Efficacy and safety of cerivastatin 0.8 mg in patients with hypercholesterolaemia: the pivotal placebo-controlled clinical trial. Cerivastatin Study Group

This pivotal, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group study evaluated the efficacy and safety of cerivastatin 0.8 mg. Patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia were randomized, after 10 weeks' dietary stabilization on an American Heart Association (AHA) Step I diet, to treatment with cerivastatin 0.8 mg (n = 776), cerivastatin 0.4 mg (n = 195) or placebo (n = 199) once daily for 8 weeks. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg reduced mean low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) by 41.8% compared with cerivastatin 0.4 mg (-35.6%, P < 0.0001) or placebo. In 90% of patients receiving cerivastatin 0.8 mg LDL-C was reduced by 23.9 -58.4% (6th - 95th percentile). Overall attainment of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goal was achieved by 84% of patients receiving cerivastatin 0.8 mg and by 59% of those with coronary heart disease (CHD). In the sub-population meeting the NCEP criteria for pharmacological therapy for LDL-C reduction, 74.6% of patients, including the 59% with CHD, reached the goal with cerivastatin 0.8 mg. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg also reduced mean total cholesterol by 29.9%, apolipoprotein B by 33.2% and median triglycerides by 22.9% (all P < 0.0001). Mean high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein A1 were elevated 8.7% (P < 0.0001) and 4.5% (P < 0.0001), respectively, by cerivastatin 0.8 mg. Reductions of triglyceride and elevation in HDL-C were dependent upon triglyceride baseline levels; in patients having baseline triglyceride levels 250 - 400 mg/dl, cerivastatin 0.8 mg reduced median triglycerides by 29.5% and elevated HDL-C by 13.2%. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg was well tolerated. The most commonly reported adverse events included headache, pharyngitis and rhinitis (4 - 6%). Symptomatic creatine kinase elevations > 10 times upper limit of normal occurred in 0%, 1% and 0.9% of patients receiving placebo, cerivastatin 0.4 mg or cerivastatin 0.8 mg, respectively. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg is an effective and safe treatment for patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia who need aggressive LDL-C lowering in order to achieve NCEP-recommended levels.     

Randomized comparison of the efficacy and safety of cerivastatin and pravastatin in 1,030 hypercholesterolemic patients. The Cerivastatin Study Group

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative efficacy and safety of cerivastatin and pravastatin in patients with type II hypercholesterolemia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, parallel-group study, hypercholesterolemic patients were randomized to treatment with cerivastatin, 0.3 mg (n=250) or 0.4 mg (n=258), or pravastatin, 20 mg (n=266) or 40 mg (n=256), for 8 weeks. RESULTS: Cerivastatin, 0.3 mg, was significantly more effective than pravastatin, 20 mg, in reducing low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol from baseline (-29.6% vs -26.8%; P=.008). Cerivastatin, 0.4 mg, was significantly more effective than pravastatin, 40 mg, in reducing LDL cholesterol (-34.2% vs -30.3%; P<.001). A larger proportion of cerivastatin-treated patients had greater than 40% reductions in LDL cholesterol than those receiving pravastatin (11.1% vs 6.0%). The percentage of patients who achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) target was 71.3% with cerivastatin, 0.3 mg, compared with 67.5% with pravastatin, 20 mg, and 74.0% with cerivastatin, 0.4 mg, compared with 71.1% with pravastatin, 40 mg (no significant difference). Cerivastatin, 0.3 mg, reduced total cholesterol to a greater extent than did pravastatin, 20 mg (P<.03). Both agents reduced triglycerides and increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to a similar degree (no significant differences). Cerivastatin and pravastatin were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Cerivastatin, 0.3 mg and 0.4 mg, showed greater efficacy than pravastatin, 20 mg and 40 mg, respectively, in lowering LDL cholesterol. Cerivastatin is safe and effective for patients with hypercholesterolemia who require aggressive LDL cholesterol lowering to achieve NCEP-recommended targets.     

A randomised comparison of simvastatin versus simvastatin and low cholesterol diet in the treatment of hypercholesterolaemia

There is little evidence to show that strict dietary modification alone confers any significant impact on cardiac events in primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Given the efficacy of the statins, the need for strict dietary modification in patients on statin therapy has been questioned. This study was performed to assess 1) the added benefit on serum lipid levels of a strict low-fat dietary regimen in patients with hypercholesterolaemia already treated with simvastatin; 2) the efficacy of simvastatin on the lipid profile of our sample Asian population; and 3) the tolerability and side-effect profile of simvastatin. This study was a prospective evaluation of 60 patients with hypercholesterolaemia treated with simvastatin who were subjected to either a normal diet or a dietitian guided low-fat diet. Assessment of the effects on serum lipid levels, side-effects, biochemical and haematological markers were performed. After 24 weeks of treatment, a strict dietitian guided low-fat diet conferred no additional benefit over and above what was achieved by simvastatin alone. Furthermore, a higher dose of simvastatin was needed in the dietitian guided diet group to achieve the target LDL-cholesterol level. Simvastatin resulted in a significant positive alteration of lipid profiles in all patients. The drug was well tolerated, with no significant change in either haematological or biochemical indices. Simvastatin is a highly effective cholesterol-lowering drug with a beneficial effect on the entire lipid spectrum in a cross-section of Asian patients, and is well tolerated. A dietitian guided dietary approach confers no additional advantage once statin therapy has been initiated.     

Double-masked comparison of the quality of life of hypercholesterolemic men treated with simvastatin or pravastatin. International Quality of Life Multicenter Group

The efficacy, safety, and impact on quality of life of once-daily treatment with simvastatin 20 mg and pravastatin 40 mg were compared in a multinational, randomized, double-masked trial involving 387 men 21 to 72 years of age with primary mild-to-moderate hypercholesterolemia. The trial consisted of a 12-week baseline period, which included 6 weeks of single-masked placebo administration, and a 12-week double-masked active treatment period. Throughout the trial, patients were maintained on a standard lipid-lowering diet. Efficacy variables were plasma lipid levels and a measurement of health-related quality of life evaluated by means of a self-administered questionnaire (the Nottingham Health Profile [NHP]) and other questionnaires related to general health, sexual function, and stress/life events. Clinic visits were scheduled at study entry (week -12), at initiation and week 5 of placebo (weeks -6 and -1, respectively); at randomization (week 1, day 1); and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of active treatment. At each visit, blood samples were collected for determination of lipid levels and the NHP, the principal measure of health-related quality of life, was administered. Primary safety measures were adverse events and laboratory test results. All statistical comparisons were two-sided, and significance was defined as P< or =0.05 except for the NHP questionnaire, which was P< or =0.01. Treatment with simvastatin 20 mg/d for 12 weeks (n = 194) resulted in significantly greater reductions in plasma total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (25.7% and 33.6%, respectively) compared with pravastatin 40 mg/d for 12 weeks (n = 193) (19.0% and 26.3%, respectively) (P<0.001). No detrimental effects on health-related quality-of-life measurements were reported with either drug. A small but statistically significant improvement in emotional reaction from baseline (P<0.001) was observed after 12 weeks of treatment with simvastatin. At least 75% of simvastatin-treated patients indicated no change in response from baseline on NHP domain scores; these findings were similar to those for pravastatin-treated patients. The differences in the changes in lipid profiles between the 2 treatment groups were not associated with any observed differences in tolerability or health-related quality-of-life measures.     

Double-blind crossover comparison of ketoprofen, naproxen, and placebo in patients with primary dysmenorrhea

Sixty-three women, aged 18 to 39 years, with primary dysmenorrhea received 25 mg, 50 mg, or 75 mg of ketoprofen, 500 mg of naproxen, or placebo as a first dose at the onset of moderate or severe pain. Each patient received three treatments and each treatment was tested in 36 patients. Mean pain relief scores (on a five-point scale) indicated a significant analgesic response for all active treatments; superiority over placebo was shown by ketoprofen 50 mg for six hours, by ketoprofen 75 mg for five hours, by ketoprofen 25 mg for four hours, and by naproxen for four hours. The onset of pain relief and peak relief were reached faster and pain relief lasted longer after 75 mg and 50 mg of ketoprofen than after 25 mg of ketoprofen or 500 mg of naproxen, which in turn were superior to placebo. Treatment was rated good to excellent by 20 patients after 25 mg of ketoprofen, by 26 after 50 mg, and by 28 after 75 mg, and by 22 after naproxen and 11 after placebo. The incidence of side effects was similar in the ketoprofen-treated and naproxen-treated patients.     

Comparison of therapy with simvastatin 80 mg and atorvastatin 80 mg in patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia

This study compared the efficacy of simvastatin 80 mg and atorvastatin 80 mg in the treatment of 26 patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia over 12 weeks using an open crossover trial format. Both, similarly, reduced LDL by 47 +/- 13% and 43 +/- 16% and median triglycerides by 22% and 27% respectively. However, atorvastatin reduced HDL by 2 +/- 24% compared with 8 +/- 30% increase with simvastatin (p = 0.05) affecting the LDL:HDL ratio achieved (4.478 +/- 1.56 vs 3.74 +/- 0.93, p = 0.001). Atorvastatin raised median fibrinogen by 15% compared with a non-significant 5% increase with simvastatin (p = 0.05). Simvastatin reduced lipoprotein (a) by a median 20% compared with baseline (p = 0.05) compared with 5% for atorvastatin. Side-effects, mostly gastrointestinal, were seen in four patients (16%) with atorvastatin compared with one case of myalgia with simvastatin (4%). We conclude both drugs are equally effective in LDL reduction but that simvastatin is superior in raising HDL and causes fewer side-effects. These results require confirmation in larger studies.     

The effects of simvastatin on plasma lipoproteins and cholesterol homeostasis in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia

We have examined the influence of simvastatin, a competitive inhibitor of 3-hydroxy-3-methyl glutaryl coenzyme A reductase on plasma concentrations of lipids and lipoproteins, the rates of cholesterol biosynthesis and degradation of 125I-labelled LDL by freshly isolated mononuclear leucocytes and the 24 h urinary excretion of mevalonic acid in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia. Patients were treated with progressively increasing doses of simvastatin (20, 40, and 80 mg day-1) taken in a twice-daily dosage for a period of 6 weeks on each dose. Plasma concentrations of LDL cholesterol decreased by 36.6%, 45.6% and 47.1% respectively on the three doses. High-affinity degradation of 125I-LDL by freshly isolated mononuclear leucocytes increased significantly on the 20 mg day-1 dosage but no further increase was observed on doses of 40 and 80 mg of simvastatin per day. Rates of 2-14C acetate incorporation into cholesterol by freshly isolated mononuclear leucocytes (obtained 12-15 h after the last dose of simvastatin) increased by 62%, 71% and 29% in cells isolated from patients on 20, 40, and 80 mg day-1 of simvastatin compared with values at baseline. In contrast, the 24 h excretion of mevalonic acid in the urine fell by 16.9%, 31.4% and 31.9% respectively on these three doses. Our results indicate that the potent hypocholesterolaemic effects of simvastatin are accompanied by increases in high-affinity LDL receptor-mediated degradation of LDL and a compensatory increase in cholesterol biosynthesis in freshly isolated mononuclear leucocytes but that rates of mevalonic acid excretion in the urine decrease.     

Randomized comparison of meropenem with cefotaxime for treatment of bacterial meningitis. Meropenem Meningitis Study Group.

Broad-spectrum cephalosporins are drugs of choice for the treatment of meningitis in communities which can afford them. The emergence of cephalosporin-resistant pneumococci demands the clinical trial of alternate agents. Carbapenems are active against the bacteria causing meningitis, but the use of imipenem-cilastatin was frustrated by drug-associated seizures. The safety and efficacy of meropenem, a new carbapenem, were compared to those of cefotaxime in a prospective randomized trial of 190 children with bacterial meningitis. Seizures occurred within 24 h before antibiotic therapy in 16 of 98 patients (16%) randomized to receive meropenem and in 6 of 92 patients (7%) randomized to receive cefotaxime. In patients without seizures before therapy, seizures occurred during therapy in 5 of 82 patients (6%) receiving meropenem and in 1 of 86 patients (1%) receiving cefotaxime (95% confidence interval: -0.7%, 10.6%). None were thought to be drug related. Twenty-four meropenem-treated patients (24%) and 11 cefotaxime-treated patients (12%) had neurological abnormalities before therapy. In patients without pretherapy neurological abnormalities, these abnormalities were present after treatment in 4 of 74 meropenem-treated patients (5%) and in 2 of 81 cefotaxime-treated patients (2%) (95% confidence interval: -3.2%, 9.1%). Of 75 meropenem-treated and 64 cefotaxime-treated patients with pretherapy positive cerebrospinal-fluid cultures, 68 and 59, respectively, had repeat lumbar punctures. Bacterial eradication was found to be 100% in both groups. Our data suggest that meropenem may be a carbapenem agent that is well tolerated and effective in the treatment of bacterial meningitis.     

Comparison between lovastatin and cholestyramine in the treatment of moderate to severe primary hypercholesterolaemia.

120 patients (64 men, 56 women) aged 19-66 years with primary hypercholesterolaemia (mean serum total cholesterol 10.1 mmol/l, range 6.5-16.3 mmol/l) with normal or moderately raised concentrations of serum triglycerides were randomised after four weeks' diet and four weeks' diet+placebo phase either to cholestyramine (40 patients) or lovastatin (80 patients) treatments for the succeeding 12 weeks. The maximal daily doses were 24 g of cholestyramine and 80 mg of lovastatin. The baseline data of the treatment groups were comparable with the exception of HDL-cholesterol concentrations, which were lower in the lovastatin group. The mean reductions in total serum cholesterol concentrations were 24.3% for cholestyramine (P less than or equal to 0.01) and 33.4% for lovastatin (P less than or equal to 0.01) (P less than or equal to 0.01 between the treatment groups), in LDL-cholesterol 32.1% (P less than or equal to 0.01) and 40.7% (P less than or equal to 0.01) (P less than or equal to 0.05 between the treatment groups) and in apolipoprotein B 23.3% (P less than or equal to 0.01) and 33.3% (P less than or equal to 0.01) (P less than or equal to 0.01 between the treatment groups), respectively. Lovastatin was the only drug to reduce serum triglyceride concentrations, it did so by 26.0%. HDL-cholesterol increased by 7.7% (P = NS) when cholestyramine was taken and by 13.5% (P less than or equal to 0.05) with lovastatin (P = NS between the treatment groups). Apolipoprotein A1 remained unchanged.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Bococizumab for the treatment of hypercholesterolaemia

Introduction: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) remains a well-established risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). LDL-C levels are considered primary targets of therapy. A new series of systemic biomolecules, the monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9), have a higher activity in reducing LDL-C.

Areas covered: The authors critically review the current evidence on the efficacy and safety of bococizumab, a humanized mAb against PCSK9, which was surprisingly discontinued in November 2016. The pharmacokinetic profile and the biological features of bococizumab vs others mAbs are also discussed. As of now, in adjunct to diet, alirocumab and evolocumab are the only approved PCSK9 mAbs for the treatment of adult patients with severe clinical atherosclerotic CVD already at maximally-tolerated statin therapy and require additional LDL-C lowering.

Expert opinion: Although discontinued, data from a phase 2b trial show the effectiveness of bococizumab in lowering LDL-C in a similar way to the two available PCSK9 antagonists. However, some peculiar biological characteristics of bococizumab may explain the attenuation of LDL-C lowering over time, as well as a higher rate of immunogenicity and of injection-site reactions.     

Design of the prospective randomized study for the treatment of patients with thrombotic microangiopathy. PRODROMI Study Group.

In thrombotic microangiopathies hemolytic uremic syndrome and thrombocytopenic purpura, plasma exchange (PE) therapy using fresh frozen plasma is standard. In almost 20% of the patients, however, this approach is ineffective. This prospective, randomized study for the treatment of patients with thrombotic microangiopathies (PRODROMI) compares PE with fresh frozen plasma (A) and cryosupernatant (B). The participating centers were the University Clinics of Freiburg, Hamburg, Düsseldorf, Essen, G?ttingen, Mannheim, Ulm, Jena, Tübingen, Würzburg, Kreiskrankenhaus Offenburg, St?dt Klinikum Karlsruhe, and Horst-Schmidt Kliniken in Wiesbaden, Germany. Patients (18 to 80 years) were diagnosed by the individual centers based on clinical and laboratory findings (thrombocyte/fragmentocyte count, hemoglobin, serum creatinine, haptoglobin and lactate dehydrogenase levels; negative Coombs-test is obligatory). HIV infection, bone marrow, or solid organ transplantation were exclusion criteria. After written consent, patients were randomized in the A or B group. All patients received 1.5 mg/kg methylprednisolone as a basic therapy. The first PE always was performed with fresh frozen plasma (50 ml/kg). A minimum of 5 and a maximum of 10 PEs were required. Thrombocyte count above 150,000/microl was considered to be a successful therapy. Treatment failure was defined as not responding to 10 PE with a thrombocyte count above 150,000/microl or a fall below this value within 30 days after stopping PE. Patients with clinical and laboratory signs of thrombotic microangiopathy occurring later than 30 days after having stopped PE were considered to have a relapse. Primary endpoints were survival, intensity of required PE sessions (duration, volume, and number), and relapse rate. Follow-up of clinical outcome was 2 years; von Willebrand Factor (vWF), vWF-cleaving-protease activity, and Factor H were determined.     

International comparison of factors associated with delay in presentation for AMI treatment.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital delay in response to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) symptoms is well documented in the US and Europe, but little is known about it in Asian countries where cardiovascular disease is increasing. AIMS: We conducted an observational study of delay times and factors associated with hospital presentation times in 595 patients with AMI from the US, England, Japan and South Korea. METHODS: Patients were interviewed about responses to symptoms within 72 h of hospital admission and the medical records were reviewed. RESULTS: The proportions of patients with delay times of 1 h or less were: US--23%, Korea--18%, England--15% and Japan--8%. In the US and England when others present at symptom onset called an ambulance patients presented two to three times sooner. Independent predictors of presentation within an hour of symptom onset were attribution of symptoms to the heart and not waiting for symptoms to go away. CONCLUSION: Similar education about the need to seek treatment early in response to AMI symptoms may be applicable in Western and Eastern industrialised populations.     

阿托伐他汀和辛伐他汀治疗原发性高脂血症的比较研究—附30例报告

目的：比较阿托伐他汀和辛伐他汀治疗原发性高脂血症的临床疗效和安全性。方法：阿托伐他汀组（10mg/d)和辛伐他汀组（10mg/d)均连续服药6周,结果：治疗6周末,阿托伐他汀组降低胆固醇,甘油三酯及升高HDL－C的总有效率分别为81％,56％,50％,辛伐他汀组分别为79％,29％,43％,阿托伐他汀组未发现转氨酶升高,肌痛等不良反应。结论：阿托伐他汀是一种安全,有效的调脂药物,其疗效和安全性不亚于辛伐他汀。     

Prophylactic treatment of classical and non-classical migraine with metoprolol—a comparison with placebo

A double-blind investigation with parallel groups was carried out in three Danish neurological clinics to evaluate the effect of metoprolol (Beloc, Betaloc, Seloken) versus placebo in migraine patients. 71 patients were included; 62 completed the study. The following parameters were used in the evaluation: frequency of headache attacks, days with migraine, severity score (days X intensity), and the consumption of pain-relieving tablets. The results of the study show that metoprolol 200 mg in Durules (a controlled release formulation) once daily is more effective regarding all evaluated parameters than placebo and that metoprolol is well tolerated.     

阿托伐他汀与辛伐他汀在颈动脉粥样硬化治疗中的比较

目的探讨阿托伐他汀与辛伐他汀在预防颈动脉粥样硬化患者发生脑梗死中的作用以及对肝功能的影响。方法将160例颈动脉粥样硬化患者随机分为两组,分别给予阿托伐他汀与辛伐他汀治疗,阿托伐组给予阿托伐他汀钙片20 mg/晚,辛伐他汀组给予辛伐他汀钠片40 mg/晚,观察使用不同他汀治疗时脑梗死和肝功能异常发生率的情况。结果辛伐他汀与阿托伐他汀治疗1年中脑梗死发生率比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.74,P<0.05),1年内肝功能异常发生率比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.10,P<0.05)。结论辛伐他汀与阿托伐他汀比较具有较强稳定颈动脉粥样硬化斑块的作用,减少了脑梗死的发生,而且在长期发挥治疗作用的同时,肝功能出现异常的发生率要低于阿托伐他汀。     

Acrivastine in two doses compared with placebo in a multicentre, parallel group study for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

In a placebo controlled, randomised, multicentre study the efficacy and safety of multiple doses of acrivastine, a derivative of the antihistamine tripolidine (Actidil) were evaluated in patients exhibiting symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Over the 10 day treatment period, 103 patients received, twice daily, either 4 mg and 8 mg of acrivastine or a placebo. Three patients withdrew from the study due to poor symptom control and two due to adverse experiences. The reporting of adverse experiences was evenly distributed between the treatment and placebo periods. Acrivastine did not affect the haematological, biochemical or urinalysis screens. Both 4 mg and 8 mg acrivastine alleviated the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis with significant improvements in the symptom scores for sneezing, running nose and the calculated overall score. In addition, 8 mg acrivastine reduced the symptom scores for watery eyes and itchy throat. Acrivastine was both well tolerated and effective in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.     

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

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