Achieving and maintaining National Cholesterol Education Program low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals with five statins

PURPOSE: Most patients fail to achieve and maintain low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol goals established by the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP). The Atorvastatin Comparative Cholesterol Efficacy and Safety Study (ACCESS) was a randomized study comparing the efficacy and safety of five statins and their ability reduce LDL cholesterol to the NCEP target level. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Of 7542 patients screened, 3916 hypercholesterolemic patients were randomly assigned to treatment with a statin, beginning with the lowest recommended dose (atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin, 10 mg; fluvastatin and lovastatin, 20 mg). If the NCEP target was not achieved, the dose was titrated up to the recommended maximum (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, and lovastatin, 80 mg; pravastatin and simvastatin, 40 mg). The total duration of treatment was 54 weeks. RESULTS: Atorvastatin achieved the greatest mean reduction in LDL cholesterol: 36% +/- 11% at 6 weeks (initial dose) and 42% +/- 13% at 54 weeks. More patients receiving atorvastatin at its initial dose (53%, 997 of 1888) achieved their NCEP target levels than patients receiving simvastatin (38%, 174 of 462), lovastatin (28%, 134 of 472), pravastatin (15%, 71 of 461), or fluvastatin (15%, 69 of 474) at the initial dose. Atorvastatin-treated patients were more likely to maintain their target levels from week 6 to week 54. The percent reduction in LDL cholesterol achieved at the initial dose correlated strongly with the proportion of patients who maintained their goals at 54 weeks (r = -0.84). CONCLUSION: For patients treated with statins, providing a greater margin between the NCEP target level and the achieved LDL cholesterol level enhances the likelihood of maintaining NCEP goal levels.     

Treating patients with documented atherosclerosis to national cholesterol education program-recommended low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol goals with atorvastatin,fluvastatin, lovastatin and simvastatin

Objectives. This study compared the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, and simvastatin in patients with documented atherosclerosis treated to U.S. National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) recommended low-density-lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentration (≤100 mg/dl [2.59 mmol/liter]).Background. For patients with advanced atherosclerosis, NCEP recommends lipid-lowering drug therapy if LDL cholesterol remains ≥130 mg/dl (3.36 mmol/liter).Methods. A total of 318 men or women with documented atherosclerosis and LDL cholesterol ≥130 mg/dl (3.36 mmol/liter) and ≤250 mg/dl (6.5 mmol/liter), and triglycerides ≤400 mg/dl (4.5 mmol/liter) participated in this 54-week, multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group, active-controlled, treat-to-target study. Patients were titrated at 12-week intervals until the LDL cholesterol goal was reached. Number of patients reaching target LDL cholesterol levels and dose to reach target were evaluated.Results. At the starting doses, atorvastatin 10 mg produced significantly greater decreases (p < 0.05) in plasma LDL cholesterol than the other treatments. Subsequently, the percentage of patients reaching goal at the starting dose was 32% for atorvastatin, 1% for fluvastatin, 10% for lovastatin and 22% for simvastatin. Atorvastatin-treated patients required a lower median dose than other treatments. Median doses at week 54 with the last available visit carried forward were atorvastatin 20 mg/day, fluvastatin 40 mg/day + colestipol 20 g/day, lovastatin 80 mg/day, simvastatin 40 mg/day.Conclusions. A significantly greater number (p < 0.05) of patients with confirmed atherosclerosis treated with atorvastatin reached the target LDL cholesterol concentration at the starting dose than patients treated with fluvastatin or lovastatin, and significantly fewer (p < 0.05) patients treated with atorvastatin required combination therapy with colestipol to achieve target LDL cholesterol concentrations than all other statins tested.     

Comparisons of effects of statins (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin) on fasting and postprandial lipoproteins in patients with coronary heart disease versus control subjects

The effects of atorvastatin at 20, 40, and 80 mg/day on plasma lipoprotein subspecies were examined in a randomized, placebo-controlled fashion over 36 weeks in 97 patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels of >130 mg/dl and compared directly with the effects of fluvastatin (n = 28), pravastatin (n = 22), lovastatin (n = 24), and simvastatin (n = 25). The effects of placebo and 40 mg/day of each statin were also examined in subjects with CHD with subjects in the fasting state and in the fed state 4 hours after a meal rich in saturated fat and cholesterol and compared with results in age- and gender-matched control subjects. At all doses tested in the fasting and fed states, atorvastatin was significantly (p <0.01) more effective in lowering LDL cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol than all other statins, and significantly (p <0.05) more effective than all statins, except for simvastatin, in lowering triglyceride and remnant lipoprotein (RLP) cholesterol. At 40 mg/day in the fasting state, atorvastatin was significantly (p <0.01) more effective than all statins, except for lovastatin and simvastatin, in lowering cholesterol levels in small LDL, and was significantly (p <0.05) more effective than all statins, except for simvastatin, in increasing cholesterol in large HDL and in lowering LDL particle numbers. Our data indicate that atorvastatin was the most effective statin tested in lowering cholesterol in LDL, non-HDL, and RLP in the fasting and fed states, and getting patients with CHD to established goals, with fluvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, and simvastatin having about 33%, 50%, 60%, and 85% of the efficacy of atorvastatin, respectively, at the same dose in the same patients.     

Comparison of effects on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol with rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin in patients with type IIa or IIb hypercholesterolemia.

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in 52 centers in North America to compare the effects of the new, highly effective statin, rosuvastatin, with atorvastatin and placebo in hypercholesterolemic patients. After a 6-week dietary run-in, 516 patients with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol > or =4.14 mmol/L (160 mg/dl) and < 6.47 mmol/L (250 mg/dl) and triglycerides < or =4.52 mmol/L (400 mg/dl) were randomized to 12 weeks of once-daily placebo (n = 132), rosuvastatin 5 mg (n = 128), rosuvastatin 10 mg (n = 129), or atorvastatin 10 mg (n = 127). The primary efficacy end point was percent change in LDL cholesterol. Secondary efficacy variables were achievement of National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel II (ATP II), ATP III, and European Atherosclerosis Society LDL cholesterol goals and percent change from baseline in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and apolipoprotein A-I. Rosuvastatin 5 and 10 mg compared with atorvastatin 10 mg were associated with greater LDL cholesterol reductions (-40% and -43% vs 35%; p <0.01 and p <0.001, respectively) and HDL cholesterol increases (13% and 12% vs 8%, p <0.01 and p <0.05, respectively). Total cholesterol and apolipoprotein B reductions and apolipoprotein A-I increases were also greater with rosuvastatin; triglyceride reductions were similar. Rosuvastatin 5 and 10 mg were associated with improved achievement in ATP II (84% in both rosuvastatin groups vs 73%) and ATP III (84% and 82% vs 72%) LDL cholesterol goals, and rosuvastatin 10 mg was more effective than atorvastatin in achieving European Atherosclerosis Society LDL cholesterol goals. Both treatments were well tolerated.     

Comparison of efficacy and safety of atorvastatin and simvastatin in patients with dyslipidemia with and without coronary heart disease

The efficacy and safety of atorvastatin 10 mg versus simvastatin 20 mg and atorvastatin 80 mg versus simvastatin 80 mg was determined in a 6-week, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end-point trial of dyslipidemic patients with and without coronary heart disease. A total of 1,732 patients with hypercholesterolemia and triglycerides < or =600 mg/dl (6.8 mmol/L) were randomized to receive either atorvastatin 10 mg (n = 650), simvastatin 20 mg (n = 650), atorvastatin 80 mg (n = 216), or simvastatin 80 mg (n = 216). The primary efficacy parameter was the change in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol from baseline to week 6. Secondary efficacy parameters included the percent change from baseline to week 6 in total cholesterol, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and the percent of patients achieving their National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) LDL cholesterol goal at study end. Atorvastatin had significantly greater reductions from baseline in LDL cholesterol than simvastatin in both comparator groups: atorvastatin 10 mg (37.1%) versus simvastatin 20 mg (35.4%) (p = 0.0097), and atorvastatin 80 mg (53.4%) versus simvastatin 80 mg (46.7%) (p <0.0001). Atorvastatin 10 and 80 mg also provided significantly greater reductions in total cholesterol, triglycerides, very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B than simvastatin 20 and 80 mg, respectively (all p <0.05). All treatment groups had a significantly decreased LDL cholesterol/HDL cholesterol ratio from baseline (all p <0.0001). In both comparator groups a higher proportion of atorvastatin-treated patients reached their NCEP LDL cholesterol goal compared with simvastatin. All 4 study treatments were well tolerated.     

Development of tachyphylaxis among patients taking HMG CoA reductase inhibitors

The purpose of this study was to determine if long-term use of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, or simvastatin) resulted in tachyphylaxis (a decreasing response to a physiologically active agent). To determine this, the charts of 254 patients treated with statins from the years 1996 to 1998 were retrospectively reviewed. During treatment, the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels of patients were followed for a minimum of 300 days. To characterize LDL cholesterol changes during statin therapy, linear and nonlinear kinetic models were generated. Tachyphylaxis, defined as a positive slope of LDL cholesterol over time, after maximum LDL cholesterol reduction, was identified in patients treated with atorvastatin at exposure doses of 10 or 20 mg/day. All other statins, at all doses reviewed, showed no [corrected] evidence of tachyphylaxis. LDL cholesterol tachyphylaxis appeared to be a unique response to prolonged use of long half-life atorvastatin therapy at exposure dosages.     

Comparison of once-daily,niacin extended-release/lovastatin with standard doses of atorvastatin and simvastatin (the ADvicor Versus Other Cholesterol-Modulating Agents Trial Evaluation [ADVOCATE])

This study compared the relative efficacy of a once-daily niacin extended-release (ER)/lovastatin fixed-dose combination with standard doses of atorvastatin or simvastatin, with a special emphasis on relative starting doses. Subjects (n = 315) with elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and decreased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol blood levels (defined as LDL cholesterol blood levels > or =160 mg/dl without coronary artery disease, or > or =130 mg/dl if coronary artery disease was present, and HDL cholesterol <45 mg/dl in men and <50 mg/dl in women) were randomized to atorvastatin, simvastatin, or niacin ER/lovastatin for 16 weeks. The primary efficacy variables were the mean percent change in LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol levels from baseline. After 8 weeks, the starting dose niacin ER/lovastatin 1,000/40 mg and the 10-mg starting dose atorvastatin both lowered mean LDL cholesterol by 38%. After 12 weeks, niacin ER/lovastatin 1,000/40 mg lowered LDL cholesterol by 42% versus 34% with the 20-mg starting dose of simvastatin (p <0.001). Niacin ER/lovastatin increased HDL cholesterol significantly more than atorvastatin or simvastatin at all compared doses (p <0.001). Niacin ER/lovastatin also provided significant improvements in triglycerides, lipoprotein(a), apolipoprotein A-1, apolipoprotein B, and HDL subfractions. A total of 6% of study subjects receiving niacin ER/lovastatin withdrew because of flushing. No significant differences were seen among study groups in discontinuance due to elevated liver enzymes. No drug-induced myopathy was observed. Niacin ER/lovastatin was comparable to atorvastatin 10 mg and more effective than simvastatin 20 mg in reducing LDL cholesterol, was more effective in increasing HDL cholesterol than either atorvastatin or simvastatin, and provided greater global improvements in non-HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and lipoprotein(a).     

Comparisons of apolipoprotein B levels estimated by immunoassay, nuclear magnetic resonance, vertical auto profile, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in subjects with hypertriglyceridemia (SAFARI Trial)

Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglyceride-rich lipoproteins constitute non-high-density lipoprotein (non-HDL) cholesterol. These are atherogenic lipoproteins and non-HDL cholesterol is a secondary target of treatment beyond LDL cholesterol in patients with hypertriglyceridemia. Some investigators favor total apolipoprotein B over non-HDL cholesterol as the secondary target of treatment. This is based on publications suggesting that total apolipoprotein B is more predictive of cardiovascular events than non-HDL cholesterol. Several methods are available for estimating total apolipoprotein B. This study compared total apolipoprotein estimated by immunonephelometric assay (INA), vertical auto profile (VAP), nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and non-HDL cholesterol levels in patients with hypertriglyceridemia from the previously reported Simvastatin plus Fenofibrate for Combined Hyperlipidemia (SAFARI) trial. Total apolipoprotein B levels were found to be highest by INA, intermediate by NMR and non-HDL cholesterol, and lowest by VAP. Concordance for non-HDL cholesterol levels among the INA, VAP, and NMR methods was better than that for total apolipoprotein B levels; the correlation between non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B by INA was strongest (0.929). In patients with a low triglyceride/HDL cholesterol ratio (<3.5), total apolipoprotein B determined by INA was higher than that estimated from non-HDL cholesterol levels, whereas in patients with a high triglyceride/HDL C ratio (≥3.5), apolipoprotein B predicted using non-HDL cholesterol was in better agreement with INA-determined apolipoprotein B levels. Similar trends were observed with VAP using equations specific for LDL particle size. In conclusion, more work is needed to improve agreement of apolipoprotein B measurements among methods employed clinically. Non-HDL cholesterol is also useful to predict total apolipoprotein B and some improvement may be attained by taking into account the ratio of triglyceride/HDL cholesterol as a measurement of LDL particle size.     

Comparing the effects of five different statins on the HDL subpopulation profiles of coronary heart disease patients

We compared the effects of five different statins (atorvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, and fluvastatin) on the lipid, lipoprotein, and apolipoprotein (apo) A-I-containing high-density lipoprotein (HDL) subpopulation profiles of 86 coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. Patients with established CHD, and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (C)>130 mg/dl, and triglyceride (TG)<400 mg/dl, were treated with atorvastatin 20, 40, and 80 mg/day and one of the other four statins at 20, 40, and when available 80 mg/day in increasing doses (4 weeks of each dose) in a randomized crossover fashion. There was an 8-week placebo controlled washout period between different drug treatments. All five statins on each dose resulted in significant reductions in total- and LDL-C compared to placebo treatment. There were also decreases in plasma TG and increases in HDL-C and apoA-I concentrations, but not all treatments changed these parameters significantly. Each statin except fluvastatin improved the HDL subpopulation profile by increasing the concentrations of the large, cholesterol-rich, LpA-I alpha-1 and prealpha-1 HDL subpopulations. CHD patients have significantly lower concentration of the large, LpA-I alpha-1 HDL particles compared to controls. Our data indicate that statins which are the most effective in lowering LDL-C and TG are also the most effective agents in modifying the HDL subpopulation profile in CHD patients towards the patterns found in healthy individuals. The order of efficacy of statins in increasing alpha-1 HDL subpopulation was: atorvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin and fluvastatin.     

The synergistic hypocholesterolemic activity of the potent cholesterol absorption inhibitor, ezetimibe, in combination with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme a reductase inhibitors in dogs

Ezetimibe (SCH 58235) and SCH 48461 are potent cholesterol absorption inhibitors, which cause significant decreases in plasma cholesterol levels in cholesterol-fed animals and in humans with hypercholesterolemia. These compounds selectively block intestinal uptake and absorption of cholesterol. These cholesterol absorption inhibitors cause modest, inconsistent reductions in plasma cholesterol levels in animals fed cholesterol-free chow diets. Although, these compounds block cholesterol absorption and increase neutral sterol excretion, chow-fed animals compensate for the loss of biliary cholesterol by increasing hepatic cholesterol synthesis. Therefore, we determined the effect of SCH 48461 and ezetimibe in combination with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG CoA) reductase inhibitors in chow-fed dogs. A synergistic reduction in plasma cholesterol was observed in chow-fed dogs given SCH 48461 (0.1 mg/kg/d) and the HMG CoA reductase inhibitor, lovastatin (5 mg/kg/d). Neither SCH 48461 nor lovastatin alone affected plasma cholesterol levels. Their combination for 14 days caused a 36% reduction in plasma cholesterol levels from 129 mg/dL to 83 mg/dL (P <.05). Ezetimibe (0.007 mg/kg/d) also caused synergistic reductions in plasma cholesterol levels in chow-fed dogs when combined with HMG CoA reductase inhibitors for 2 weeks (5 mg/kg lovastatin -50%; 2.5 mg/kg pravastatin -41%; 5 mg/kg fluvastatin -60%, and -30% with low doses of simvastatin and atorvastatin 1 mg/kg). The combination of this class of cholesterol absorption inhibitors with an HMG CoA reductase inhibitor should be very effective clinically at reducing plasma cholesterol levels, even with reduced dietary intake of cholesterol.     

Comparison of efficacy and safety of atorvastatin (10mg) with simvastatin (10mg) at six weeks. ASSET Investigators

The 6-week efficacy and safety of atorvastatin versus simvastatin was determined during a 54-week, open-label, multicenter, parallel-arm, treat-to-target study. In all, 1,424 patients with mixed dyslipidemia (triglyceride 200 to 600 mg/dl [2.26 to 6.77 mmol/L]) were stratified to 1 of 2 groups (diabetes or no diabetes). Patients were then randomized to receive either atorvastatin 10 mg/ day (n = 730) or simvastatin 10 mg/day (n = 694). Efficacy was determined by measuring changes from baseline in lipid parameters including low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and apolipoprotein B. Compared with simvastatin, atorvastatin produced significantly greater (p < 0.0001) reductions from baseline in LDL cholesterol (37.2% vs 29.6%), total cholesterol (27.6% vs 21.5%), triglycerides (22.1% vs 16.0%), the ratio of LDL cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (41.1% vs 33.7%), and apolipoprotein B (28.3% vs 21.2%), and a comparable increase from baseline in HDL cholesterol (7.4% vs 6.9%). Atorvastatin was also significantly (p < 0.0001) more effective than simvastatin at treating the overall patient population to LDL cholesterol goals (55.6% vs 38.4%). Fewer than 6% of patients in either treatment group experienced drug-attributable adverse events, which were mostly mild to moderate in nature. Diabetic patients treated with either statin had safety characteristics similar to nondiabetics, with atorvastatin exhibiting superior efficacy to simvastatin. In conclusion, atorvastatin, at a dose of 10 mg/day, is more effective than simvastatin 10 mg/day at lowering lipids and reaching LDL cholesterol goals in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. Both statins are well tolerated with safety profiles similar to other members of the statin class.     

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin,simvastatin, and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR* Trial)

The primary objective of this 6-week, parallel-group, open-label, randomized, multicenter trial was to compare rosuvastatin with atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin across dose ranges for reduction of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. Secondary objectives included comparing rosuvastatin with comparators for other lipid modifications and achievement of National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and Joint European Task Force LDL cholesterol goals. After a dietary lead-in period, 2,431 adults with hypercholesterolemia (LDL cholesterol > or =160 and <250 mg/dl; triglycerides <400 mg/dl) were randomized to treatment with rosuvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; simvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg; or pravastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg. At 6 weeks, across-dose analyses showed that rosuvastatin 10 to 80 mg reduced LDL cholesterol by a mean of 8.2% more than atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg, 26% more than pravastatin 10 to 40 mg, and 12% to 18% more than simvastatin 10 to 80 mg (all p <0.001). Mean percent changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the rosuvastatin groups were +7.7% to +9.6% compared with +2.1% to +6.8% in all other groups. Across dose ranges, rosuvastatin reduced total cholesterol significantly more (p <0.001) than all comparators and triglycerides significantly more (p <0.001) than simvastatin and pravastatin. Adult Treatment Panel III LDL cholesterol goals were achieved by 82% to 89% of patients treated with rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg compared with 69% to 85% of patients treated with atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg; the European LDL cholesterol goal of <3.0 mmol/L was achieved by 79% to 92% in rosuvastatin groups compared with 52% to 81% in atorvastatin groups. Drug tolerability was similar across treatments.     

Impact of dietary fat type within the context of altered cholesterol homeostasis on cholesterol and lipoprotein metabolism in the F1B hamster

Cholesterol status and dietary fat alter several metabolic pathways reflected in lipoprotein profiles. To assess plasma lipoprotein response and mechanisms by which cholesterol and dietary fat type regulate expression of genes involved in lipoprotein metabolism, we developed an experimental model system using F1B hamsters fed diets (12 weeks) enriched in 10% (wt/wt) coconut, olive, or safflower oil with either high cholesterol (0.1%; cholesterol supplemented) or low cholesterol coupled with cholesterol-lowering drugs 10 days before killing (0.01% cholesterol, 0.15% lovastatin, 2% cholestyramine; cholesterol depleted). Irrespective of dietary fat, cholesterol depletion, relative to supplementation, resulted in lower plasma non-high-density lipoprotein (non-HDL) and HDL cholesterol, and triglyceride concentrations (all Ps < .05). In the liver, these differences were associated with higher sterol regulatory element binding protein-2, low-density lipoprotein receptor, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase, and 7α-hydroxylase messenger RNA (mRNA) levels; higher scavenger receptor B1 and apolipoprotein A-I mRNA and protein levels; lower apolipoprotein E protein levels; and in intestine, modestly lower sterol transporters adenosine triphosphate-binding cassette (ABC) A1, ABCG5, and ABCG8 mRNA levels. Irrespective of cholesterol status, coconut oil, relative to olive and safflower oils, resulted in higher non-HDL cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations (both Ps < .05) and modestly higher sterol regulatory element binding protein-2 mRNA levels. These data suggest that, in F1B hamsters, differences in plasma lipoprotein profiles in response to cholesterol depletion are associated with changes in the expression of genes involved in cholesterol metabolism, whereas the effect of dietary fat type on gene expression was modest, which limits the usefulness of the experimental animal model.     

Rosuvastatin--a highly effective new 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor: review of clinical trial data at 10-40 mg doses in dyslipidemic patients

Rosuvastatin (Crestor; licensed to AstraZeneca, Macclesfield, UK from Shionogi, Osaka, Japan) is a new statin with pharmacologic characteristics that translate into selectivity of effect in hepatic cells and enhanced potency in 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibition. It is approved for use at doses of 10-40 mg once daily to reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, increase high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and improve other lipid measures in dyslipidemic patients. In a dose-ranging study in mild/moderate hypercholesterolemia, rosuvastatin reduced LDL cholesterol by 52-63% at 10-40 mg. Rosuvastatin 10 mg reduces LDL cholesterol significantly more than atorvastatin 10 mg, simvastatin 10-40 mg and pravastatin 10-40 mg, and enables significantly more patients to achieve National Cholesterol Education Program and Joint European Societies LDL cholesterol goals compared with each of these statins. Rosuvastatin also produces marked elevations in HDL cholesterol and maintains this effect across the dose range. Rosuvastatin favorably modifies triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and other lipid measures in patients with hypertriglyceridemia or mixed dyslipidemia, including diabetic patients, and may constitute a monotherapy option for many such patients. Rosuvastatin is well tolerated when used alone or in combination, exhibiting a safety profile similar to that of other available statins. Rosuvastatin offers considerable advantages for use in routine clinical practice.     

Atorvastatin treatment beneficially alters the lipoprotein profile and increases low-density lipoprotein particle diameter in patients with combined dyslipidemia and impaired fasting glucose/type 2 diabetes

Diabetic dyslipidemia is featured by hypertriglyceridemia, low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels, and elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol commonly in the form of small, dense LDL particles. First-line treatment, fibrates versus statins or both, of dyslipidemia in diabetic patients has been the focus of debate. We investigated the potential hypolipidemic effects of atorvastatin, a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor with good triglyceride lowering properties, in patients with combined dyslipidemia and evidence of impaired fasting glucose or type 2 diabetes. Twenty patients were recruited for the study, and after a 60-day wash out period, baseline measurements of lipoprotein parameters, LDL particle diameter, and apolipoprotein B (apoB) degradation fragments were obtained. The group was then randomized, in a double-blinded manner, into 2 subgroups. Group A received atorvastatin (80 mg) and group B received placebo daily for 60 days. After the first treatment period, all patients were reanalyzed for the above parameters. The treatment regime then crossed over for the second treatment period in which group A received placebo and group B received atorvastatin (80 mg) daily for 60 days. All parameters were remeasured at the end of the study. Treatment with atorvastatin resulted in a statistically significant reduction in total cholesterol (41%), LDL cholesterol (55%), triglycerides (TG) (32%), and apoB (40%). Mean LDL particle diameter significantly increased from 25.29 +/- 0.24 nm (small, dense LDL subclass) to 26.51 < 0.18 nm (intermediate LDL subclass) after treatment with atorvastatin (n = 20, P <.005). At baseline, LDL particles were predominantly found in the small, dense subclass; atorvastatin treatment resulted in a shift in the profile to the larger and more buoyant LDL subclass. Atorvastatin treatment did not produce consistent changes in the appearance of apoB degradation fragments in plasma. Our results suggest that atorvastatin beneficially alters the atherogenic lipid profile in these patients and significantly decreases the density of LDL particles produced resulting in a shift from small, dense LDL to more buoyant and less atherogenic particles.     

Determinants of variable response to statin treatment in patients with refractory familial hypercholesterolemia

Interindividual variability in low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (LDL-C) response during treatment with statins is well documented but poorly understood. To investigate potential metabolic and genetic determinants of statin responsiveness, 19 patients with refractory heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia were sequentially treated with placebo, atorvastatin (10 mg/d), bile acid sequestrant, and the 2 combined, each for 4 weeks. Levels of LDL-C, mevalonic acid (MVA), 7-alpha-OH-4-cholesten-3-one, and leukocyte LDL receptor and hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase mRNA were determined after each treatment period. Atorvastatin (10 mg/d) reduced LDL-C by an overall mean of 32.5%. Above-average responders (LDL-C -39.5%) had higher basal MVA levels (34.4+/-6.1 micromol/L) than did below-average responders (LDL-C -23.6%, P<0.02; basal MVA 26.3+/-6.1 micromol/L, P<0.01). Fewer good responders compared with the poor responders had an apolipoprotein E4 allele (3 of 11 versus 6 of 8, respectively; P<0.05). There were no baseline differences between them in 7-alpha-OH-4-cholesten-3-one, hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase mRNA, or LDL receptor mRNA, but the latter increased in the good responders on combination therapy (P<0.05). Severe mutations were not more common in poor than in good responders. We conclude that poor responders to statins have a low basal rate of cholesterol synthesis that may be secondary to a genetically determined increase in cholesterol absorption, possibly mediated by apolipoprotein E4. If so, statin responsiveness could be enhanced by reducing dietary cholesterol intake or inhibiting absorption.     

Comparison of properties of four inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme a reductase

Four inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase have been approved for treatment of hypercholesterolemia. Three of these are fungal metabolites or derivatives thereof: lovastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin. The fourth, fluvastatin, is totally synthetic. Its structure, containing a fluorophenyl-substituted indole ring, is distinct from that of the fungal metabolites. Lovastatin and simvastatin are administered as prodrugs, which undergo in vivo transformation to active inhibitory forms; fluvastatin and pravastatin are administered as active agents. The HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors are all effective in reducing plasma concentrations of low density lipoprotein. They have differing pharmacokinetic properties, which may be of importance in some patients. All of these drugs are very well tolerated, and there do not appear to be major differences in toxicity or adverse effects. When LDL reductions >30% are needed, simvastatin is the most cost-effective HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor. However, these drugs are most commonly used in dosages that reduce LDL-C by 20–30%. For this degree of LDL reduction, fluvastatin is the most cost-effective HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor.     

Atorvastatin monotherapy vs. combination therapy in the management of patients with combined hyperlipidemia

BACKGROUND: Mixed hyperlipidemia is a common disorder characterized by elevated VLDL and LDL levels. Patients with this syndrome usually are in need of combination therapy, comprising a fibric acid derivate with a statin drug in order to achieve LDL and triglyceride target values. Atorvastatin is a hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor demonstrated to be effective in reducing both cholesterol (CHOL) and triglyceride (TG) levels in humans. We examined the efficacy of atorvastatin as monotherapy in achieving a better or the same lipid profile in patients with mixed hyperlipidemia treated with combination therapy. DESIGN: We compared atorvastatin with a combination of a fibric acid derivate and a statin drug (other than atorvastatin) in a 24-week, prospective randomized, open-label study of 27 patients with mixed hyperlipidemia. METHODS: All 27 patients had been treated with statin-fibrate therapy in different regimens for at least a year. Atorvastatin at a daily dose of 20 mg was substituted for statin-fibrate therapy. Lipid and safety profiles were assessed. RESULTS: Atorvastatin significantly reduced total cholesterol, LDL-C, and HDL-C compared to statin-fibrate therapy. In contrast, TG and glucose levels were significantly elevated with atorvastatin. Target LDL-C and TG was achieved in 10 patients with the single therapy of atorvastatin vs. 6 patients under statin-fibrate. In 16 patients, atorvastatin was at least as effective as, or better than, the combination therapy, and was recommended for continuation of treatment. CONCLUSION: Atorvastatin is an adequate monotherapy for many mixed hyperlipidemia patients. We recommend atorvastatin be considered for every patient suffering from mixed hyperlipidemia.     

Comparison of the efficacy of atorvastatin versus cerivastatin in primary hypercholesterolemia

This 6-week Prospective, Randomized, Open-label Blinded End point (PROBE) study conducted at 12 sites in the United States compared the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin with cerivastatin. In all, 215 hypercholesterolemic patients (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol > or = 160 mg/dl [4.14 mmol/L]; triglycerides < or = 400 mg/dl [4.52 mmol/L]) were randomized to receive either atorvastatin 10 mg once daily (n = 108) or cerivastatin 0.3 mg once daily (n = 107). Efficacy was assessed by measuring changes from baseline in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and triglycerides. Atorvastatin produced significantly greater (p < 0.0001) reductions from baseline to week 6 in LDL cholesterol (37.7% vs 30.2%), total cholesterol (27.5% vs 22.2%), and apolipoprotein B (28.6% vs 21.2%), and a significantly greater (p < 0.05) increase from baseline to week 6 in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (6.8% vs 4.3%) than cerivastatin. Atorvastatin treatment was also associated with a greater percent decrease from baseline to week 6 in triglycerides, with a trend toward statistical significance (p = 0.0982). The percentage of patients that achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program LDL cholesterol goal was greater for those receiving atorvastatin (73%) than for those receiving cerivastatin (66%). The proportion of patients experiencing drug-attributable adverse events, which were mostly mild to moderate and related to the digestive system, was significantly less (p < 0.05) with atorvastatin (5%) than with cerivastatin (14%) treatment. In conclusion, atorvastatin (10 mg/day) is more effective at lowering LDL cholesterol in hypercholesterolemic patients than cerivastatin (0.3 mg/day). Both atorvastatin and cerivastatin are well tolerated, with safety profiles similar to other members of the statin class.