo. A subset of patients had lipid subfraction measurements taken at baseline (week 0) and postrandomization (week 12). Plasma samples were used to quantify cholesterol associated with VLDL subfractions (VLDLI+2 and VLDL3), IDL, and 4 LDL subfractions (LDL1-4) via the Vertical Auto Profile II method. LDL-C particle size was determined using segmented gradient gel electrophoresis. The primary end point was median percent change in subfraction cholesterol for E/S versus ezetimibe or simvastatin monotherapy, pooled across doses. RESULTS: Of the 1528 patients randomized in the original study, 1397 (91%) had lipid subfraction measurements taken. E/S was associated with significant reductions in VLDL-CI+2, VLDL-C3, IDL-C, LDL-C1, LDL-C2, and LDL-C3 versus ezetimibe, simvastatin, and placebo. E/S resulted in near-additive reductions in VLDL-CI+2, VLDL-C3, IDL-C, LDL-C1, LDL-C2, and LDL-C3 versus ezetimibe and simvastatin monotherapy. Of the subfractions examined, with regard to E/S, the greatest reductions were observed in IDL-C and LDL-C1, LDL-C2, and LDL-C3. When compared with placebo, ezetimibe, simvastatin, and E/S did not shift the distribution of LDL particles toward a larger, more buoyant LDL subclass pattern. CONCLUSION: E/S was more effective than ezetimibe and simvastatin monotherapy in reducing atherogenic lipoprotein subfractions in these patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.     

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe co-administered with ongoing atorvastatin therapy in achieving low-density lipoprotein goal in patients with hypercholesterolemia and coronary heart disease

This randomised, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe (EZE) co-administered with ongoing atorvastatin (ATV) therapy in 450 hypercholesterolemic patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) who had not achieved their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal < or =2.60 mmol/l while on a stable dose of ATV 10 or 20 mg/day for > or =6 weeks. After a 4-week diet/baseline active run-in period, patients with LDL-C >2.60 mmol/l and < or =4.20 mmol/l were stratified by ATV dose and randomised (1 : 1) to EZE 10 mg or PBO for 6 weeks while continuing open-label ATV. Significantly more patients achieved an LDL-C goal < or =2.6 mmol/l with EZE than PBO (81.3 vs. 21.8%; p < or = 0.001). Compared to PBO, co-administration of EZE with ongoing ATV led to significantly (p < or = 0.001) greater reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and apolipoprotein B; HDL-C was significantly (p < or = 0.05) increased. Co-administration of EZE and ATV was well tolerated, with an overall safety profile similar to ATV alone.     

Ezetimibe/simvastatin vs atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolemia: the VYTAL study

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of the recommended usual starting and next highest doses of ezetimibe/ simvastatin and atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolemia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This double-blind, multicenter study (June 22 to December 7, 2005) consisted of adult patients randomized to the recommended usual starting (ezetimibe/simvastatin, 10/20 mg/d, vs atorvastatin, 10 or 20 mg/d) or next highest (ezetimibe/simvastatin, 10/40 mg/d, vs atorvastatin, 40 mg/d) doses. Efficacy end points included percent changes from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (primary) and proportion of patients attaining LDL-C levels less than 70 mg/dL (secondary). RESULTS: A total of 1229 patients participated in the study. Significantly greater mean reductions were found in LDL-C levels with ezetimibe/simvastatin, 10/20 mg/d (-53.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -55.4% to -51.8%), than with atorvastatin, 10 mg/d (-38.3%; 95% CI, -40.1% to -36.5%; P < .001) or 20 mg/d (-44.6%; 95% CI, -46.4% to -42.8%; P < .001), and with ezetimibe/simvastatin, 10/40 mg/d (-57.6%; 95% CI, -59.4% to -55.8%), vs atorvastatin, 40 mg/d (-50.9%; 95% CI, -52.7% to -49.1%; P < .001). Ezetimibe/simvastatin was also superior to atorvastatin in attainment of LDL-C levels less than 70 mg/dL (P < .001 for all dose comparisons). Significantly better improvements with ezetimibe/simvastatin than with atorvastatin (P < or = .001) were observed for total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Ezetimibe/ simvastatin, 10/20 mg/d, reduced high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and triglyceride levels significantly more than atorvastatin, 10 mg/d (P = .02), with comparable reductions at other doses. Incidences of clinical adverse events, including serious drug-related and prespecified gastrointestinal-, gallbladder-, and hepatitis-related allergic reactions or rash events, and laboratory adverse events, including repeated elevation of hepatic transaminases or creatine kinase levels, were similar for both treatments. CONCLUSION: Ezetimibe/simvastatin provided additional lipid-modifying benefits over atorvastatin monotherapy at the recommended usual starting and next highest doses in patients with type 2 diabetes. Both treatments were generally well tolerated.     

Long-term safety and tolerability profile of ezetimibe and atorvastatin coadministration therapy in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia

Long-term safety and tolerability of ezetimibe plus atorvastatin (EZE + ATV) coadministration therapy were compared to those of ATV monotherapy in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia. Upon completion of a 12 week randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing EZE 10 mg; ATV 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg; EZE + ATV 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg or placebo, 246 patients were enrolled in a 12-month extension, with reassignment to double-blind EZE 10 mg (n = 201) or matching placebo (n = 45) coadministered daily with open-label ATV 10 mg. At intervals of 6 weeks, patients not at National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel II LDL-C goals were titrated to the next higher ATV dose. Safety evaluations included adverse event (AE) reports and laboratory test results. EZE + ATV and ATV monotherapy groups were similar with regard to incidence of all AEs (71 vs. 67%), treatment-related AEs (22 vs. 27%) and discontinuations due to AEs (9 vs. 7%) or treatment-related AEs (6 vs. 7%), respectively. Neither clinically significant elevations in hepatic transaminases or creatine kinase nor any cases of myopathy or rhabdomyolysis were observed in either group during the extension study. After 6 weeks, EZE + ATV 10mg produced greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; -53 vs. -37%), total cholesterol (TC; -38.8 vs. -26.0%) and triglycerides (TG; -28 vs. -12%) and similar increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (4.6 vs. 4.5%) compared to ATV 10 mg, respectively, and these changes were maintained and significant at 1 year (p < 0.01 for LDL-C, TC and TG). More EZE + ATV patients achieved LDL-C goal than ATV patients at study endpoint (91 vs. 78%, respectively; p = 0.02). Thus, the coadministration of EZE + ATV for 12 months was well tolerated and more efficacious than ATV monotherapy.     

Effectiveness and tolerability of ezetimibe in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: pooled analysis of two phase II studies

BACKGROUND: Ezetimibe (SCH 58235) is a novel cholesterol absorption inhibitor that selectively and potently blocks intestinal absorption of dietary and biliary cholesterol. OBJECTIVE: Data from 2 multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, 12-week studies of ezetimibe were pooled to evaluate the drug's effect on lipid parameters in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: After dietary stabilization (National Cholesterol Education Program Step I diet or a stricter diet), washout of lipid-altering drugs, and a 6-week placebo lead-in period, patients with baseline plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels > or = 130 and < or = 250 mg/dL and plasma triglyceride (TG) levels < or = 300 mg/dL were randomized to receive either ezetimibe 0.25, 1, 5, or 10 mg, or placebo administered once daily before the morning meal in study A (dose-response study) or ezetimibe 5 or 10 mg or placebo administered once daily before the morning meal or at bedtime in study B (dose-regimen study). RESULTS: A total of 432 patients were included in this pooled analysis, 243 in study A and 189 in study B. The 5- and 10-mg doses of ezetimibe significantly reduced LDL-C levels by 15.7% and 18.5%, respectively (P < 0.01 vs placebo) and significantly increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (hDL-C) levels by 2.9% and 3.5%, respectively (P < 0.05 vs placebo). A reduction in plasma TG levels was observed (P = NS). With the 10-mg dose of ezetimibe, 67.8% of patients achieved > or = 15% reduction in plasma LDL-C levels, and 22.0% achieved > or = 25% reduction. With the 5-mg dose, 54.0% of patients achieved > or = 15% reduction in plasma LDL-C levels, and 15.3% achieved > or = 25% reduction. The decrease in plasma LDL-C levels was significantly greater with ezetimibe 10 mg compared with ezetimibe 5 mg (P < 0.05). Ezetimibe was well tolerated, with an adverse event profile similar to that of placebo. Conclusions: In these two 12-week studies, ezetimibe significantly decreased plasma LDL-C levels and increased plasma HDL-C levels, with a tolerability profile similar to that of placebo.     

Supratherapeutic response to ezetimibe administered with cyclosporine

OBJECTIVE: To report the case of a patient who underwent orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) and demonstrated a supratherapeutic response to ezetimibe when administered with cyclosporine. CASE SUMMARY: Ezetimibe 10 mg/day was added to the lipid-lowering regimen (atorvastatin 40 mg/day) of a 64-year-old male patient after OHT to achieve a target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level < or = 97 mg/dL, as recommended by national guidelines. After 2 months of ezetimibe, the patient's LDL-C level had decreased by 60% to 51 mg/dL. Subsequently, the dose of ezetimibe was reduced to 5 mg/day and, after another 2 months, a repeat lipid panel revealed LDL-C 57 mg/dL. DISCUSSION: Hyperlipidemia is a common problem among heart transplant recipients. Combination therapy using a statin plus ezetimibe appears to be an attractive option to achieve target lipid levels in this population. However, the manufacturer warns that ezetimibe should be administered cautiously in patients concomitantly receiving cyclosporine. Unpublished data suggest a pharmacokinetic interaction between ezetimibe and cyclosporine that results in a significant 2.3- to 12-fold increase in exposure to total ezetimibe. An objective causality assessment in this case revealed that this supratherapeutic LDL-C reduction was probably related to coadministration of ezetimibe and cyclosporine. A potential mechanism to explain this interaction might be an alteration in glucuronidation induced by cyclosporine. CONCLUSIONS: When ezetimibe is prescribed for patients concomitantly receiving cyclosporine, it should be initiated at a lower than recommended dose (> or = 5 mg/day) and titrated upward. Careful and consistent monitoring of patients on this combination is also advised.     

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe coadministered with statins: randomised, placebo-controlled, blinded experience in 2382 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia

We assessed pooled safety and lipid-regulating efficacy data from four similarly designed trials of ezetimibe coadministered with statins in 2382 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Patients were randomised to one of the following double-blind treatments for 12 weeks: placebo; ezetimibe 10 mg; statin; or statin + ezetimibe. Statin doses tested were 10, 20, 40 mg/day (atorvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin or lovastatin) or 80 mg/day (atorvastatin, simvastatin). Treatment with ezetimibe + statin led to significantly greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), apolipoprotein B and increases in HDL-C, compared to statin alone. At each statin dose, treatment with ezetimibe + statin led to a greater LDL-C reduction compared to the next highest statin monotherapy dose. Ezetimibe + statin had a safety profile similar to statin monotherapy. Coadministration of ezetimibe + statin offers a well-tolerated, highly efficacious new treatment strategy for patients with hypercholesterolemia.     

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe 40 mg vs. ezetimibe 10 mg in the treatment of patients with homozygous sitosterolaemia

Objective: To assess the effect of ezetimibe (EZE) 40 mg/day on non‐cholesterol sterol plasma concentrations in patients with homozygous sitosterolaemia (HoS). Methods: This was a multi‐centre, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled parallel group study. Twenty‐seven patients (≥ 18 years) with HoS and plasma sitosterol levels > 5 mg/dl who had been taking EZE 10 mg/day for ≥ 6 months prior to enrolment received open‐label EZE 10 mg/day for the duration of the study and were randomised 1 : 1 to blinded EZE 30 mg/day (4 × EZE 10 mg tablets; n = 13) or placebo (1 × EZE 10 mg tablet and 3 × matching placebo tablets; n = 14) for 26 weeks. Patients were permitted to remain on other ongoing treatments (e.g. bile salt‐binding resin, statin and/or low sterol diet). End‐points included median per cent between‐group changes from baseline in plasma sitosterol, campesterol, lathosterol, low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) sterols, LDL cholesterol (LDL‐C) measured by gas–liquid chromatography, and Achilles tendon thickness size measured radiographically. Results: Ezetimibe 40 mg/day resulted in median per cent changes from baseline in plasma sitosterol levels of 3.3% vs. ?10% in the EZE 10 mg/day group, in plasma campesterol of ?0.5% vs. ?9.7% in the EZE 10 mg/day group, and in plasma lathosterol of 0.8% vs. 1.1% in the EZE 10 mg/day group (p = ns for all between‐group differences). Median per cent changes in the EZE 40 mg/day and EZE 10 mg/day groups, respectively, were 1.3% and 0% for LDL sterols and 2.5% and 4.4% for LDL‐C (p = ns for both between‐group differences). At study end‐point, Achilles tendon thickness remained unchanged in the EZE 40 mg/day group and increased slightly in the EZE 10 mg/day group (2.2%), yielding a non‐significant between‐group difference of ?2.2%. EZE 40 mg/day was generally well tolerated. Conclusions: In patients with HoS, treatment with EZE 40 mg/day for 26 weeks was no more effective at reducing plasma plant sterol concentrations vs. EZE 10 mg/day. EZE 40 mg/day had a safety and tolerability profile similar to EZE 10 mg/day.     

Effects of fluvastatin extended-release (80 mg) alone and in combination with ezetimibe (10 mg) on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and inflammatory parameters in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study

Background: Combining lipid-lowering agents with complementary mechanisms of action can provide greater cholesterol reductions than using either agent alone, improving achievement of target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of fluvastatin extended-release (XL) 80 mg/d administered alone or combined with ezetimibe 10 mg/d on plasma lipid levels and inflammatory parameters in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. The tol-erability of both regimens was also evaluated. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study, patients with hypercholesterolemia were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive fluvastatin XL 80 mg/d alone or in combination with ezetimibe 10 mg/d for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage change from baseline to week 12 in LDL-C level with fluvastatin XL + ezetimibe combination therapy compared with fluvastatin XL alone. Plasma concentrations of inflammatory biomarkers were measured at baseline and week 12. Proportions of patients who achieved National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) LDL-C goals were calculated. Tolerability was assessed by the monitoring and recording of all adverse events (AEs) and laboratory values. Results: A total of 82 patients were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 50.0 [12.0] years; 44% male; 100% white; mean [SD] weight, 73.5 [14.9] kg; combination group, 38 patients; monotherapy group, 44). Fluvastatin XL + ezetimibe and fluvastatin XL monotherapy were associated with significant decreases from baseline in mean LDL-C level (by 49.9% and 35.2%, respectively; between-group difference, P < 0.001). Fluvastatin XL + ezetimibe was associated with significantly greater reductions from baseline than fluvastatin XL monotherapy in total cholesterol (38.2% vs 27.5% P < 0.001), triglycerides (21% vs 3.8% P = 0.02) and apolipoprotein B (34.8% vs 22.5% P < 0.001). NCEP ATP III LDL-C goals were achieved by 87% of patients receiving fluvastatin XL + ezetimibe and 67% of patients receiving fluvastatin XL monotherapy (between-group difference, P = 0.042). The combination was associated with significantly lowered high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels in patients with high baseline hs-CRP (>2 mg/L; P < 0.02), >1 cardiovascular risk factor (P < 0.05), or hypertension (P = 0.015); both regimens were associated with significantly reduced plasma levels of interleukin-1B. No significant between-group differences in the incidences of AEs were found. Most AEs were mild or moderate in intensity. Headache was the most common AE, occurring in 5/44 (11.4%) patients in the fluvastatin XL group and 2/38 (5.3%) patients in the fluvastatin XL + ezetimibe group. One serious AE (convulsive crisis) occurred in a patient receiving fluvastatin XL + ezetimibe, but was not suspected to be related to study medication. Conclusion: Fluvastatin XL in combination with ezetimibe was found to be well-tolerated and effective, allowing the majority (87%) of these patients with primary hypercholesterolemia to achieve current treatment goals, and reduced hs-CRP levels in patients at higher cardiovascular risk.     

Colesevelam HCl and ezetimibe combination therapy provides effective lipid-lowering in difficult-to-treat patients with hypercholesterolemia

This study investigated the effects of colesevelam hydrochloride (WelChol; Sankyo Pharma, Parsippany, NJ) and ezetimibe (Zetia; Merck/Schering Plough Pharmaceuticals, North Wales, PA), alone and in combination, for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia in patients who were intolerant to, or refused, HMG-Co-A reductase inhibitor (statin) therapy. Combination therapy with colesevelam HCl/ezetimibe resulted in an additional reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels of approximately 20% (P < 0.005) and 16% (P < 0.01), respectively, compared with monotherapy with either agent. Total cholesterol, LDL-C, and non-HDL-C levels were within National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III target ranges at the end of the combination therapy regimen in 10 of 12 patients. In conclusion, colesevelam HCl/ezetimibe combination therapy appears to be an efficacious and well-tolerated alternative for patients with hypercholesterolemia.     

Effects of simvastatin on the lipid profile and attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals when added to thiazolidinedione therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease is the major cause of mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM). Given the increasingly aggressive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals for patients with DM set by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and the American Diabetes Association, many patients remain above target. Treatment with thiazolidinediones (TZDs) improves glycemic control but does not lower (and may raise) LDL-C concentrations. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the lipid-modifying efficacy and tolerability of adding the hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A-reductase inhibitor simvastatin to existing TZD therapy in patients with type 2 DM. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Patients with type 2 DM who were taking a stable dose of pioglitazone or rosiglitazone and had a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) value < or =9.0% and an LDL-C concentration > 100 mg/dL were randomized to receive simvastatin 40 mg (the recommended initial dose for patients with DM) or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary end point was the effect of treatment on LDL-C concentrations. Other lipid, lipoprotein, and safety measures were also assessed. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-three patients (127 [50.2%] men, 126 [49.8%] women; mean age, 56 years) were randomized to treatment (123 simvastatin, 130 placebo). At the end of the study, mean LDL-C concentrations were reduced 34.)% from baseline (from 134.3 to 89.5 mg/dL) in the simvastatin group and were unchanged in the placebo group (P<0.001). Simvastatin produced significant reductions in concentrations of total cholesterol, triglycerides (TG), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein (apo) B compared with placebo (all, P<0.001 ) and significant increases in concentrations of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ( P=0.002 ) and apo A-I ( P=0.006 ). In patients who had not attained target concentrations of LDL-C (<100 mg/dL), TG (<150 mg/dL), or HDL-C (>45 mg/dL) at baseline, significantly more simvastatin recipients had achieved these goals at the end of the study compared with placebo recipients (LDL-C: 67.3% vs 5.2%, respectively, P<0.001; HDL-C: 95.3% vs 83.6%, P<0.05; TG: 40.8% vs 11.0%, P<0.001 ). Simvastatin was well tolerated, and no clinically meaningful differences in the incidence of serious adverse events, treatment-related adverse events, or discontinuations due to adverse events were observed between groups. There were no significant between-group differences in glycemic control (HbA1c) or concentrations of fasting insulin, creatine phosphokinase, or hepatic transaminases. CONCLUSION: Simvastatin was an effective and generally well tolerated treatment for hyperlipidemia when used in combination with TZD therapy in this population of patients with type 2 DM.     

Comparative effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients with characteristics of metabolic syndrome

BACKGROUND: Hypercholesterolemic patients with metabolic syndrome (MS) are at high risk for coronary heart disease. The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines provide the option of aggressively lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in hypercholesterolemic patients with MS. OBJECTIVE: The lipid-modifying efficacy of simvastatin and atorvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients with MS as defined by NCEP ATP III was assessed. METHODS: A post hoc subgroup analysis was performed on data from a 36-week, multicenter (54 sites worldwide), randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-escalation (forced-titration) study designed to assess the effects of simvastatin (40-80 mg) and atorvastatin (20-80 mg) on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein (apo) A-I levels in patients with LDL-C > or = 160 mg/dL. Patients were classified as having MS if they met >/=3 of the following criteria: (1) triglyceride (TG) level > or =150 mg/dL; (2) HDL-C <40 mg/dL (men) or <50 mg/dL (women); (3) secondary diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or taking antidiabetic medication and/or fasting serum glucose (FSG) level > or =110 mg/dL; (4) secondary diagnosis of hypertension and/or taking antihypertensive medication and/or systolic blood pressure (SBP)/diastolic blood pressure (DBP) > or =130/ > or =85 mm Hg; and (5) body mass index (BMI) > or =30 kg/m(2) (surrogate for waist circumference). RESULTS: Of 808 evaluable patients, 212 (26.2%) were classified as having MS at baseline. Compared with the non-MS subgroup, MS patients were slightly older and more likely to be female. They also had higher BMI, SBP/DBP, FSG, and TG levels, and lower HDL-C and apo A-I levels than non-MS patients. The simvastatin group contained 99 patients; the atorvastatin group, 113 patients. Both drugs produced large reductions in total cholesterol, LDL-C, non-HDL-C, TG, and apo B, with atorvastatin producing slightly greater reductions in TG. However, simvastatin consistently produced larger increases in HDL-C and apo A-I than atorvastatin, especially at higher doses. After 36 weeks of treatment, 47.7% and 48.5% in the simvastatin and atorvastatin groups, respectively, no longer met > or =3 of the MS criteria. CONCLUSIONS: In hypercholesterolemic patients with characteristics of MS, simvastatin and atorvastatin had comparable beneficial effects on apo B-containing atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins, and MS status was effectively modified by both drugs. However, although atorvastatin produced slightly larger decreases in TG, simvastatin produced larger increases in HDL-C.     

Combination therapy with ezetimibe and simvastatin to achieve aggressive LDL reduction

A low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol goal of less than 100 mg/dl is recommended for patients at moderate to high risk of cardiovascular disease with an optional LDL goal of less than 70 mg/dl for patients at a very high risk of cardiovascular disease. Most patients will require reductions in LDL of more than 50% in order to achieve these more aggressive goals. Only a few agents will lower LDL by at least 50%. This review will focus on the efficacy and safety ezetimibe/simvastatin coadministered as a therapy with enhanced LDL-lowering efficacy, while minimizing the adverse effects of statins in a wide range of patients. Ezetimibe 10 mg/simvastatin 80 mg lowers LDL by approximately 60% and has been demonstrated to be superior to the highest doses of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin for lowering LDL and raising high-density lipoprotein.     

A 12-week, prospective, open-label analysis of the effect of rosuvastatin on triglyceride-rich lipoprotein metabolism in patients with primary dyslipidemia

BACKGROUND: Although the effect of statins on lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) has been extensively studied, their hypotriglyceridemic capacity is not fully understood. OBJECTIVE: The present study examined clinical and laboratory factors potentially associated with the triglyceride (TG)-lowering effect of rosuvastatin. METHODS: Eligible patients had primary dyslipidemia and a moderate risk of heart disease. Patients were prescribed rosuvastatin 10 mg/d in an open-label fashion and kept 3-day food diaries. Laboratory measurements, performed at baseline and 12 weeks, included serum lipid parameters (total cholesterol [TC], TGs, LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and apolipoprotein [apo] levels), non-lipid metabolic variables (including carbohydrate metabolism parameters and renal, liver, and thyroid function tests), and LDL-subfraction profile (by high-resolution 3% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis). Tolerability was assessed at each visit. RESULTS: Participants were 75 hyperlipidemic patients (39 men and 36 women; mean age, 51.7 years). At 12 weeks, TC levels were reduced by 35.1% (P < 0.001), TGs by 15.2% (P < 0.001), LDL-C by 48.5% (P < 0.001), apoE by 35.4% (P < 0.001), and apoE by 17.3% (P < 0.001) from baseline, whereas HDL-C and apoA1 levels were not significantly changed. Stepwise linear regression analysis showed that baseline TG levels were most significantly correlated (R(2) = 42.0%; P < 0.001) with the TG-lowering effect of rosuvastatin, followed by the reduction in apoCIII levels (R(2) = 13.6%; P < 0.01). Rosuvastatin use was associated with a reduction in cholesterol mass of both large LDL particles (mean [SD], from 150.5 [36.6] to 90.5 [24.3] mg/dL; P < 0.001) and small, dense LDL (sdLDL) particles (from 11.5 [8.4] to 6.6 [4.5] mg/dL; P < 0.001). Rosuvastatin had no effect on cholesterol distribution of the LDL subfractions (mean [SD], large particles, from 90.8% [7.0%] to 91.8% [5.1%]; sdLDL, from 7.1% [4.7%] to 7.5% [4.8%]) or the mean LDL particle size (from 26.5 [4.2] to 26.6 [4.0] rim). A significant increase in mean LDL particle size after rosuvastatin treatment (mean [SD], from 26.4 [0.4] to 26.9 [0.4] rim; P = 0.02) was observed only in patients with baseline TG levels > or =120 mg/dL. No serious adverse events requiring study treatment discontinuation were reported. One patient who presented with headache and 2 patients who presented with fatigue quickly recovered without discontinuing rosuvastatin treatment. A posttreatment elevation in aminotransferase levels <3-fold the upper limit of normal (ULN) was recorded in 5 (6.7%) patients, and 2 (2.7%) patients experienced elevated creatine kinase concentrations <5-fold ULN. CONCLUSION: Baseline TG levels were the most important independent variable associated with the TG-lowering effect of rosuvastatin.