A dose-specific meta-analysis of lipid changes in randomized controlled trials of atorvastatin and simvastatin

BACKGROUND: The available statins exhibit differences in the potency with which they alter serum lipid levels. OBJECTIVE: Meta-analyses were conducted to assess the relative potency of atorvastatin and simvastatin (the 2 most commonly prescribed statins) across all possible dose combinations in terms of changes in total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), triglycerides (TG), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, National Health Service (NHS) Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for randomized, head-to-head trials of atorvastatin and simvastatin in patients aged >or=18 years with elevated levels of serum TC and LDL-C. Reference lists of the identified articles, letters, and editorials also were reviewed. The manufacturers of atorvastatin and simvastatin products were contacted for relevant unpublished data. All studies were reviewed and rated for quality by 2 independent reviewers. The maximum quality score was 4 points; trials with a score of <2 points were considered to be of poor quality and were excluded from analysis. Dose comparisons were abstracted in pairs from each trial. Meta-analyses were conducted on the fixed-dose pairs for each lipid parameter. Weighted mean differences in the change in TC, LDL-C, TG, and HDL-C were estimated using the Der Simonian and Laird random-effects model. RESULTS: Seventeen published trials and 1 unpublished study were included in the meta-analyses. Atorvastatin treatment was associated with significantly greater reductions in TC, LDL-C, and TG in the majority of dose comparisons with simvastatin. The potency of atorvastatin and simvastatin was comparable at dose ratios between 1:2 and 1:4. Higher doses of simvastatin were more effective in increasing HDL-C levels than atorvastatin, with no apparent dose-equivalence point. The HDL-C advantage of simvastatin was greatest when simvastatin 80 mg was compared with atorvastatin 80 mg (weighted mean difference, -4.35%; 95% CI, -5.64 to -3.08, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In these meta-analyses, atorvastatin was 2 to 4 times as potent as simvastatin in reducing TC, LDL-C, and TG, indicating that the dose equivalence of atorvastatin and simvastatin lay between 1:2 and 1:4. In contrast, simvastatin was more effective than atorvastatin in increasing HDL-C, but without any indication of a point of dose equivalence.     

A 52-week,multicenter, randomized,parallel-group,double-blind,double-dummy study to assess the efficacy of atorvastatin and simvastatin in reaching low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglyceride targets: the treat-to-target (3T) study

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the prevention of coronary heart disease call for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction as the primary target of treatment and reduction of triglycerides (TG) as an additional target. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the ability of atorvastatin and simvastatin to reduce LDL-C and TG concentrations and to meet 3 target lipid levels: LDL-C or=4.0 mmol/L (>or=155 mg/dL), were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive once-daily oral treatment with 20 mg atorvastatin or 20 mg simvastatin. Fasting (12-hour) blood samples for the estimation of lipid levels and clinical laboratory values were collected after 4, 8, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. The dose was doubled after 12 weeks if the target National Cholesterol Education Program level of LDL-C (相似文献   

Achievement of English National Service Framework lipid-lowering goals: pooled data from recent comparative treatment trials of statins at starting doses

Despite the importance of reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, detailed in guidelines in many countries, repeated surveys show poor physician performance in attaining guideline lipid targets, which is associated with reluctance by physicians to up-titrate statins from starting doses. Data from randomised, double-blind trials comparing common starting doses of atorvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin and simvastatin for 12 weeks in hypercholesterolaemic patients were therefore analysed for achievement of lipid-lowering goals recommended by the England National Service Framework (NSF) for coronary heart disease (CHD). In three pooled trials, rosuvastatin 10 mg (n = 389) reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and total cholesterol more significantly than atorvastatin 10 mg (n = 393) (p < 0.001). NSF goals were achieved by 83% of rosuvastatin patients vs. 55% of atorvastatin patients (p < 0.001) at relevant starting doses. In two pooled trials, rosuvastatin 10 mg (n = 226) reduced LDL-C and total cholesterol more significantly than simvastatin 20 mg (n = 249) and pravastatin 20 mg (n = 252) (p < 0.001). NSF goals were achieved at starting doses by 83% of rosuvastatin patients vs. 51% of simvastatin patients and 19% of pravastatin patients (p < 0.001 vs. each comparator). This improved achievement of NSF lipid target, at starting doses, was also seen in high-risk patients (those eligible for secondary prevention or primary prevention because of a 10-year CVD risk of >30%) with 84% patients on rosuvastatin vs. 58% on atorvastatin and 75% of patients on rosuvastatin vs. 49% on simvaststin and 24% on pravastatin. In summary, there are considerable and clinically significant variations in the achievement of lipid goals between common starting doses of statins in hypercholesterolaemic patients.     

A model for assessing the cost-effectiveness of atorvastatin and simvastatin in achieving Canadian low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets

BACKGROUND: Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is an important modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease. Statins differ in their LDL-C-lowering effects and acquisition costs. Atorvastatin and simvastatin are the 2 most commonly used statins in Canada. OBJECTIVE: This analysis compared the cost-effectiveness of atorvastatin and generic simvastatin in terms of annual drug cost per patient treated to Canadian LDL-C targets. It was conducted from the perspective of the Canadian provincial drug-reimbursement plans. METHODS: A hypothetical cohort of 1000 dyslipidemic patients was assigned baseline LDL-C serum concentrations and levels of risk for CV disease based on Canadian population data. Canadian data on statin dosing were combined with efficacy data from a published meta-analysis to determine the proportion of patients who would be expected to achieve LDL-C targets after treatment with atorvastatin or generic simvastatin. Statin acquisition costs were obtained from Ontario and Quebec and reported in 2005 Canadian dollars. The sensitivity of the model to changes in drug costs, effectiveness, and persistence with treatment was tested. RESULTS: The model predicted that more patients would reach the LDL-C target with atorvastatin than with simvastatin (73% vs 57%, respectively). The mean annual drug cost per patient treated to target was $54 higher with atorvastatin ($905 vs $851). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, measured as annual drug cost per additional patient treated to target with atorvastatin, was $1088. The model was sensitive to drug cost and effectiveness assumptions. Incorporating real-life rates of adherence into the model had no significant impact on the results. CONCLUSION: In this hypothetical cohort of dyslipidemic patients, treatment with atorvastatin would allow achievement of LDL-C targets in more patients than treatment with simvastatin, at an annual incremental cost of $1088 per additional patient treated to target.     

Review of efficacy of rosuvastatin 5 mg

The prevalence of coronary heart disease (CHD) has been increasing in the past few decades in Japan, as it has in industrialised countries worldwide. CHD risk can be substantially reduced by lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with dyslipidaemia. Statins are highly effective for this indication, but many patients treated with these drugs still do not meet their treatment goals, often because clinicians fail to titrate these patients to a higher, potentially more effective, dose. Thus, there is a need for more effective agents that can help patients reach their goals at starting doses. This paper reviews key clinical results for a new agent, rosuvastatin. The data show that rosuvastatin 5 mg is highly effective in lowering LDL-C to recommended levels for most patients (mean reductions ranging from 42 to 52%). In addition, rosuvastatin 5 mg effectively lowers triglycerides (-16%), total cholesterol (-30%), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C; -38%) and apolipoprotein (apo) B levels (-33%) and increases HDL-C (+8.2-13%) in a wide range of patients with hypercholesterolaemia, including the elderly, obese patients, postmenopausal women and patients with hypertension, CHD, diabetes and metabolic syndrome. The 5-mg dose of rosuvastatin dose also produces greater reductions in LDL-C and larger increases in HDL-C than recommended initial doses of atorvastatin, simvastatin or pravastatin (for LDL-C reductions, p <0.001 vs. atorvastatin 10 mg, simvastatin 20 mg and pravastatin 20 mg; for HDL-C elevations, p <0.01 vs. atorvastatin 10 mg). These results demonstrate that rosuvastatin 5 mg produces favourable effects on the lipid profile and helps more patients achieve LDL-C goals than comparator statins.     

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

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

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.     

Torcetrapib/atorvastatin combination therapy

Elevated blood levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are associated with an increased risk for atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD). Atorvastatin is a statin drug that inhibits 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl coenzyme A reductase (the rate-limiting step of cholesterol production) and primarily lowers LDL-C levels. Atorvastatin has also been shown to significantly reduce CHD events. However, as with all statins (and all other monotherapy lipid-altering drugs), atorvastatin alone reduces the risk of CHD in only a minority of patients relative to placebo. Conversely, it is low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol that are associated with increased CHD risk. Torcetrapib is a cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor that primarily raises high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition has generally been shown to reduce atherosclerosis in rabbits. Taken together, atorvastatin and torcetrapib provide striking improvements in lipid levels, and complementary actions upon important lipid parameters. This review examines the chemistry, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, safety/tolerability and efficacy of the combination torcetrapib/atorvastatin agent that is currently in development and that provides complementary lipid benefits towards the goal of reducing CHD risk beyond that of atorvastatin alone.     

Torcetrapib/atorvastatin combination therapy

Elevated blood levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are associated with an increased risk for atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD). Atorvastatin is a statin drug that inhibits 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl coenzyme A reductase (the rate-limiting step of cholesterol production) and primarily lowers LDL-C levels. Atorvastatin has also been shown to significantly reduce CHD events. However, as with all statins (and all other monotherapy lipid-altering drugs), atorvastatin alone reduces the risk of CHD in only a minority of patients relative to placebo. Conversely, it is low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol that are associated with increased CHD risk. Torcetrapib is a cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor that primarily raises high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition has generally been shown to reduce atherosclerosis in rabbits. Taken together, atorvastatin and torcetrapib provide striking improvements in lipid levels, and complementary actions upon important lipid parameters. This review examines the chemistry, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, safety/tolerability and efficacy of the combination torcetrapib/atorvastatin agent that is currently in development and that provides complementary lipid benefits towards the goal of reducing CHD risk beyond that of atorvastatin alone.     

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and LDL-C goal attainment among elderly patients treated with rosuvastatin compared with other statins in routine clinical practice

Background: Reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels lowers the risk of consequences of cardiovascular disease. Research has confirmed these benefits in elderly patients. The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A inhibitors (ie, statins) have long-standing proven efficacy in reducing levels of LDL-C and total cholesterol.Objective: The goal of this study was to compare change in LDL-C from baseline and National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III LDL-C goal attainment in a population of elderly patients (aged ≥65 years) treated with rosuvastatin versus other statins in routine clinical practice.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort analysis using medical and pharmacy claims data linked to clinical laboratory results from a large managed care health plan of commercial and Medicare Advantage members in the United States. Included were members aged ≥65 years who were newly treated with statins (index date) from August 1, 2003, through February 28, 2005. All subjects were continuously enrolled for 12 months preindex and ≥30 days postindex, with variable follow-up until therapy discontinuation or end of health plan eligibility. Based on NCEP ATP III guidelines, patients were grouped into risk categories with associated LDL-C goals. The primary outcomes were change in LDL-C from baseline and attainment of NCEP ATP III LDL-C goal among patients not at goal before starting therapy. Generalized linear modeling was used to assess percent change in LDL-C from baseline, controlling for covariates (including age, sex, NCEP risk level, medication possession ratio, preindex LDL-C value, days from index date to postindex LDL-C value, and number of preindex office visits for dyslipidemia). In the subset of patients not at goal before starting therapy, logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of individual patients on other statins reaching goal as compared with rosuvastatin and to produce predicted percent attaining LDL-C goal on individual statins.Results: Of the 2227 elderly new users of statin therapy, 8.0% started on rosuvastatin, 38.9% started on atorvastatin, 3.0% on fluvastatin, 31.0% on lovastatin, 5.5% on pravastatin, and 13.6% on simvastatin. Females comprised 57.7% of the population, and the mean (SD) age was 73 (5.8) years (range, 65–94 years). The mean (SD) doses of rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin were 10.65 (4.59), 16.0 (12.78), 66.31 (23.56), 27.38 (14.07), 32.86 (16.46), and 28.1 (26.2) mg, respectively. After controlling for covariates, rosuvastatin-treated patients had a 35.8% decrease in LDL-C from baseline, which was significantly greater compared with patients in the atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin (29.3%, 21.9%, 22.5%, 22.0%, and 24.9%, respectively; P < 0.05) groups. Atorvastatin (odds ratio [OR], 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12–0.52), fluvastatin (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.02–0.14), lovastatin (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.05–0.20), pravastatin (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.03–0.20), and simvastatin (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06–0.30) were less likely to attain LDL-C goal compared with rosuvastatin (all, P < 0.001). Predicted percent attaining goal was 93.6% among rosuvastatin users, significantly greater than users of atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin (81.2%, 55.8%, 66.8%, 64.1%, and 72.8%, respectively; P < 0.05).Conclusion: In this elderly patient population, rosuvastatin was a more effective treatment for reducing LDL-C levels and attaining NCEP ATP III LDL-C goals than the other statins.     

Achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals in high-risk patients in managed care: comparison of rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, and simvastatin in the SOLAR trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate attainment of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal of less than 100 mg/dL with statin treatments in managed care patients at high risk for coronary heart disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a randomized, open-label, multicenter trial (SOLAR [Satisfying Optimal LDL-C ATP III goals with Rosuvastatin]) performed at 145 US clinical centers from June 5, 2002 to July 12, 2004, high-risk men and women in a managed care population received typical starting doses of rosuvastatin (10 mg/d), atorvastatin (10 mg/d), or simvastatin (20 mg/d) for 6 weeks. Those who did not meet the LDL-C target of less than 100 mg/dL at 6 weeks had their dose titrated (doubled), and all patients were followed up for another 6 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 1632 patients were randomized to 1 of the 3 treatment regimens. After 6 weeks, 65% of patients taking rosuvastatin reached the LDL-C target of less than 100 mg/dL vs 41% with atorvastatin and 39% with simvastatin (P<.001 vs rosuvastatin for both). After 12 weeks, 76% of patients taking rosuvastatin reached the LDL-C target of less than 100 mg/dL vs 58% with atorvastatin and 53% with simvastatin (P<.001 vs rosuvastatin for both). Reductions in the LDL-C level, total cholesterol level, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) level, and non-HDL-C/HDL-C ratio were significantly greater with rosuvastatin at both 6 and 12 weeks compared with the other statins. Adverse events were similar in type and frequency in all treatment groups, and only 3% of all patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. No myopathy was observed, no clinically important impact on renal function was attributed to study medications, and clinically important increases in serum transaminases were rare. CONCLUSION: In a managed care population, 10 mg of rosuvastatin treatment resulted in more patients reaching the NCEP ATP III LDL-C goal compared with 10 mg of atorvastatin and 20 mg of simvastatin, potentially reducing the need for titration visits.     

Twelve-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label comparison of the effects of rosuvastatin 10 mg/d and atorvastatin 10 mg/d in high-risk adults: a DISCOVERY study

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) advocate reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and total cholesterol (TC) levels as the primary goals. However, approximately 50% to 60% of patients fail to reach recommended cholesterol goals. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this Direct Statin Comparison of LDL-C Values: An Evaluation of Rosuvastatin Therapy Compared with Atorvastatin (DISCOVERY) trial was to compare the efficacy of the 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors rosuvastatin calcium and atorvastatin calcium in achieving the 1998 Second Joint Task Force (JTF) of European and Other Societies on Coronary Prevention target for LDL-C. Secondary objectives included comparing the efficacy of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin in achieving the 1998 JTF-recommended goal for TC and modifying other lipid levels, and to compare the tolerability of the 2 statins. METHODS: This 12-week, randomized, open-label, 2-arm, parallel-group trial was conducted at 210 centers in Finland, Iceland, and Ireland. Patients aged > or =18 years with a high risk for CHD and primary hypercholesterolemia (LDL-C >3.5 mmol/L [>135 mg/dL]) were randomized (2:1) to receive rosuvastatin 10 mg or atorvastatin 10 mg PO OD for 12 weeks. Before randomization, statin-naive patients underwent 6 weeks of dietary counseling, whereas patients receiving treatment with a starting dose of another lipid-lowering therapy but with an LDL-C level >3.1 mmol/L (>120 mg/dL) were switched to study drug immediately after they were determined eligible for the study Patients were assessed for fasting lipid levels at weeks 0 and 12, and the proportions of patients attaining 1998 and 2003 JTF lipid goals (1998: LDL-C, <3.0 mmol/L [<116 mg/dL]; TC, <5.0 mmol/L [<193 mg/dL]; 2003: LDL-C, <2.5 mmol/L [<97 mg/dL]; TC, <4.5 mmol/L [<174 mg/dL]) were calculated. Tolerability was monitored for the 12-week study and for an additional 36-week optional extension period. RESULTS: One thousand twenty-four patients were randomized to treatment (568 men, 456 women; mean age, 60.7 years). Patient demographic characteristics were similar between the 2 treatment groups. The efficacy analysis consisted of 911 patients (504 men, 407 women; mean age, 60.7 years; mean body weight, 82.4 kg); 627 received rosuvastatin and 284 received atorvastatin. Compared with atorvastatin, rosuvastatin was associated with significantly greater reductions in LDL-C and TC (both, P < 0.05), and with a significantly greater increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level (P < (105). A greater proportion of patients in the rosuvastatin group compared with the atorvastatin group reached the 1998 goals for LDL-C (83.4% vs 683%; P < 0.001) and TC (76.4% vs 59.5%; P < 0.001). Also, compared with the atorvastatin group, greater proportions of patients in the rosuvastatin group achieved the 2003 JTF goals for LDL-C and TC (both, P < 0.001). Both agents were well tolerated: serious drug-related events were observed in < or =3.0% of patients in each group, and no clinically significant differences were found between the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of selected patients at high risk for CHD and with primary hypercholesterolemia, rosuvastatin 10 mg/d for 12 weeks was associated with significantly greater reductions in LDL-C and TC levels compared with atorvastatin 10 mg/d. Furthermore, significantly more patients receiving rosuvastatin achieved the 1998 and 2003 JTF-recommended lipid targets compared with those receiving atorvastatin. Both agents were well tolerated.     

Effect of atorvastatin on cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND: The development of hyperlipidemia after liver transplant is frequently treated with hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) such as atorvastatin. As atorvastatin and the primary immunosuppressant drug, cyclosporine, are metabolized by the same pathway, there is the potential for an interaction. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of atorvastatin on cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in liver transplant recipients. METHODS: Six stable, long-term adult liver transplant recipients from a single center who developed posttransplant dyslipidemia were recruited to participate in a 14-day, open-label study of atorvastatin 10 mg/d coadministered with standard posttransplant immunosuppression using constant oral doses of cyclosporine and corticosteroids. A 10-point pharmacokinetic profile was performed prior to and on day 14 after commencement of atorvastatin therapy. Cyclosporine concentrations were measured by HPLC-electrospray-tandem mass spectrometry. The AUC was calculated by the linear trapezoidal rule, with other parameters determined by visual inspection. RESULTS: Atorvastatin coadministration increased the cyclosporine AUC by 9% (range 0-20.6%; 3018 vs 3290 ng.h/mL; p = 0.04). No significant change was evident for other cyclosporine pharmacokinetic parameters. Total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were significantly lower on day 14 than at baseline (p < 0.02). One patient developed a twofold increase in transaminases after 2 weeks of atorvastatin therapy, but no other clinical or biochemical adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Atorvastatin coadministration increases the cyclosporine AUC by approximately 10% in stable liver transplant recipients. This change in systemic exposure to cyclosporine is of questionable clinical significance. Atorvastatin is effective in reducing cholesterol levels in liver transplant recipients.     

A COST-EFFECTIVENESS MODEL OF ALTERNATIVE STATINS TO ACHIEVE TARGET LDL-CHOLESTEROL LEVELS

An economic model was developed to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of alternative HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) – atorvastatin, cerivastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin – to achieve target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in a population of secondary CHD prevention patients. By using a cholesterol target as the endpoint of interest and a dose titration approach, the model assumes that the statins demonstrate a class effect through cholesterol lowering. The model was used to estimate the proportion of patients achieving target LDL-C levels (<3 mmol/l) under each scenario tested. Total costs and incremental cost-effectiveness relative to no treatment and to the lowest cost option were estimated for each scenario. Total costs were highest for pravastatin and lowest for cerivastatin. Compared with no treatment, the incremental cost per patient treated to target LDL-C varied between £383 (atorvastatin) and £1213 (pravastatin). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in comparison with the lowest cost treatment (cerivastatin) were £141 per additional patient achieving target LDL-C with atorvastatin, and £275 with simvastatin. Fluvastatin and pravastatin were both less effective and more expensive than the lowest cost therapy. Although cerivastatin was associated with lowest expected costs, therapy with atorvastatin achieved the lowest cost-effectiveness ratios. Hence atorvastatin would allow the largest number of patients to be treated to target LDL-C within a fixed drug budget. Choosing between drug therapies on the basis of price alone may be misleading if the effectiveness of therapies varies.     

国产阿托伐他汀治疗高危冠心病患者的疗效和安全性

目的:观察国产阿托伐他汀强化降脂治疗对冠心病高危患者的疗效和其安全性。方法:选择临床确诊为冠心病高危患者104例,随机分为两组:阿托伐他汀10mg.d-1组(n=50);阿托伐他汀40mg.d-1组(n=54)。分别于用药前、用药1个月、3个月、6个月时测定血清总胆固醇(TC)、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C),高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)、三酰甘油(TG)、血糖(GLU)、肝肾功能和肌酸激酶(CK),共治疗6个月。结果:(1)治疗6个月后,与治疗前相比,阿托伐他汀10mg.d-1组LDL-C、TC、TG水平分别降低38.04%、29.37%、20.74%,HDL水平升高了5.98%。40mg.d-1组LDL-C、TC、TG水平分别降低49.14%、37.69%、26.98%,HDL水平升高3.48%。10mg.d-1组LDL-C的达标率为54.00%,40mg.d-1组LDL-C的达标率为79.24%。两组间LDL-C的达标率有显著差异(P<0.01)。(2)两组间治疗前后肝肾功能和肌酸激酶等未见明显差异。结论:口服阿托伐他汀40mg.d-1较10mg.d-1治疗能更有效的降低LDL-C、TC和TG水平,使LDL-C水平达标率高,且两者的安全性一致。     

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

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

Rosuvastatin: a new inhibitor of HMG-coA reductase for the treatment of dyslipidemia

Rosuvastatin (Crestor, AstraZeneca) is a synthetic statin that represents an advance on the pharmacologic and clinical properties of other agents in this class. Relative to other statins, rosuvastatin possesses a greater number of binding interactions with HMG-CoA reductase and has a high affinity for the active site of the enzyme. Rosuvastatin is relatively hydrophilic and is selectively taken up by, and active in, hepatic cells. Rosuvastatin has the longest terminal half-life of the statins and is only minimally metabolized by the cytochrome P450 (CYP 450) enzyme system with no significant involvement of the 3A4 enzyme. Consistent with this finding is the absence of clinically significant drug interactions between rosuvastatin and other drugs known to inhibit CYP 450 enzymes. In patients with hypercholesterolemia, rosuvastatin 10-40 mg has been shown to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels by 52-63%, as well as increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels by up to 14% and reduce triglycerides (TG) by up to 28%. Studies have shown that rosuvastatin is superior to atorvastatin, simvastatin and pravastatin in reducing LDL-C and favorably modifying other components of the atherogenic lipid profile. The significant decreases in LDL-C with rosuvastatin treatment should help to improve attainment of lipid goals and reduce the requirement for dose titration. In addition, the effects of rosuvastatin on HDL-C and TG levels will be of benefit in treating patients with abnormalities such as mixed dyslipidemia and the metabolic syndrome. Rosuvastatin is well tolerated, with a safety profile comparable with that of other currently available statins.     

瑞舒伐他汀和阿托伐他汀对高胆固醇血症患者血浆脂蛋白相关性磷脂酶A2的影响

目的 比较瑞舒伐他汀和阿托伐他汀对高胆固醇血症惠者血浆脂蛋白相关性磷脂酶A2(LpPLA2)活性的影响.方法 本试验为随机、双盲研究.在4周治疗性生活方式改善后,符合入选标准的高胆固醇血症患者随机分入瑞舒伐他汀5 mg组(瑞舒伐他汀5 mg/d)、瑞舒伐他汀10 mg组(瑞舒伐他汀10 mg/d)和阿托伐他汀10 mg组(阿托伐他汀10 mg/d),治疗8周.药物治疗前和治疗8周后测定血清总胆固醇、血清甘油三酯、血清低密度脂蛋白胆固醇、血清高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平以及血浆Lp-PLA2活性.结果 60例高胆固醇血症患者入选.治疗前各组血脂参数和血浆Lp-PLA2活性相似.治疗8周后,瑞舒伐他汀5 mg组、瑞舒伐他汀10 mg组和阿托伐他汀10 mg组血清低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)水平分别降低35%、41%和36%,血浆Lp-PLA2活性降低幅度分别为15%、17%和15%.血浆Lp-PLA2活性和血清LDL-C水平相关(r=0.507,P=0.00).结论 高胆固醇血症患者瑞舒伐他汀和阿托伐他汀治疗8周后,血浆Lp-PLA2活性均显著下降.血浆Lp-PLA2活性和血清LDL-C水平相关.