Single-pill therapy in the treatment of concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia (the amlodipine/atorvastatin gemini study)

The Gemini Study was a 14-week, open-label, non-comparative, office-based, multicenter trial to evaluate single-pill therapy in the treatment of concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia. In addition to recommending lifestyle modifications, eight dosage strengths of amlodipine/atorvastatin single pill (5/10, 5/20, 5/40, 5/80, 10/10, 10/20, 10/40, and 10/80 mg) were electively titrated to improve blood pressure and lipid control. A total of 1220 patients with uncontrolled hypertension at baseline received study medication. At baseline, mean blood pressure was 146.6/87.9 mm Hg and mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration was 152.9 mg/dL. At study end, 57.7% of patients had achieved both their blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals (51.9% of patients with uncontrolled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol at baseline). The mean dose of study medication at end point was amlodipine component 7.1 mg and atorvastatin component 26.2 mg. Fifty-eight patients (4.8%) discontinued therapy due to adverse events. Single-pill therapy is effective in reducing both blood pressure and lipid levels and in helping patients achieve goals for both hypertension and dyslipidemia.     

Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Single-Pill Therapy for Blood Pressure and Lipid Goals in African Americans: Influence of the Metabolic Syndrome and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

African Americans with diabetes ± the metabolic syndrome are at high risk for cardiovascular disease. This subanalysis of the Clinical Utility of Caduet in Simultaneously Achieving Blood Pressure and Lipid End Points (CAPABLE) trial studied attainment of the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) and the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals by 8 flexibly titrated doses (5/10–10/80 mg) of amlodipine/atorvastatin single pill in 494 African Americans with hypertension and dyslipidemia, according to the presence of diabetes ± the metabolic syndrome. In 169 diabetic patients, the metabolic syndrome was associated with poorer BP goal attainment (38.5% vs 48.5% in diabetic patients without the metabolic syndrome). Among diabetic patients (± the metabolic syndrome) 61% to 62% reached LDL-C goal. More than 60% of patients with diabetes uncontrolled for LDL-C were maintained on suboptimal atorvastatin therapy (mean final dose: 29.9 mg vs maximum of 80 mg). Reluctance to intensify therapy to attain accepted targets in high-risk individuals suggests a degree of clinical inertia not explained by objective evidence of dose-dependent intolerance.     

The Use of a Single-Pill Calcium Channel Blocker/Statin Combination in the Management of Hypertension and Dyslipidemia: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Study

Poor control of hypertension or dyslipidemia may at least in part be due to these risk factors being treated in isolation. The Caduet in Untreated Subjects Population (CUSP) trial was an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy/safety of the combination of a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine besylate) and a statin (atorvastatin calcium) in a single-pill form (5/20 mg) plus therapeutic lifestyle changes (TLC) compared with placebo plus TLC in patients with comorbid hypertension and dyslipidemia without evidence of cardiovascular disease. At week 4, additional antihypertensive/lipid-lowering medication was permitted. The primary end point was the proportion of patients in whom the dual goal of blood pressure (<140/90 mm Hg) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control (<100 mg/dL) was met at week 4. This dual goal attainment was significantly greater with amlodipine/atorvastatin plus TLC compared with placebo plus TLC at week 4 (47.6% vs 1.7%; P <.001), with further improvements at week 8. Most adverse events were mild to moderate. Therapy with single-pill amlodipine/atorvastatin plus TLC in these patients significantly increased dual blood pressure/low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment compared with placebo plus TLC.     

Treatment of heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia: atorvastatin vs simvastatin

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study compares the cholesterol-lowering efficacy of atorvastatin and simvastatin in attainment of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) goal in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HFH). The association of atorvastatin with significant changes of blood fibrinogen and other coagulative variables was also compared with that of simvastatin. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a 24-week study, 26 HFH patients (16 men, 10 women, mean age 55.1 +/- 11.3) were randomly assigned to receive atorvastatin or simvastatin. The initial daily dose of 10 mg was progressively raised to 20, 40 and 80 mg in patients who had not reached the NCEP LDL-C goal. Significant reductions of total and LDL-C (p < 0.001), triglycerides (p < 0.005) and apoB100 (p < 0.001) were observed in both groups. Atorvastatin caused greater reductions in total cholesterol (-42% vs -30%) (p < 0.001) and LDL-C (-50% vs -37%) (p < 0.01). Three patients treated with Atorvastatin (23%) and none of those treated with simvastatin reached the NCEP LDL-C goal at the end of the study. No significant departures from the fibrinogen and coagulative variable baselines were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Atorvastatin has greater cholesterol-lowering efficacy than simvastatin in HFH.     

Achieving National Cholesterol Education Program goals in coronary artery disease

National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines recommend low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels <100 mg/dL for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and lipid-lowering therapy if LDL-C remains >100-130 mg/dL after dietary intervention. Studies consistently report that the majority of CAD patients do not achieve NCEP goals in clinical practice; we sought to determine if our practice fared better. We performed a retrospective chart review of 600 CAD patients followed by cardiologists. The mean age was 69, and 66% of patients were male. Of persons with a cardiology clinic lipid profile (60%), most (76%) achieved an LDL-C <100 mg/dL; however, only 61% were treated to the NCEP secondary goal of non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL. Of patients not at an LDL-C goal, 81% were on lipid-lowering therapy, but only 18% were on maximal statin doses and 6% on combination therapy. We concluded that the majority of CAD patients have had recent lipid measurements and are treated according to NCEP guidelines, but many patients remain on suboptimal therapy.     

Can combining different risk interventions into a single formulation contribute to improved cardiovascular disease risk reduction? Rationale and design for an international, open-label program to assess the effectiveness of a single pill (amlodipine/atorvastatin) to attain recommended target levels for blood pressure and lipids (The JEWEL Program)

BACKGROUND: In order to prevent cardiovascular events, it is essential to effectively manage overall risk of cardiovascular disease. However, despite guideline recommendations to this effect, current management of the major, modifiable cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension and dyslipidemia is disconnected and patient adherence to therapy is poor. This is particularly important for patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors, who are often prescribed multiple medications. The JEWEL study program will investigate the use of single-pill amlodipine/atorvastatin as a strategy to improve management of these patients. METHODS: The JEWEL program consists of two 16-week, international, open-label, multicenter, titration-to-goal studies in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. The 2 studies differ based on country of enrollment and certain tertiary endpoints, but the overall designs are very similar. Patients have been enrolled from 255 centers across Canada and 13 European countries. The study is designed to assess the efficacy, safety, and utility of amlodipine/atorvastatin single-pill therapy in a real-world setting. Patients will be initiated at a dose of amlodipine 5 mg/atorvastatin 10 mg, unless previously treated, and will be uptitrated as necessary. The primary efficacy parameter is the percentage of patients, at different levels of cardiovascular risk, achieving country-specific guideline-recommended target levels for blood pressure and lipids. A secondary analysis of efficacy measured attainment of the same single goal for blood pressure across all study participants (JEWEL I and II) and the same single goal for LDL-C across all study participants (JEWEL I and II). The program will utilize a newly developed questionnaire to gain better understanding of participants' beliefs and behaviors towards medical treatment of their multiple risk factors. Approximately 2850 patients will be enrolled in the program, which is due to be completed in August 2005. CONCLUSION: The JEWEL program will assess the effectiveness of a single pill (amlodipine/atorvastatin) in targeting the two principal risk factors for cardiovascular disease simultaneously to achieve nationally applicable treatment targets in a routine clinical practice setting.     

Comparison of rosuvastatin with atorvastatin, simvastatin and pravastatin in achieving cholesterol goals and improving plasma lipids in hypercholesterolaemic patients with or without the metabolic syndrome in the MERCURY I trial

AIM: The metabolic syndrome (MS) increases the risk of coronary heart disease, yet few data are available on the effects of statin treatment in improving lipid measures in patients with the syndrome. This analysis compares the effects of statin therapy on plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement and lipid levels in hypercholesterolaemic patients with or without the MS. METHODS: The Measuring Effective Reductions in Cholesterol Using Rosuvastatin TherapY I (MERCURY I) trial compared rosuvastatin 10 mg with atorvastatin 10 mg and 20 mg, simvastatin 20 mg and pravastatin 40 mg over 8 weeks in patients with coronary or other atherosclerotic diseases or diabetes who had fasting levels of LDL-C of >or=2.99 mmol/l and triglycerides of <4.52 mmol/l. Modified National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) criteria for the MS were met by 1342 (43%) of 3140 patients. RESULTS: LDL-C goal achievement rates and reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) were similar in patients with and without the MS within statin treatment groups; triglycerides were reduced more and HDL-C tended to be increased more in patients with the MS, as expected. Treatment with rosuvastatin 10 mg was more effective in allowing patients with and without the MS to reach European and ATP III LDL-C goals, compared to atorvastatin 10 mg, simvastatin 20 mg and pravastatin 40 mg (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons); consistently produced greater reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol and non-HDL-C, compared to these treatments; and produced similar or greater reductions in triglycerides and increases in HDL-C, compared to the other treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Statin therapy is effective in allowing LDL-C goal achievement and improving the lipid profile in hypercholesterolaemic high-risk patients with the MS. Rosuvastatin 10 mg presents significant advantages in goal achievement and lipid lowering over other statins at commonly used doses in patients both with and without the MS.     

Effects of switching statins on achievement of lipid goals: measuring effective reductions in cholesterol using rosuvastatin therapy (MERCURY I) study

Background

In a multinational trial (4522IL/0081), we assessed the effects of switching to low doses of rosuvastatin from commonly used doses of atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement in high-risk patients.

Methods

Hypercholesterolemic patients (n = 3140) with coronary heart disease, atherosclerosis, or type 2 diabetes were randomized to open-label rosuvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 10 or 20 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, or pravastatin 40 mg for 8 weeks. Patients either remained on these treatments for another 8 weeks or switched treatments from atorvastatin 10 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, and pravastatin 40 mg to rosuvastatin 10 mg or from atorvastatin 20 mg to rosuvastatin 10 or 20 mg. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients reaching the Joint European Societies' LDL-C goal (<116 mg/dL) at week 16. For measures of cholesterol goal achievement, treatment arms were compared using logistic-regression analysis.

Results

Significant improvement in LDL-C goal achievement was found for patients who switched to rosuvastatin 10 mg, compared with patients who remained on atorvastatin 10 mg (86% vs 80%, P < .05), simvastatin 20 mg (86% vs 72%, P < .0001), and pravastatin 40 mg (88% vs 66%, P < .0001), and between patients switched to rosuvastatin 20 mg and those who remained on atorvastatin 20 mg (90% vs 84%, P < .01). Similar results were found for achievement of the European combined LDL-C and total cholesterol goals and National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III LDL-C goals. All statins were well tolerated over 16 weeks.

Conclusions

We demonstrated that switching to a more efficacious statin is an effective strategy to improve lipid goal achievement in patients requiring lipid-lowering therapy.     

Rosuvastatin is cost-effective compared with atorvastatin in reaching cholesterol goals

BACKGROUND: Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels reduces the risk of coronary heart disease. The introduction of a highly efficacious new statin, rosuvastatin, may enable more patients to be treated to LDL-C goal within a fixed budget. OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin 10 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg in lowering LDL-C and achieving guideline goals after 12 weeks of treatment. The LDL-C goals were those recommended by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel (NCEP ATP) III and the Third Joint European Task Force. METHODS: The analysis was performed on pooled data from three clinical trials. Efficacy was measured as the percent reduction in LDL-C and the proportion of patients who reached guideline LDL-C goals following the first 12 weeks of treatment, prior to dose titration. Costs comprised drug acquisition costs only. The cost-effectiveness measures were cost per 1% reduction in LDL-C and cost per patient treated to their LDL-C goal. RESULTS: Treatment with rosuvastatin 10 mg costs 1.85 per 1% reduction in LDL-C, compared with 2.37 per 1% reduction with atorvastatin 10 mg. The average costs per patient treated to the European LDL-C goals were 130.18 for rosuvastatin 10 mg and 242.44 for atorvastatin 10 mg. Treating to NCEP ATP III goals costs 115 per patient treated with rosuvastatin 10 mg vs. 163 per patient treated with atorvastatin 10 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Rosuvastatin has the same acquisition costs as and is more efficacious than atorvastatin in lowering LDL-C and treating patients to target LDL-C levels.     

Efficacy and safety of coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia: results of the AVALON trial

The AVALON study was a randomized, multicenter trial to assess the efficacy and safety of coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. Phase one was an 8-week, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled period whereby patients received amlodipine 5 mg, atorvastatin 10 mg, amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg, or placebo. Thereafter, all patients received single-blind amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg for 8-weeks, followed by 12 weeks of open-label treatment where doses could be titrated to improve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and blood pressure control. A total of 847 patients entered the double-blind phase. At Week 8, 45% of the patients receiving amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg reached both their blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals, compared with 8.3% with amlodipine (p < 0.001), 28.6% with atorvastatin (p < 0.001), and 3.5% with placebo. At 28 weeks, 67.1% of patients coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin (mean doses, 7.6 mg and 28.4 mg, respectively) achieved both targets. Framingham estimated 10-year risk of coronary heart disease declined from baseline levels of 15.1% to 6.9% at Week 28. Following coadministered treatment, the adverse events reported were similar to either agent alone. Concomitant administration of amlodipine and atorvastatin is an effective and well tolerated treatment for coexisting hypertension and dyslipidemia.     

Reaching recommended lipid and blood pressure targets with amlodipine/atorvastatin combination in patients with coronary heart disease

The effects of combined atorvastatin and amlodipine on blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels were investigated in 134 patients with documented coronary heart disease treated for 1 year. BP at baseline was 128 +/- 15/79 +/- 9 mm Hg and was controlled by the treating physician; no calcium channel blockers were allowed. Baseline means for plasma cholesterol were 6.4 +/- 1.1 mmol/L (147 +/- 39 mg/dl), triglycerides 2.0 +/- 0.9 mmol/L (177 +/- 88 mg/dl), LDL cholesterol 4.4 +/- 1.0 mmol/L (170 +/- 39 mg/dl), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol 1.2 +/- 0.3 mmol/L (46 +/- 12 mg/dl). Patients were all given atorvastatin 10 mg, then increased to 80 mg if the LDL cholesterol was <2.5 mmol/L (100 mg/dl). At 3 months, patients were randomized to amlodipine 10 mg or placebo. Plasma LDL cholesterol was decreased by 50%, and the LDL cholesterol target of <2.5 mmol/L was achieved in 81% of the patients. BP targets were achieved in 69% of the atorvastatin + placebo group, versus 96% in the atorvastatin + amlodipine group (p = 0.0002). With use of combination atorvastatin + amlodipine at doses ranging from 10 to 80 mg and 5 to 10 mg, respectively, recommended therapeutic goals were reached in most select subjects with coronary artery disease who were concomitantly receiving aspirin and antihypertensive therapy.     

Single-pill combination of telmisartan/amlodipine in patients with severe hypertension: results from the TEAMSTA severe HTN study

This 8-week, randomized, double-blind, controlled study compared efficacy and tolerability of telmisartan/amlodipine (T/A) single-pill combination (SPC) vs the respective monotherapies in 858 patients with severe hypertension (systolic/diastolic blood pressure [SBP/DBP] ≥180/95 mm Hg). At 8 weeks, T/A provided significantly greater reductions from baseline in seated trough cuff SBP/DBP (-47.5 mm Hg/-18.7 mm Hg) vs T (P<.0001) or A (P=.0002) monotherapy; superior reductions were also evident at 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks. Blood pressure (BP) goal and response rates were consistently higher with T/A vs T or A. T/A was well tolerated, with less frequent treatment-related adverse events vs A (12.6% vs 16.4%) and a numerically lower incidence of peripheral edema and treatment discontinuation. In conclusion, treatment of patients with substantially elevated BP with T/A SPCs resulted in high and significantly greater BP reductions and higher BP goal and response rates than the respective monotherapies. T/A SPCs were well tolerated.     

Related factors of meeting National Cholesterol Education Program-recommended goals with atorvastatin

The aim of this study was to observe the efficacy of atorvastatin and the related factors of meeting the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP)-recommended low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels in patients with hypercholesterolemia. A total of 107 patients were treated with atorvastatin 10 mg/day for 12 weeks. Eighty % of the patients achieved the target goals. There was a significant difference in the initial body mass index (BMI) between patients achieving the target goals and those not achieving the target goals (p < 0.05). In multiple stepwise logistic regression analysis, initial BMI and complications correlated with reaching the NCEP-recommended target goals (p < 0.05). A great number of patients treated with atorvastatin, including those previously poorly controlled with other therapies, reached the target goals at the starting dose 10 mg/day. BMI may be a useful index of achieving the NCEP-recommended target goals with atorvastatin.     

Effects of rosuvastatin on lipids, lipoproteins and apolipoproteins in the dyslipidaemia of diabetes.

AIMS: To compare the effects of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin 10 and 20 mg on plasma lipid and lipoprotein profiles in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and triglycerides < or = 6.0 mmol/l. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, multicentre study to assess the effect of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin, at 10 mg/day for 8 weeks followed by 20 mg/day for a further 8 weeks, on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), together with a range of secondary lipid and lipoprotein end points. RESULTS: Rosuvastatin reduced mean LDL-C levels from baseline over 16 weeks by 57.4%, while atorvastatin reduced mean LDL-C levels by 46.0% over the same period. The difference in LDL-C reduction between treatments was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Rosuvastatin also produced statistically significantly greater mean reductions from baseline in levels of total cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B and lipid ratios. More patients achieved European LDL-C (< 2.5 mmol/l) and total cholesterol (< 4.5 mmol/l) goals with rosuvastatin than with atorvastatin. Rosuvastatin was associated with a significantly (P < 0.049) greater mean percentage increase in glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) from baseline compared with atorvastatin; however, patients in both treatment groups maintained good glycaemic control. Both rosuvastatin and atorvastatin were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Greater reductions in LDL-C were achieved with rosuvastatin compared with equal doses of atorvastatin, enabling more patients with Type 2 diabetes to achieve European LDL-C goals.     

Initial angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/calcium channel blocker combination therapy achieves superior blood pressure control compared with calcium channel blocker monotherapy in patients with stage 2 hypertension

BACKGROUND: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee (JNC 7) on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure recommends initial combination therapy for patients whose blood pressure (BP) is >20/10 mm Hg above goal. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy versus that of monotherapy in patients with stage 2 hypertension, who by definition meet the JNC 7 recommendation for initial combination antihypertensive therapy. METHODS: This multicenter, double-blind, 12-week study randomized 364 patients with stage 2 hypertension to fixed-dose combination therapy with amlodipine besylate/benazepril HCl (5/20 mg/d titrated to 10/20 mg/d) or amlodipine besylate monotherapy (5 mg/d titrated to 10 mg/d). RESULTS: Significantly more patients randomized to combination therapy (74.2%) compared with those randomized to monotherapy (53.9%; P <.0001) achieved the primary end point (reductions in systolic BP > or =25 mm Hg, if baseline systolic BP was <180 mm Hg, or > or =32 mm Hg, if baseline systolic BP was > or =180 mm Hg). Significantly more patients randomized to combination therapy compared with monotherapy attained BP goals of <140/90 mm Hg (61.0% v 43.3%; P =.0007) and < or =130/85 mm Hg (35.7% v 19.1%; P =.0004). Among patients with baseline systolic BP > or =180 mm Hg, combination therapy resulted in significantly greater reductions in systolic BP compared with monotherapy (-42.3 v -30.4 mm Hg; P =.001). More than 90% of patients in each group were titrated to the higher dose. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy was well tolerated and resulted in significantly greater BP reductions and attainment of BP goals compared with monotherapy in patients with stage 2 hypertension. This evidence supports the recommendation of combination therapy as first-line treatment in stage 2 hypertension.     

Achieving goal blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes: conventional versus fixed-dose combination approaches

Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) demonstrate that only 11% of people with diabetes who are treated for high blood pressure achieve the blood pressure goal of <130/85 mm Hg recommended in the sixth report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI). The current study tests the hypothesis that initial therapy with a fixed-dose combination will achieve the recommended blood pressure goal in patients with type 2 diabetes faster than conventional monotherapy. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study had as a primary end point achievement of blood pressure <130/85 mm Hg. Participants (N=214) with hypertension and type 2 diabetes received either amlodipine/benazepril 5/10 mg (combination) or enalapril 10 mg (conventional) once daily for 4 weeks, titrated to 5/20 mg/day or 20 mg/day, respectively at this time, if target blood pressure was not achieved. Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg/day was added for the final 4 weeks, if target blood pressure was still not reached. Time from baseline to achieve blood pressure <130/85 mm Hg was shorter in the combination group (5.3+/-3.1 weeks combination vs. 6.4+/-3.8 weeks conventional; p=0.001). At 3 months, more participants in the combination group achieved treatment goal (63% combination vs. 37% conventional; p=0.002). Data analysis at 3 months comparing blood pressure control rates between the fixed-dose combination group (without HCTZ) to the conventional group (receiving HCTZ) showed an even greater disparity in blood pressure goal achievement (87% combination without HCTZ vs. 37% conventional group with HCTZ; p=0.0001). We conclude that initial therapy with a fixed-dose combination may be more efficacious than conventional monotherapy approaches for achieving blood pressure goals in the diabetic patient. A fixed-dose combination approach appears as safe as the current conventional approaches.     

Achieving lipoprotein goals in patients at high risk with severe hypercholesterolemia: efficacy and safety of ezetimibe co-administered with atorvastatin

Background

Despite the efficacy of statins in lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, many patients who are at high risk for heart disease with hypercholesterolemia require additional LDL-C level reduction. The cholesterol absorption inhibitor, ezetimibe, has been shown to provide significant incremental reductions in LDL-C levels when co-administered with statins. This study was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe (10 mg) plus response-based atorvastatin titration versus response-based atorvastatin titration alone in the attainment of LDL-C goals in subjects who are at high risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) and are not at their LDL-C goal on the starting dose of atorvastatin.

Methods

This was a 14-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study conducted in 113 clinical research centers in 21 countries. Participants were adults with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH), CHD, or multiple (≥2) cardiovascular risk factors, and a LDL-C level ≥130 mg/dL after a 6- to10-week dietary stabilization and atorvastatin (10 mg/day) open-label run-in period. Eligible subjects continued to receive atorvastatin (10 mg) and were randomized to receive blinded treatment with ezetimibe (10 mg/day; n = 305) or an additional 10 mg/day of atorvastatin (n = 316). The atorvastatin dose in both groups was doubled after 4 weeks, 9 weeks, or both when the LDL-C level was not at its goal (≤100 mg/dL), so that patients receiving combined therapy could reach 40 mg/day and patients receiving atorvastatin alone could reach 80 mg/day. The primary end point was the proportion of subjects achieving their LDL-C level goal at week 14. A secondary end point was the change in LDL-C level and other lipid parameters at 4 weeks after ezetimibe co-administration with 10 mg/day of atorvastatin versus 20 mg/day of atorvastatin monotherapy.

Results

The proportion of subjects reaching their target LDL-C level goal of ≤100 mg/dL was significantly higher in the co-administration group than in the atorvastatin monotherapy group (22% vs 7%; P <.01). At 4 weeks, levels of LDL-C, triglycerides, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were reduced significantly more by combination therapy than by doubling the dose of atorvastatin (LDL-C −22.8% versus −8.6%; P <.01). The combination regimen had a safety and tolerability profile similar to that of atorvastatin alone.

Conclusions

The addition of ezetimibe to the starting dose of 10 mg/day of atorvastatin followed by response-based atorvastatin dose titration to a maximum of 40 mg/day provides a more effective means for reducing LDL-C levels in patients at high risk for CHD than continued doubling of atorvastatin as high as 80 mg/day alone.     

Is alternate daily dose of atorvastatin effective in treating patients with hyperlipidemia? The Alternate Day Versus Daily Dosing of Atorvastatin Study (ADDAS)

Background The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of alternate-day dosing of atorvastatin compared with the standard once-daily dose based on mean low-density lipoprotein (LDL) reduction from baseline at 6 and 12 weeks of treatment. Methods In a double-blind, placebo-controlled design, 35 eligible patients who met the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel II (ATP II) guidelines for drug therapy, depending on their risk factors, were randomly assigned to receive 10 mg of atorvastatin as an initial dose every day or every other day. Patients were assessed at 6 and 12 weeks as to whether they met the LDL-C goal, and the dose was doubled if the goal was not reached. Results LDL-C decreased by 27% and 38%, in the every-other-day (n = 15) and every-day (n = 15) groups, respectively, at 6 weeks. At 12 weeks, the LDL-C was reduced by 35% and 38% in the every-other-day and every-day groups, respectively (P = .49). The mean dose was 18 mg (9 mg/d) in the alternate-day group (n = 14) and 12 mg/d in the every-day group (n = 12) at the end of the 12 weeks (P = .001). Conclusions Although higher doses of atorvastatin were used on alternate days, these results suggest that the alternate-day administration of atorvastatin can produce a reduction in LDL-C comparable to that of daily administration in patients with hypercholesterolemia, and yet provide some cost savings. (Am Heart J 2002;144:674-7.)     

A noninferiority comparison of valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide combination versus amlodipine in black hypertensives

The objective of the study was to demonstrate that reduction in mean 24-hour diastolic blood pressure with 160 mg valsartan and 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide was not inferior to 10 mg amlodipine in hypertensive blacks. A total of 482 blacks with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension (mean seated blood pressure 140 to 180/90 to 110 mm Hg) were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, prospective study. After a placebo run-in period, patients were randomized to 160 mg valsartan or 5 mg amlodipine for 2 weeks, then force-titrated to 160 mg valsartan and 12.5 mg hydrochlorothiazide or 10 mg amlodipine for an additional 10 weeks. Blood pressure was assessed by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Other assessments included quality of life, peripheral edema, and safety. Noninferiority of valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide to amlodipine was demonstrated by comparable reductions in mean 24-hour diastolic blood pressure with both treatments (-10.2+/-8.6 mm Hg versus -9.1+/-8.3 mm Hg, respectively; P<0.001 for noninferiority), as well as in mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure (-15.9+/-12.1 mm Hg versus -14.5+/-12.2 mm Hg; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The proportion of patients reporting adverse events and the incidence of most events were similar in both treatment groups, although more patients treated with amlodipine reported peripheral edema (5.8% versus 1.7%; P=0.03) and joint swelling (2.9% versus 0%; P=0.008) compared with valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide. We conclude that a starting dose of valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide (160/12.5 mg) is as effective as high-dose amlodipine (10 mg) in reducing blood pressure in blacks with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension, and valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide is better tolerated.