Lipid-altering efficacy of the ezetimibe/simvastatin single tablet versus rosuvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients

ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin single tablet product compared with rosuvastatin at the approved usual starting, next highest, and maximum doses.

Research design and methods: Double-blind, multicenter, 6‐week, parallel-group study in hypercholesterolemic patients (n = 2959). Patients were randomized based on stratification by low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels to ezetimibe/simvastatin or rosuvastatin, respectively, at the usual starting (10/20 or 10?mg/day), the next highest (10/40 or 20?mg/day), and maximum doses (10/80 or 40?mg/day).

Results: At all doses and across doses, ezetimibe/simvastatin reduced LDL‐C levels significantly more (52–61%) than rosuvastatin (46–57%; p ≤ 0.001). Significantly greater percentages of all patients (p < 0.001) and high risk patients (p ≤ 0.005) attained LDL‐C levels < 70?mg/dL (1.8?mmol/L) following ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment compared with rosuvastatin at the prespecified doses and across doses. Ezetimibe/simvastatin also produced significantly greater reductions in total cholesterol (?p < 0.001), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (?p < 0.001), lipid ratios (?p ≤ 0.003), and apolipoprotein B (?p < 0.05). Reductions in triglycerides were significantly greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin than rosuvastatin at the usual starting (?p = 0.004) and next highest (?p = 0.006) doses, and across all doses (?p < 0.001). Increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and decreases in high sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP) were similar between treatment groups. Safety profiles were comparable for both treatments; however, the percent of patients with proteinuria was significantly higher following rosuvastatin treatment than ezetimibe/simvastatin, respectively at 10?mg versus 10/20?mg/day (?p = 0.004) and 40?mg versus 10/80?mg/day (?p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Ezetimibe/simvastatin was more effective than rosuvastatin in LDL‐C lowering, and provided greater or comparable improvements in other lipid measures and hsCRP at the approved usual starting, next highest, and maximum doses in hypercholesterolemic patients. Although the doses compared in this study were not equivalent on a milligram basis, the results provide clinically relevant information regarding the use of these drugs for initial therapy and for subsequent use at higher doses when appropriate. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated; however, this study was not powered nor of sufficient duration to assess the prevalence of rare clinical adverse effects. Overall, ezetimibe/simvastatin offers an effective and tolerable treatment option for lipid management. An assessment of its full clinical benefit awaits evaluation in longer-term clinical studies.     

Persistence of atorvastatin and simvastatin among patients with and without prior cardiovascular diseases: a US managed care study

ABSTRACT

Background: In clinical practice, persistence with statin therapy is poor. While little is known about relative persistence to specific statins, previous studies have observed greater persistence in patients who achieve greater degrees of lipid lowering. Identification of statin therapies which improve patient persistence has the potential to improve the quality of patient care and clinical outcomes. Therefore, we assessed patient persistence with atorvastatin and simvastatin in primary and secondary prevention patients enrolled in managed care.

Methods: New statin users aged ≥18 years, both with and without prior cardiovascular (CV) events within the 12 month pre-treatment period, were identified from a large national database of managed care patients. Patients initiated atorvastatin or simvastatin therapy from January 1, 2003 to September 30, 2005 and were continuously enrolled in a covered plan for at least 12 months before and after initiation of statin therapy. Subanalyses of patients ≥65 years were also conducted. Measures of interest included demographic and clinical characteristics of the study samples and persistence of statin utilization over the 1-year follow-up period. Persistence was defined as the number of days a patient remained on treatment in the first year following their index date, measured from the date of first fill to study end or the date of discontinuation.

Results: A total of 129 764 atorvastatin users and 45 558 simvastatin users without prior CV events were included in the study. For those patients with prior CV events, a total of 6888 atorvastatin users and 4443 simvastatin users were included in the study. Median persistence in patients without prior CV events was 50 days longer for patients initiating therapy with atorvastatin than simvastatin (207 vs. 157 days, p < 0.0001) and after adjusting for confounding factors, those treated with atorvastatin were 15% less likely to discontinue therapy during the first year than those treated with simvastatin (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.84, 0.86; p < 0.001). In secondary prevention patients median persistence was 85 days longer in atorvastatin patients than simvastatin patients (266 vs. 181 days, p < 0.0001) and atorvastatin patients were 22% less likely to discontinue therapy (HR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.75, 0.82; p < 0.001). Persistence was worse in the elderly patients, but the relative difference between atorvastatin and simvastatin was similar to the overall patient population.

Conclusions: In patients with and without prior CV disease, persistence is generally poor, even worse in the elderly, but significantly better for atorvastatin patients than simvastatin patients (p < 0.001). Further studies are required to determine whether this is due to differences in cost, effectiveness, side-effects, or other attributes of the statins.

Study limitations: Differences in persistence could be, in part, due to unmeasured confounders although all available variables were adjusted in multivariate analyses. Additionally, the claims database lacks some clinical data such as lipid levels, limiting assessments of statin efficacy, and does not include any reasons for discontinuation of therapy.     

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

ABSTRACT

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

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

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

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

Comparative efficacy of the addition of ezetimibe to statin vs statin titration in patients with hypercholesterolaemia: systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objective:

To systematically review and analyse evidence for cholesterol-lowering efficacy of at least 4 weeks of add-on ezetimibe vs doubling statin dose, in adults with primary hypercholesterolaemia.     

Lipid-lowering drug use in Italian primary care: effects of reimbursement criteria revision

Objective To assess whether the prescribing pattern of lipid-lowering drugs (LLD) changed after reimbursement criteria revision in a general practice in southern Italy. Methods From the Caserta-1 Local Health Service database, 93 general practitioners (GPs) who had consistently sent data about their patients during the years 2003-2005 were recruited. Prevalence of use and incidence of new treatments were calculated for each year, stratified by three drug cohorts: statins, omega-3 fatty acids, and fibrates. Subanalyses by gender, age, and indication of use were performed. Results Overall, 1-year prevalence of LLD use increased from 2003 to 2004. After reimbursement criteria revision (November 2004), a slight decrease was observed for statins, from 41.1 (95% CI: 39.9–42.2) per 1,000 inhabitants in 2004 to 40.3 (39.2–41.5) in 2005, while omega-3 utilization fell markedly: 14.6 (13.9–15.3) vs. 5.4 (5.0–5.8). The use of both statins and omega-3 fatty acids was reduced particularly for primary prevention. On the other hand, utilization of statins increased in diabetic patients and as secondary prevention from 2004 to 2005. Concerning individual molecules, 1-year prevalence of use of any statin declined from 2004 to 2005, except for rosuvastatin. Conclusions Revision of reimbursement criteria led to significant changes in the trend in LLD use in general practice in southern Italy: (1) statin utilization was slightly reduced in 2005, although it increased in certain categories, such as diabetic patients, and (2) omega-3 fatty acid use was strongly reduced even though a higher use in post-infarction cases was reported.     

Effect of statins on lipoprotein receptor expression in cell lines from human mast cells and basophils

Objective Statins are potent inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase and widely used to treat hyperlipidaemia. Apart from their direct lipid-lowering effects, statins may also influence lipid metabolism through modulation of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors. Basophils and mast cells have been reported to express LDL receptors and have been implicated in atherogenesis. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of statins on the interactions of ¹²⁵I-LDL with purified primary human blood basophils, a human basophil cell line, KU812, and a human mast cell line, HMC-1.Methods Direct binding experiments were carried out with the primary basophils and KU812 as well as HMC-1 cells before and after pretreatment of the cells with atorvastatin, simvastatin, or cerivastatin. The effects of these three statins on the LDL-uptake and degradation as well as on thymidine incorporation in the cells were also studied.Results Primary basophils, HMC-1 and KU812 cells expressed two classes of LDL binding sites. Exposure to atorvastatin, simvastatin or cerivastatin increased significantly (P<0.05) the number of ¹²⁵I-LDL binding sites on primary basophils and HMC-1 as well as KU812 cells. The effects of the statins were dose dependent. The statins also enhanced the uptake and degradation of LDL in primary basophils, HMC-1 and KU812 cells. The increase in the number of LDL binding sites induced by statins was abolished by mevalonic acid (200 mol/l). Statins had no effect on the thymidine incorporation into the cells in an unstimulated condition.Conclusion Our results provide evidence for the upregulation of LDL binding sites on human basophils and mast cells by statins. We hypothesise that effects of statins on the lipid metabolism might also involve basophils and mast cells.     

普伐他汀治疗慢性舒张性心力衰竭的临床研究

目的研究他汀类药物治疗慢性舒张性心力衰竭的临床效果。方法选择2007年1月至2008年1月笔者所在医院收治的舒张性心力衰竭患者50例作为研究对象,在常规予以强心、利尿、硝酸酯类药物治疗的基础上加用普伐他汀治疗6个月,同时选择20例相似患者作为对照组,随访观察患者心功能改善情况、治疗效果情况。结果两组患者各心功能监测指标与治疗前比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05,P〈0．01）,其中,治疗后患者左心室质量（LVM）、舒张早期血流的峰值流速（EPFV）、舒张早期血流流速积分（ETW）、A／E、收缩期峰值血流流速积分／总流速积分（ATVI／TTVI）和心功能NYAH分级评分改善程度他汀组与对照组比较,差异有显著性（P〈0．05）。治疗后对照组总有效率为65．0％,他汀组总有效率为82．0％,两组间比较,差异有非常显著性（P〈0．01）。结论他汀类药物——普伐他汀治疗舒张性心力衰竭效果较好,且可明显改善患者的心功能。     

他汀类药物致不良反应文献分析

目的:探讨临床一线降脂药他汀类药物致不良反应的一般规律及特点,为临床合理用药提供参考。方法:对2000年～2005年国内报道的使用他汀类药物致不良反应19例进行分类统计、分析。结果:不良反应临床表现以肌肉毒性反应常见,其次为肝脏毒性反应以及其它不良反应(神经系统反应、关节肿痛、过敏等)。结论:应严格掌握用药指征、规范用药剂量及联合用药,密切观察患者临床表现及生化指标监测结果,确保其用药安全,减少不良反应的发生。