LDL-C reductions and goal attainment among naive statin users in the Netherlands: real life results*

ABSTRACT

Objective: The effectiveness of statin therapy in a real life setting may differ from that in clinical trials, as physicians make non-randomised treatment decisions for patients with less uniform and possibly different characteristics. We therefore performed a study to compare the effectiveness of different statins and doses in routine clinical practice with respect to total serum cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction and goal attainment according to European guidelines on the prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD).

Research design and methods: Naive statin users starting treatment in 2003 and 2004 with LDL-C measurements at baseline and between 30 and 365 days after start of treatment were extracted from the PHARMO database. During treatment with their initial statin dose LDL-C reduction and attainment of cholesterol goals were compared between different statins and doses.

Results: Of 2303 identified naive patients, approximately 30% were allocated to the high CVD-risk group. Average LDL-C reductions were 48%, 42%, 39%, and 32% at mean doses of 11 mg rosuvastatin, 17 mg atorvastatin, 22 mg simvastatin and 35 mg pravastatin, respectively. The proportion of patients attaining cholesterol goals was 75% for rosuvastatin, 68% for atorvastatin, 56% for simvastatin, and 42% for pravastatin. Dose comparisons showed greater LDL-C reduction and increased goal attainment for rosuvastatin 10 mg compared to other statins at most doses (adjusted p < 0.05).

Conclusions: In a real life setting, both LDL-C reduction and the proportion of patients attaining cholesterol goals appear to be significantly increased among users of rosuvastatin compared to other statins. These results confirm and extend reported clinical trial results to a real world setting.     

LDL‐C/HDL‐C ratio in subjects with cardiovascular disease and a low HDL‐C: results of the RADAR (Rosuvastatin and Atorvastatin in different Dosages And Reverse cholesterol transport) study

ABSTRACT

Background: The ratio of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C/HDL‐C) is a reliable predictor of cardiovascular risk. Low HDL‐C levels in patients with coronary artery disease are associated with a high risk for cardiovascular events.

Objectives: This study compared the effects of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin on the LDL‐C/HDL‐C ratio in patients with cardiovascular disease and low HDL‐C.

Methods: Patients aged 40–80 years with established cardiovascular disease and HDL‐C < 1.0?mmol/L (< 40?mg/dL) entered a 6‐week dietary run-in period, before randomisation to open-label treatment with rosuvastatin 10?mg (n = 230) or atorvastatin 20?mg (n = 231) for 6 weeks. Doses were increased after 6 weeks to rosuvastatin 20?mg or atorvastatin 40?mg, and after 12 weeks to rosuvastatin 40?mg or atorvastatin 80?mg. Serum lipid parameters were measured at baseline and 6, 12 and 18 weeks.

Results: After 6 weeks of treatment, mean percentage change from baseline in LDL‐C/HDL‐C ratio was –47.0% in the rosuvastatin group and –41.9% in the atorvastatin group (?p < 0.05 for between-group comparison). After 12 and 18 weeks of treatment, change from baseline was –53.0% and –57.3%, respectively, for rosuvastatin, compared with –47.9% and –49.6%, respectively, for atorvastatin (?p < 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively, for between-group comparison). Rosuvastatin also reduced LDL‐C, total cholesterol and non-HDL‐C significantly more than atorvastatin at all three time points, and significantly improved total cholesterol/HDL‐C and apolipoprotein B/A‐I ratios.

Conclusions: Rosuvastatin 10, 20 and 40?mg is significantly more effective than atorvastatin 20, 40 and 80?mg, respectively, in improving the LDL‐C/HDL‐C ratio in patients with cardiovascular disease and low HDL‐C. Further studies are required to clarify the benefits of rosuvastatin for reduction of cardiovascular risk.     

A Pharmacogenetics‐based Approach to Reduce Cardiovascular Mortality with the Prophylactic Use of Statins

Abstract: Nitric oxide (NO) is the main endothelial‐derived relaxation factor and plays a major role in cardiovascular homeostasis. This key signalling molecule is synthesised by a family of nitric oxide synthases (NOS), and the endothelial isoform (eNOS) is the most important for nitric oxide formation in the cardiovascular system. Cardiovascular drugs including statins increase eNOS expression and up‐regulate NO formation, and this effect may be responsible for protective, pleiotropic effects produced by statins. However, the genetic background may also affect NO formation in the cardiovascular system, and recent studies have shown that genetic polymorphisms in the eNOS gene modify endogenous NO formation and the risk of developing cardiovascular diseases. For example, cases with the CC genotype for the T^?786C polymorphism in the eNOS gene are at increased cardiovascular risk when compared with those with the TT genotype. Interestingly, pharmacogenetic studies have recently indicated that atorvastatin improves NO formation more clearly in these individuals. However, it is not known whether this polymorphism really increases cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and whether atorvastatin or other statins attenuate the morbidity and mortality rates in cases with the CC genotype. If proved true, then statins‐induced up‐regulation of eNOS and increased NO formation could compensate for a genetic ‘disadvantage’ in cases with the CC genotype. This could be a significant advance in the prevention of cardiovascular events. It is necessary although to validate this hypothesis with clinical trials which will require a long follow‐up to assess relevant clinical events and not only surrogate biomarkers.     

Effect of Atorvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin on Levels of Serum Lipids,Inflammatory Markers and Adiponectin in Patients with Hypercholesterolemia

Purpose  To compare the short-term effect of treatment with atorvastatin and rosuvastatin on levels of serum lipids, inflammatory markers and adiponectin in patients with hypercholesterolemia. Methods  Sixty-nine patients with hypercholesterolemia were randomly assigned to receive 10 mg/day of atorvastatin or rosuvastatin for 12 weeks. Inflammatory biomarkers, including highsensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), and endothelin (ET-1), plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1) and plasma tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), adiponectin, and lipid profiles were measured before and after statin therapy. Results  Atorvastatin and rosuvastatin both lowered levels of hs-CRP, MMP-9, PAI-1, total cholesterol (TC), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) from baseline values, with rosuvastatin lowering TC and LDL-C to a greater extent than atorvastatin (P < 0.05). Adiponectin level increase was 15% higher than that at baseline with atorvastatin (P > 0.05) but 67% higher with rosuvastatin (P < 0.05). Conclusions  Therapy with both statins not only significantly improved lipid profiles but also decreased levels of vascular biomarkers hs-CRP, MMP-9, and PAI-1; however, only rosuvastatin increased serum adiponectin levels significantly in patients with hypercholesterolemia, which could imply a beneficial effect in coronary artery disease.     

Eltrombopag in patients with chronic liver disease

Objective: To compare change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III LDL-C goal attainment in diabetic patients treated with rosuvastatin versus other statins in a large, managed care health plan. Research Design and Methods: This retrospective cohort analysis used medical and pharmacy claims linked to laboratory results from a commercial/MedicareAdvantage health plan. Study participants were ≥ 18 years of age, had a diagnosis of diabetes, were newly treated with statins from 8/1/03 to 2/28/05, and were considered at high risk for cardiovascular events as defined by NCEP guidelines. Subjects were continuously enrolled for 12 months pre-index and ≥ 30 days post-index, with variable follow-up until therapy discontinuation or end of health plan eligibility. Main Outcome Measures: Change in LDL-C from baseline, and attainment of NCEP LDL-C goal among patients not at goal before starting therapy. Results: A total of 3337 adult patients with diabetes were identified with new use of statin therapy during the identification period. A total of 9% (n = 301) started on rosuvastatin, 49.4% (n = 1,649) on atorvastatin, 20.7% (n = 690) on simvastatin, 7.0% (n = 234) on pravastatin, 11.7% (n = 391) on lovastatin and 2.2% (n = 72) on fluvastatin. After controlling for covariates, rosuvastatin patients experienced a significantly greater decrease in LDL-C from baseline (38.7%) than patients taking atorvastatin (34.2%) (p = 0.05), simvastatin (31.5%), pravastatin (24.2%), fluvastatin (26.3%) or lovastatin (24.9%) (p < 0.0001). Rosuvastatin users were significantly more likely to attain LDL-C goal than those taking the other statins (odds ratio: 0.44, 0.28, 0.14, 0.14, 0.19, respectively; p < 0.001). Predicted percent attaining goal was significantly greater for those taking rosuvastatin (87.3%) than for those taking atorvastatin (76.9%), simvastatin (68.7%), pravastatin (55.0%), lovastatin (55.3%) or fluvastatin (61.3%) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: For diabetic patients, rosuvastatin is more effective at reducing LDL-C levels and attaining NCEP ATP III LDL-C goal than other statins in real-world clinical practice.     

Differences between statins on clinical endpoints: a population-based cohort study

ABSTRACT

Objective: Many studies have shown differences between statins based on surrogate endpoints, but few have studied differences in reaching clinical endpoints.

This study compares the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events between atorvastatin users and other statin users in daily general practice.

Research design and methods: A cohort study was performed in the Integrated Primary Care Information project database, a longitudinal general practice research database with electronic patient records of more than 500?000 individuals in the Netherlands. All new statin users in the period 1st September 1999 to 31st December 2002 were included. Multivariate Cox-regression analysis was used to compare the occurrence of the primary endpoint between atorvastatin users and other statin users.

Main outcome measures: The primary endpoint was the composite outcome of fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction, admission for unstable angina pectoris, fatal or non-fatal cerebrovascular accidents, or transient ischaemic events.

Results: 3499 new statin users were identified, including 797 patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. 1341 persons started with simvastatin (38.3%), 1154 with atorvastatin (33.0%), 811 with pravastatin (23.2%) and 193 with other statins (5.5%). The median follow-up was 1.9 years. Two hundred and thirty three patients (6.7%) experienced a primary endpoint. Atorvastatin users had a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events than users of other statins (relative risk [RR]: 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55–0.96). The relative risks of atorvastatin users compared to simvastatin and pravastatin users individually were 0.70 (95% CI: 0.48–1.02) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.52–1.16), respectively. The protective effect of atorvastatin was more pronounced in persons without a history of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events.

Conclusion: Atorvastatin showed a more favourable effect on fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in the general population than other statins.     

Rosuvastatin: new preparation. Opt for statins with evidence of efficacy on clinical outcome

(1) Simvastatin and pravastatin are the two reference statins for type IIA and type IIB hypercholesterolaemia because they have the best-documented protective effect against cardiovascular events. Simvastatin and pravastatin are also the reference statins for familial heterozygous hypercholesterolaemia, though there is no evidence that they prevent cardiovascular events in this group. Statins are not very effective in familial homozygous hypercholesterolaemia. (2) Rosuvastatin is the sixth statin to arrive on the French market. The fifth, cerivastatin, was withdrawn from the market in 2001 because of serious adverse effects. (3) Rosuvastatin has not been assessed in terms of morbidity or mortality. The results of comparative trials in type IIA and type IIB hypercholesterolaemia suggest that rosuvastatin is slightly more active than simvastatin, pravastatin and atorvastatin on some lipid parameters after a few weeks of treatment. (4) Rosuvastatin has not been compared with simvastatin or pravastatin in familial heterozygous hypercholesterolaemia. One trial showed it to be slightly more effective than atorvastatin on cholesterol levels. According to one trial, rosuvastatin does not appear to be more effective than atorvastatin in homozygous forms. (5) In clinical trials the adverse effects of rosuvastatin were similar to those of other statins, with the exception of renal adverse effects. We don't know whether rosuvastatin is more or less likely than other statins to cause rhabdomyolysis. (6) Clinical trials reported some cases of proteinuria and renal failure suggesting there is a need for more thorough assessment in long-term trials. (7) In practice, statins with the best-documented benefits (simvastatin and pravastatin) should be used first for cardiovascular prevention in patients with hypercholesterolaemia.     

A randomised study comparing the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin with atorvastatin for achieving lipid goals in clinical practice in Asian patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease (DISCOVERY-Asia study)

ABSTRACT

Background: Most studies investigating the benefits of statins have focused on North American and European populations. This study focuses on evaluating the lipid-lowering effects of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin in Asian patients.

Objectives: The DIrect Statin COmparison of LDL‐C Values: an Evaluation of Rosuvastatin therapY (DISCOVERY)-Asia study is one of nine independently powered studies assessing the efficacy of starting doses of statins in achieving target lipid levels in different countries worldwide. DISCOVERY-Asia was a 12-week, randomised, open-label, parallel-group study conducted in China, Hong Kong, Korea, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Thailand.

Results: A total of 1482 adults with primary hypercholesterolaemia and high cardiovascular risk (>?20%/10 years, type 2 diabetes, or a history of coronary heart disease) were randomised in a 2?:?1 ratio to receive rosuvastatin 10?mg once daily (o.d.) or atorvastatin 10?mg o.d. The percentage of patients achieving the 1998 European Joint Task Force low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) goal of <?3.0?mmol/L at 12 weeks was significantly higher in the rosuvastatin group (n = 950) compared with the atorvastatin group (n = 471) (79.5 vs. 69.4%, respectively; p < 0.0001). Similar results were observed for 1998 European goals for total cholesterol (TC), and the 2003 European goals for LDL‐C and TC. LDL‐C and TC levels were reduced significantly more with rosuvastatin compared with atorvastatin. Both drugs were well-tolerated and the incidence and type of adverse events were similar in each group.

Conclusions: This 12-week study showed that the starting dose of rosuvastatin 10?mg o.d. was significantly more effective than the starting dose of atorvastatin 10?mg o.d. at enabling patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia to achieve European goals for LDL‐C and TC in a largely Asian population in real-life clinical practice. The safety profile of rosuvastatin 10?mg is similar to that of atorvastatin 10?mg in the Asian population studied here, and is consistent with the known safety profile of rosuvastatin in the white population.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00241488.     

Differential effect of genetic variants of Na(+)-taurocholate co-transporting polypeptide (NTCP) and organic anion-transporting polypeptide 1B1 (OATP1B1) on the uptake of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of genetic variations in organic anion-transporting polypeptide 1B1 (OATP1B1) and Na(+)/taurocholate co-transporting polypeptide (NTCP) on the uptake of various statins having different affinities for these transporters. The functional activities and simultaneous expression of NTCP and OATP1B1 were confirmed by the uptake of taurocholate and estrone-3-sulphate as representative substrates for NTCP and OATP1B1, respectively, and by an immunofluorescence analysis. The substrate specificities of NTCP and OATP1B1 for statins and the effects of genetic variations on the uptake of rosuvastatin, pitavastatin, and atorvastatin were measured. Based on the K(m) values and intrinsic clearances of the three statins, pitavastatin was taken up more efficiently than rosuvastatin and atorvastatin by OATP1B1. Consequently, the cellular accumulation of pitavastatin was modulated according to the genetic variation of OATP1B1 (OATP1B1*15), rather than NTCP*2. In contrast, NTCP*2 displayed greater transport of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, compared with NTCP wild type. Thus, the measurements of decreased rosuvastatin and atorvastatin transport by OATP1B1*15 were confounded by the presence of NTCP and its genetic variant, NTCP*2. In conclusion, the functional consequences of genetic variants of NTCP and OATP1B1 may be different for various statins, depending on the substrate specificity of the OATP1B1 and NTCP transporters.     

Cost-effectiveness of statins in the prevention of coronary heart disease events in middle-aged Finnish men

ABSTRACT

Objective: This study evaluated the long-term cost-effectiveness of atorvastatin 20?mg, rosuvastatin 10?mg and simvastatin 40?mg in primary and secondary prevention of CHD in Finland.

Research design and methods: The effect of statin therapy on the incidence of CHD and the expected total costs of the disease were described using a Markov state transition model. Due to the limited amount of evidence concerning mortality and morbidity for rosuvastatin, the model was used to transmute the efficiency data of all statins (decrease in total cholesterol) into long-term endpoints (myocardial infarction, death) using risk functions of the FINRISK and 4S studies. The study followed a characterized cohort of 55-year-old Finnish men with an average 3.3–6.6?%?baseline risk of dying from cardiovascular disease within a 10-year period.

Main outcome measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, compared with simvastatin, measured as cost of life years gained (€/LYG) and cost of quality adjusted life years gained (€/QALY).

Results: The use of rosuvastatin increased the life expectancy by 0.27 years on average (LYG) compared with simvastatin, producing additional 0.08 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Compared with simvastatin, the cost of one LYG with rosuvastatin was €10 834 and the cost of one QALY gained was €36 548 (discount rate 5?%?per annum). Corresponding figures for atorvastatin were €31 286/LYG and €105 599/QALY.

Conclusions: If the decision makers’ willingness to pay for a QALY gained is around €40 000 there is a high probability (?>?50?%?) that rosuvastatin represents a cost-effective form of therapy in the prevention of CHD in middle-aged men with an average 3.3–6.6?%?risk of dying within 10 years from cardiovascular disease. However, the true clinical impact of these results needs confirmation from on-going clinical trials, as the role of rosuvastatin in reducing clinical events is pending, but for simvastatin and atorvastatin established.     

基于层次分析法合理选择他汀类药物

目的基于最高的性价比选择他汀类药物。方法在调脂强度达标的范围内,基于层次分析法构建评价指标体系,确定减低LDL-C强度和价格为评价指标,设计问卷调查表确定个体化的评价指标权重,使用matlab软件进行矩阵计算,根据结果选择最适合患者长期治疗的性价比最高的他汀类药物。结果根据患者调脂目标及经济能力合理选择他汀,如更关注药物的调脂强度,则依次选择阿托伐他汀40mg,瑞舒伐他汀10mg,阿托伐他汀20mg,辛伐他汀20mg,阿托伐他汀10mg,辛伐他汀40mg,氟伐他汀80mg,普伐他汀80mg及普伐他汀40mg。如更加关注价格,依次选择辛伐他汀20mg,阿托伐他汀10mg,氟伐他汀80mg,辛伐他汀40mg,瑞舒伐他汀10mg,阿托伐他汀20mg,普伐他汀40mg,阿托伐他汀40mg及普伐他汀80mg。如药物的调脂强度和价格同等重要,则依次选择辛伐他汀20mg,阿托伐他汀10mg,氟伐他汀80mg,辛伐他汀40mg,瑞舒伐他汀10mg,阿托伐他汀20mg,阿托伐他汀40mg,普伐他汀40mg及普伐他汀80mg。结论在调脂强度达标的范围内,可以通过层次分析法获得最适合患者的性价比最高的他汀类药物。     

Cumulative clinical trial data on atorvastatin for reducing cardiovascular events: the clinical impact of atorvastatin

ABSTRACT

Background: Since the 1990s a multitude of statin trials have definitively demonstrated the ability of statin therapy to reduce the risk of adverse coronary heart disease (CHD) events. Among these, the Atorvastatin Landmarks program – a group of 32 major atorvastatin trials – has assessed the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin across its full dose range and has helped illustrate its effectiveness in treatment of cardiovascular disease and its related disorders and also in non-cardiovascular outcomes.

Scope: This paper will review the major atorvastatin clinical trials and report the important findings and their clinical significance.

Findings: Clinical trials with atorvastatin have established significant reductions in cardiovascular events in patients with and without CHD. Studies show that high-dose atorvastatin will reduce LDL to ≈?70?mg/dL in many patients and improve cardiac outcomes. Current evidence suggests that high-dose atorvastatin can halt and, in some cases, reverse atherosclerotic progression. A study of diabetic patients showed atorvastatin decreased the occurrence of acute CHD events, coronary revascularizations, and stroke. Atorvastatin has been found to be effective for reducing nonfatal myocardial infarctions and fatal CHD in hypertensive patients with three or more additional risk factors. High-dose atorvastatin was found to be effective in reducing risk of recurrent stroke in patients with prior cerebrovascular events, has been shown to benefit patients suffering a recent acute coronary syndrome, and to slow cognitive decline in preliminary studies of patients with Alzheimer's disease. Atorvastatin has been associated with reduced progression of mild chronic kidney disease; however, in a randomized trial of patients with end stage renal disease on hemodialysis, atorvastatin showed no statistically significant benefit. Limitations of this review include lack of generalizablity of the atorvastatin trial data to other statins, lack of head to head outcome trials involving the newer more potent statins, and the relatively short study durations (none exceeded 5 years) when atherosclerosis is typically a decades-long disease.

Conclusion: A compelling body of evidence documents that atorvastatin reduces major cardiovascular events in both secondary and primary prevention of CHD and in a broad range of patients and disease conditions. Furthermore, throughout its dose range, atorvastatin is safe and well tolerated.     

Achieving 2003 European lipid goals with rosuvastatin and comparator statins in 6743 patients in real-life clinical practice: DISCOVERY meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Background: There is an increasing body of evidence to support the benefits of reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and this has been reflected in a lowering of LDL-C goals recommended by international guidelines. Therefore, there is a growing need for effective lipid-modifying therapies to optimise the achievement of these more stringent LDL-C goals.

Objective: A meta-analysis of data pooled from five studies participating in the DISCOVERY (DIrect Statin COmparison of LDL‐C Values: an Evaluation of Rosuvastatin therapY) Programme was performed to compare the effect of rosuvastatin treatment with other statins in real-life clinical practice.

Results: These studies included 6743 patients with hypercholesterolaemia from different ethnicities, countries and cultural environments. The meta-analysis showed that significantly more patients receiving rosuvastatin 10?mg achieved the 2003 European LDL‐C goals compared with those who received atorvastatin 10?mg or simvastatin 20?mg (?p < 0.001 for both comparisons). A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving rosuvastatin 10?mg also achieved the 2003 European total cholesterol goal compared with those on atorvastatin 10?mg (?p < 0.001).

Conclusions: The meta-analysis showed that rosuvastatin was more effective than comparator statins at lowering LDL‐C levels and enabling patients to achieve lipid goals at recommended start doses. In addition, all statins studied were well tolerated and confirmed that rosuvastatin had a similar safety profile to other statins.     

The safety and effectiveness of statins as treatment for HIV-dyslipidemia: the evidence so far and the future challenges

Introduction: Statin therapy is widely used across the globe for the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). It is well established that statin therapy is associated with significant decrease in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and plasma cholesterol levels. HIV-dyslipidemia is a common problem with extensive use of combination antiretroviral therapy (CART), and is associated with an increase in incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD), resulting in hospital admission and surgery throughout the western healthcare systems.

Areas covered: This review describes the effectiveness and safety of statins in the treatment of HIV-dyslipidemia. Medline was searched for different statins as treatment for HIV-dyslipidemia.

Expert opinion: Dyslipidemia in patients with HIV is different from the normal population, due to the fact that HIV treatment may not only cause dyslipidemia, but may also interact with lipid lowering medication. Statin-unresponsive HIV-dyslipidemia can be treated with the addition of ezetimibe, fenofibrate, fish oil and niacin. Current guidelines recommend the use of pravastatin and atorvastatin as first-line therapy, whereas European guidelines include rosuvastatin. There is an urgent need to confirm whether the use of statins in HIV-dyslipidemia is associated with an increase in the incidence of diabetes; this is significant because HIV patients are known to be insulin-resistant. HIV is also associated with Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD), a condition known to be associated with insulin resistance. Further clinical trials are urgently needed to assess the impact of statins on CVD in HIV patients, and future challenges for researchers in this area are enormous.     

Comparison of efficacy,safety, and cost-effectiveness of various statins in dyslipidemic diabetic patients

Background and Aim:

To determine efficacy safety and the cost effectiveness, of the four most commonly prescribed statins (rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin) in the treatment of dyslipidemia among diabetic patients.

Materials and Methods:

This is a cohort, observational, population-based study conducted at diabetic clinics of the Hamad Medical Hospital and Primary Health Care Centers (PHCC) over a period from January 2007 to September 2012. The study included 1,542 consecutive diabetes patients above 18 years of age diagnosed with dyslipidemia and prescribed any of the indicated statins. Laboratory investigations were taken from the Electronic Medical Records Database (EMR-viewer). The sociodemographic, height, weight, and physical activities were collected from Patient''s Medical Records. Information about statin was extracted from the pharmacy drug database. The effective reductions in total cholesterol using rosuvastatin with atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin in achieving cholesterol goals and improving plasma lipids in dyslipidemic diabetic patients were measured. Serum lipid levels measured a 1 week before the treatment and at the end 2^nd year.

Results:

Rosuvastatin (10 mg) was the most effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; 28.59%), followed by simvastatin 20 mg (16.7%), atorvastatin 20 mg (15.9%), and pravastatin 20 mg (11.59.3%). All statins were safe with respect to muscular and hepatic functions. Atorvastatin was the safest statin as it resulted in the least number of patients with microalbuminuria (10.92%) as compared to other statins. Treatment with rosuvastatin 10 mg was more effective in allowing patients to reach European and Adult Treatment Plan (ATP) III LDL-C goals as compared to other statins (P < 0.0001) and produced greater reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol, and non-HDL-C, produced similar or greater reductions in triglycerides (TGs) and increased in HDL-C.

Conclusion:

Rosuvastatin 10 mg was the most effective statin in reducing serum lipids and total cholesterol in dyslipidemic diabetic patients.KEY WORDS: Atorvastatin, cost effective, dyslipidemic diabetic patients, efficacy, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, safety of statin use in dyslipidemic diabetic patients, safety, simvastatin     

Interaction potential between clarithromycin and individual statins—A systematic review

The high prevalence of statin and clarithromycin utilization creates potential for overlapping use. The objectives of this MiniReview were to investigate the evidence base for drug‐drug interactions between clarithromycin and currently marketed statins and to present management strategies for these drug combinations. We conducted a systematic literature review following PRISMA guidelines with English language studies retrieved from PubMed and EMBASE (from inception through March 2019). We included 29 articles (16 case reports, 5 observational, 5 clinical pharmacokinetic and 3 in vitro studies). Based on mechanistic/clinical studies involving clarithromycin or the related macrolide erythromycin (both strong inhibitors of CYP3A4 and of hepatic statin uptake transporters OATP1B1 and OATP1B3), clarithromycin is expected to substantially increase systemic exposure to simvastatin and lovastatin (>5‐fold increase in area under the plasma concentration‐time curve (AUC)), moderately increase AUCs of atorvastatin and pitavastatin (2‐ to 4‐fold AUC increase) and slightly increase pravastatin exposure (≈2‐fold AUC increase) while having little effect on fluvastatin or rosuvastatin. The 16 cases of statin‐clarithromycin adverse drug reactions (rhabdomyolysis (n = 14) or less severe clinical myopathy) involved a CYP3A4‐metabolized statin (simvastatin, lovastatin or atorvastatin). In line, a cohort study found concurrent use of clarithromycin and CYP3A4‐metabolized statins to be associated with a doubled risk of hospitalization with rhabdomyolysis or other statin‐related adverse events as compared with azithromycin‐statin co‐administration. If clarithromycin is necessary, we recommend (a) avoiding co‐administration with simvastatin, lovastatin or atorvastatin; (b) withholding or dose‐reducing pitavastatin; (c) continuing pravastatin therapy with caution, limiting pravastatin dose to 40 mg daily; and (d) continuing fluvastatin or rosuvastatin with caution.     

Investigating cardiovascular risk reduction – the Rosuvastatin GALAXY Programme™

The GALAXY Programme^? is a comprehensive global research initiative that will address several important unanswered questions in statin research and investigate the impact of rosuvastatin on cardiovascular risk reduction and patient outcomes. Studies already completed demonstrate that rosuvastatin provides greater reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) than other statins, enabling more patients to achieve LDL-C treatment goals. Additionally, rosuvastatin provides beneficial effects on other components of the atherogenic lipid profile. Ongoing studies will evaluate whether these effects translate into beneficial effects on atherosclerosis and significant reductions in cardiovascular events. Important information will also be provided on the role of statins in less well studied groups, including patients with heart failure, end stage renal disease, and individuals without elevated LDL-C but at heightened vascular risk as a result of increased systemic inflammation. Ultimately, the GALAXY Programme will provide clinical data that will enable physicians to make more effective statin treatment decisions, which will lead to improved patient care and cardiovascular outcomes.     

Statins: can the new generation make an impression?

Although large-scale statin trials have demonstrated significant reductions in cardiovascular risk, there are many patients who have a cardiovascular event despite receiving statin therapy. There is increasing evidence that larger reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are associated with greater improvements in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, which highlights the need for more efficacious statins. This article will review the lipid-altering effects of two new statins, rosuvastatin and pitavastatin. Rosuvastatin represents an advance in the pharmacological and clinical properties of other available agents. The large LDL-C reductions observed with rosuvastatin, even at the start dose of 10 mg and in patients switched from other statins to rosuvastatin 10 mg, should help to improve goal attainment, while reducing the need for dose titration. The ability of rosuvastatin to improve other elements of the lipid profile, such as high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides and non-HDL-C, may be of utility in patients with diabetes and the metabolic syndrome. Increases in HDL-C, along with the greater efficacy of rosuvastatin for reducing LDL-C and non-HDL-C, may obviate the need for combination therapy. Results of a number of outcome studies with rosuvastatin are expected over the next 5 years, which will contribute to the evidence base for statin therapy and cardiovascular disease prevention.