Mevalonate in blood and muscle: Response to atorvastatin treatment and the relationship to statin intolerance in patients with coronary heart disease.

Statin-associated muscle symptoms are frequently reported and often lead to discontinuation of statin therapy with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. In vitro studies suggest that statin-mediated inhibition of the mevalonate pathway leads to muscle cell toxicity. We aimed to determine the relationship between mevalonate, LDL-cholesterol, and atorvastatin metabolites in patients with coronary heart disease and self-perceived muscle side effects. Furthermore, we assessed the correlation between mevalonate in blood and muscle and the relationship to statin intolerance due to muscle symptoms. We used blood plasma from a randomized crossover trial (n = 70) and muscle biopsies and plasma from a subgroup in a subsequent open intervention study (n = 26). Both studies tested atorvastatin 40 mg/day. Seven patients did not tolerate ≥3 statins throughout the follow-up and were classified as statin-intolerant. Mevalonate in blood plasma decreased during atorvastatin treatment (median difference -38%, range -77% to 43%, p < 0.001), whereas mevalonate in muscle tissue was not lowered (0.05%, range -47% to 145%). Mevalonate correlated poorly with LDL-cholesterol and atorvastatin metabolites (Spearman's rho -0.28 to 0.10). The statin-intolerant patients had a smaller reduction in circulating mevalonate compared with the tolerant patients; median difference -8.1 (-22 to 3.5) nmol/L versus -25 (-93 to 12) nmol/L, p = 0.028. A similar observation was made for LDL-cholesterol. Cutoffs based on these biomarkers classified >50% correctly as tolerant. Inhibition of the mevalonate pathway does not appear to be the mechanism underlying statin intolerance in the present study. Further studies of mevalonate as a biomarker for statin tolerance are needed to clarify the potential.

Pharmacokinetic Comparison of a Fixed-Dose Combination of Candesartan Cilexetil/Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Versus Co-administration of Individual Formulations in Healthy Participants.

INTRODUCTION: Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of angiotensin II receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, and statins are conventional therapeutic interventions prescribed for cardiovascular diseases. This study aimed at drawing a comparison between the pharmacokinetics and safety of an FDC and the corresponding individual formulations in healthy subjects. METHODS: A randomized, open-label, single-dose, three-sequence, three-period, partially repeated crossover study was conducted with a cohort of healthy volunteers. A 14-day washout period was maintained between each of the three periods. In this study, candesartan cilexetil, amlodipine, and atorvastatin was administered orally as FDCs of 16/10/40 mg in study 1 and 16/5/20 mg in study 2. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) of candesartan, amlodipine, and atorvastatin were estimated as the geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the FDC to individual formulations. If the within-subject coefficient of variation (CVwr) of Cmax was greater than 0.3, the bioequivalence (BE) range calculated using the reference-scaled average bioequivalence was used to assess whether the 90% CI was within the BE range. RESULTS: The GMRs (90% CIs) for the AUClast for candesartan and amlodipine were 0.9612 (0.9158-1.0089)/0.9965 (0.9550-1.0397) and 1.0033 (0.9800-1.0271)/1.0067 (0.9798-1.0344), and the GMRs (90% CIs) for Cmax were 0.9600 (0.8953-1.0294)/0.9851 (0.9368-1.0359) and 1.0198 (0.9950-1.0453)/1.0003 (0.9694-1.0321) in studies 1 and 2, respectively. The extended BE ranges calculated from the CVwr of the Cmax of atorvastatin were 0.7814-1.2797 and 0.7415-1.3485, respectively. The GMRs (90% CIs) for the AUClast of atorvastatin were 1.0532 (1.0082-1.1003)/1.0252 (0.9841-1.0680), and the GMRs (90% CIs) for Cmax were 1.0630 (0.9418-1.1997)/0.9888 (0.8792-1.1120) in studies 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Cmax and AUClast values of candesartan cilexetil/amlodipine/atorvastatin 16/10/40 mg and 16/5/20 mg, respectively, were within the BE ranges. There were no clinically significant differences in safety between the two formulations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, study 1: NCT04478097; study 2: NCT04627207.

Validation of a novel direct method to determine reduced adherence to atorvastatin therapy.

AIMS: Objective methods to determine statin adherence are requested to improve lipid management. We have recently established a method to detect reduced adherence to atorvastatin therapy with cut-off values based on the sum of atorvastatin and its major metabolites in the blood. We aimed to validate this method in patients with and without cardiovascular disease, and optimize previous cut-off values. METHODS AND RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic study included 60 participants treated with atorvastatin 20 mg (N = 20), 40 mg (N = 20), and 80 mg (N = 20). Atorvastatin was then stopped and blood samples collected from day zero to day four. Quantification of the parent drug and its metabolites in blood plasma was performed with a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay. The cut-off values for reduced adherence were validated and optimized by calculating diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. Our candidate cut-off value of dose-normalized six-component sum of atorvastatin plus metabolites <0.10 nM/mg provided a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 93% for detecting ≥2 omitted doses. An optimized cut-off <0.062 nM/mg provided a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 100%. An alternative simplified two-component metabolite sum with a cut-off value <0.05 nM/mg provided a sensitivity of 98% and a specificity of 76%. An optimized cut-off <0.02 nM/mg provided a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 98%. CONCLUSION: This validation study confirms that our direct method discriminates reduced adherence from adherence to atorvastatin therapy with high diagnostic accuracy. The method may improve lipid management in clinical practice and serve as a useful tool in future studies.

Ganoderic acid A attenuates high-fat-diet-induced liver injury in rats by regulating the lipid oxidation and liver inflammation.

Ganoderic Acid A (GA) has many pharmacological effects such as anti-tumor, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and immunosuppressive effects. However, the protective effect of GA on liver injury has not been reported. This study aimed to investigate the action of GA on insufficient methionine and choline combined with high-fat diet (HFD)-induced non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in rats. NAFLD model was established by insufficient methionine and choline combined with high fat feeding to rats. The levels of Acetyl-CoA carboxylase, fatty acid synthase, sterol regulatory element binding protein, liver X receptors, AMP-activated protein kinase, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α, PPARg coactivator 1α and NF-κB pathway in the liver were detected by western blot. The results of this study demonstrated that the expression of GA can not only significantly decrease the live weight and liver weight per body weight of HFD mice, but also restore the alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, total bilirubin levels, triglyceride and cholesterol in serum. In addition, the expression of GA increased the levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in serum, ameliorated pathological changes and decreased NAS score of mice's liver. In conclusion, the treatment with GA could improve NAFLD in rats by regulating the levels of signaling events involved in free fatty acid production, lipid oxidation and liver inflammation.

The Lipoxin Receptor/FPR2 Agonist BML-111 Protects Mouse Skin Against Ultraviolet B Radiation.

Excessive exposure to UV, especially UVB, is the most important risk factor for skin cancer and premature skin aging. The identification of the specialized pro-resolving lipid mediators (SPMs) challenged the preexisting paradigm of how inflammation ends. Rather than a passive process, the resolution of inflammation relies on the active production of SPMs, such as Lipoxins (Lx), Maresins, protectins, and Resolvins. LXA4 is an SPM that exerts its action through ALX/FPR2 receptor. Stable ALX/FPR2 agonists are required because SPMs can be quickly metabolized within tissues near the site of formation. BML-111 is a commercially available synthetic ALX/FPR2 receptor agonist with analgesic, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory properties. Based on that, we aimed to determine the effect of BML-111 in a model of UVB-induced skin inflammation in hairless mice. We demonstrated that BML-111 ameliorates the signs of UVB-induced skin inflammation by reducing neutrophil recruitment and mast cell activation. Reduction of these cells by BML-111 led to lower number of sunburn cells formation, decrease in epidermal thickness, collagen degradation, cytokine production (TNF-α, IL-1ß, IL-6, TGF, and IL-10), and oxidative stress (observed by an increase in total antioxidant capacity and Nrf2 signaling pathway), indicating that BML-111 might be a promising drug to treat skin disorders.

Effects of Switching from Treatment with Amlodipine and Atorvastatin Using Two Pills to an Equal Dose of Single-Pill Therapy in Japanese Outpatients.

This study examined whether switching from amlodipine and atorvastatin treatment using two pills to an equal dose of single-pill therapy is useful in Japanese outpatients. We retrospectively reviewed data obtained from 94 outpatients for whom treatment with two pills, namely amlodipine and atorvastatin, was switched to an equal dose of single-pill therapy in 11 hospitals. The criterion for enrollment in this study was that patients had switched their medication without changing other anti-hypertensive or anti-cholesterol drugs. Neither systolic nor diastolic blood pressure changed significantly after switching to an equal dose of single-pill therapy, whereas low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels significantly decreased after the medication was switched from 94±24 mg/dl to 89±17 mg/dl (p=0.015). A switch from medication with two separate pills of amlodipine and atorvastatin to an equal dose of single-pill therapy resulted in an overall decrease in LDL cholesterol. The results indicated that the switch to single-pill therapy might be a useful treatment.

Ganoderic acid A is the effective ingredient of Ganoderma triterpenes in retarding renal cyst development in polycystic kidney disease.

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is one of the most common life-threatening monogenetic diseases characterized by progressive enlargement of fluid-filled renal cysts. Our previous study has shown that Ganoderma triterpenes (GT) retards PKD renal cyst development. In the present study we identified the effective ingredient of GT in suppression of kidney cyst development. Using an in vitro MDCK cystogenesis model, we identified ganoderic acid A (GA-A) as the most promising candidate among the 12 ganoderic acid (GA) monomers. We further showed that GA-A (6.25-100 µM) significantly inhibited cyst growth in MDCK cyst model and embryonic kidney cyst model in vitro, and the inhibitory effect was reversible. In kidney-specific Pkd1 knockout (kPKD) mice displaying severe cystic kidney disease, administration of GA-A (50 mg· kg-1 ·d-1, sc) significantly attenuated renal cyst development. In both MDCK cells and kidney of kPKD mice, we revealed that GA-A dose-dependently downregulated the Ras/MAPK signaling pathway. The expression of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) was also suppressed, suggesting a possible effect of GA-A on cell proliferation. These experimental data suggest that GA-A may be the main ingredient of GT as a potential therapeutic reagent for treating ADPKD.

EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF A SINGLE-PILL COMBINATION OF ATORVASTATIN/AMLODIPINE IN PATIENTS WITH ARTERIAL HYPERTENSION AND DYSLIPIDEMIA.

- The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of a single-pill combination of atorvastatin/amlodipine in patients with arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and moderate to high cardiovascular risk. This prospective study included 243 patients with arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and moderate to high cardiovascular risk, mean age 63.3±9.8 years. All patients were prescribed a treatment with one of the following doses of a single-pill combination of atorvastatin/amlodipine: 10/5, 10/10, 20/5 or 20/10 mg daily. The follow-up period was 3 months. The mean baseline values of the systolic and diastolic blood pressure were 155.7±16.2 and 92.0±9.2 mm Hg, respectively. At month 3, the respective mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure values were 136.9±26.9 and 80.6±5.1 mm Hg. The mean baseline values of total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were 6.6±1.2 and 4.4±1.1 mmol/L, respectively. At month 3, the respective mean values of total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were 5.1±0.9 and 2.9±1.0 mmol/L. Treatment was discontinued in 9 (3.7%) patients due to adverse events. In conclusion, treatment with the single-pill combination of atorvastatin/amlodipine was effective and well tolerated by the patients with arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and moderate to high cardiovascular risk.

Who benefits from fixed-dose combinations? Two-year statin adherence trajectories in initiators of combined amlodipine/atorvastatin therapy.

PURPOSE: We compared statin adherence in individuals initiating combined amlodipine/atorvastatin therapy as a fixed-dose (FDC) or free combination and identified subgroups benefiting most from FDCs. METHODS: We used a 10% sample of Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme dispensing data (2005-2015) to identify individuals initiating amlodipine and atorvastatin as an FDC (n = 3996) or free combination (n = 5434), with or without prior statin dispensing. We measured the proportion of days covered in each 30-day period over 24 months and classified patterns of statin adherence using group-based trajectory models. We identified predictors of adherence trajectories using logistic regression. RESULTS: The median age was 71 years, and 53% were female. We identified 4 patterns of statin adherence: near-perfect adherence (n = 5383), good adherence (n = 1893), declining adherence (n = 1247), and early nonadherence (n = 907). Compared with the free combination, FDC initiators were more likely to have near-perfect adherence if they were previously statin adherent irrespective of amlodipine dose (amlodipine 5 mg: OR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.38-1.87; amlodipine 10 mg: OR = 2.39, 95% CI 1.63-3.51) or they were previously statin nonadherent and initiated on the 5 mg amlodipine dose (OR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.50-2.32). Statin-naïve individuals initiating on the FDC with 10 mg amlodipine were less likely to have near-perfect adherence (OR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.88) and more likely to have early nonadherence (OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.17-2.55). CONCLUSIONS: The amlodipine/atorvastatin FDC was associated with greater statin adherence among prevalent statin users, and individuals who initiated on lower amlodipine doses. The FDCs did not improve adherence in statin-naïve individuals and in some cases resulted in poorer adherence.

Is Time an Important Problem in Management of Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia by Using an Amlodipine-Atorvastatin Single Pill Combination?

BACKGROUND Is the timing of dosing for amlodipine and atorvastatin important with regard to therapeutic efficacy? To answer this question, we designed an outpatient, practice-based, case-control study lasting 8 weeks. MATERIAL AND METHODS Two hundred patients were divided into 2 groups: in Group I, patients were provided with a single pill containing amlodipine/atorvastatin (5/20 mg) to be taken each night at 10 pm, and in Group II, patients were taking amlodipine (5 mg) and atorvastatin (20 mg) each morning at 7 am. RESULTS Our results indicated no obvious difference in blood pressure control between the 2 groups. Taking amlodipine at night not only lowered blood pressure, but it also provided better control during the peak blood pressure in the morning. Hypercholesterolemia control in the 2 groups was also not significantly different, taking atorvastatin in the morning was as effective as dosing at night in patients with hypercholesterolemia. While the carotid IMT, hs-CRP, and LVMI were significantly lower after treatment, no differences were found between the 2 groups. Although no obvious difference was found in adverse drug reactions between the 2 groups, compliance was much better in the single-pill group than in patients taking the 2 medications separately. CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, single-pill amlodipine-atorvastatin taken at night can lower blood pressure and reduce the morning peak blood pressure levels the next day. Additionally, this dosing method could improve patient adherence to the therapy.

[One year persistence of atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination versus atorvastatin therapy]. / Az atorvastatin/amlodipin fix kombináció versus az atorvastatinterápia a terápiahuség tükrében.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertension and dyslipidemia are modifiable cardiovascular risk factors. In Hungary hypertension and dyslipidemia are quite frequent conditions. The patients' adherence is very important factor to reach the targets. AIM: The aim of the authors was to investigate the one-year persistence of the atorvastatin therapy and atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination. METHOD: National Health Insurance Found prescriptions database of Hungary on pharmacy claims between October 1, 2012 and September 30, 2013 was analyzed. The authors identified patients who filled prescriptions for atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination and atorvastatin prescribed for the first time. Patients did not receive similar drugs for one year before the study. To model the persistence, the apparatus of survival analysis was used, where "survival" was the time to abandon the medication. As it was available to month precision, discrete time survival analysis was applied: a generalized linear model was estimated with complementary log-log link function with the kind of drug being the only explanatory variable. RESULTS: During the trial period, atorvastatin and atorvastatin plus amlodipine fixed dose combination was started in 192,579 and 24,433 patients, respectively. One year persistence rate in patients with atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination was 43%, and 21% in patients with atorvastatin therapy. The 360-days-restricted study period, the mean duration of persistence was 221.4 (SE: 0.894) days in patients on atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination and 153.0 days (SE: 0.297) in those on atorvastatin regimen. The hazard of discontinuation was almost twofold higher during treatment with atorvastatin therapy compared with the use of the atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination (hazard ratio = 1.85, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant difference between the one-year persistence of atorvastatin therapy and atorvastatin plus amlodipine fixed dose combination. The result demonstrate that atorvastatin and amlodipine fixed dose combination is favourable to reach double goals on blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol.

AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v PFIZER: EVERGREENING AND MARKET POWER AS A BLOCKBUSTER DRUG GOES OFF PATENT.

In Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 113, the ACCC alleged that Pfizer's "Project LEAP" involved a scheme to lock pharmacists into substituting its generic version of the high sales volume anti-cholesterol drug, patent-expired atorvastatin (Lipitor), which took advantage of a substantial degree of market power for a purpose proscribed by s 46(1)(c) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). The ACCC also claimed that Pfizer's actions constituted a course of exclusive dealing pursuant to s 47(1)(d) and (e) for the proscribed purpose of lessening competition. Flick J in the Federal Court of Australia, in a judgment heavy with quotations but sparse in reasoning, dismissed the ACCC's Amended Originating Application alleging abuse of market power and ordered the ACCC to pay Pfizer's costs. The ACCC has now appealed the decision. This column explores this case in the context of Pfizer's broader strategies to preserve its income globally from this high sales volume drug in the period following its patent expiration.

[Comparative Randomized Study of the Effects of Long-Term Therapy With Rosuvastatin and Combination of Atorvastatin and Ezetimibe on Carbohydrate Metabolism and Adipokines Levels in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Diabetes Mellitus].

OBJECTIVE: This open randomized study compares the effects of 24-week-long treatment with rosuvastatin and with atorvastatin coadministered with ezetimibe on the parameters of carbohydrate metabolism and the plasma levels of adipokynes in patients with coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). METHOD: A total of 31 patients with coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus or IGT were recruited in the study. Patients were randomized into two groups: group 1 included patients who received rosuvastatin therapy in an average dose of 12.5 mg/day (n = 16); group 2 included patients who received combination treatment with atorvastatin in an average dose of 13.3 mg/day and ezetimibe (10 mg) (n = 15). Plasma levels of lipids, apoB, apoA1, glucose, insulin, leptin, and adiponectin were evaluated; HOMA-IR index (an empty stomach insulin, mu/l x fasting glucose, mmol/l)/22.5) was calculated. RESULTS: During the therapy, the LDL-C and apoB levels decreased by 51.7% and 42.3% in group 1 and by 51.8% and 44.9% in group 2, respectively. Reduction in the triglyceride levels was significantly more pronounced in group 2 than in group 1: 43.2% vs 17.4% (p < 0.02), whereas we did not observed significant changes of HDL-C and apoA1 in either group. The increases in basal glycemia, basal insulinemia, HbA1c levels (from 6.47% [6.10-7.02%] to 6.98% 16.23-8.18%]), and HOMA-IR (from 2.14 [1.68-3.51] to 4.30 [2.31-5.77]) were found only in group 2 (p < 0.05 for all). These changes were observed in 75% of patients of group 2 independently of the presence of diabetic state or IGT, but the changes were more pronounced in patients with disturbed carbohydrate metabolism. Changes of leptin levels during the therapy were diverse: 73% patients of group 1 demonstrated decrease in the leptin levels, whereas 67% of patients in group 2 experienced 57%-increase in the leptin concentrations. Degree of increased basal glycemia was associated with increase in the leptin levels (r = 0.37, p = 0.04) in the entire group of patients (n = 31). Furthermore, changes in leptin levels were negatively associated with decreased adiponectin levels (r = -0.57, p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: In case of equivalent degree of the decrease in LDL-C levels, 24-week combination therapy with atorvastatin and ezetimibe, unlike rosuvastatin treatment, induced increases in basal glycemia, insulinemia, HbA1c, and HOMA-IR index irrespective of the presence of carbohydrate metabolism disturbances before treatment. Our data suggest that adiponectin and leptin are involved in the mechanisms of adverse metabolic effects of the combination of atorvastatin and ezetimibe.

Impact of Dual Lipid-Lowering Strategy With Ezetimibe and Atorvastatin on Coronary Plaque Regression in Patients With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Multicenter Randomized Controlled PRECISE-IVUS Trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite standard statin therapy, a majority of patients retain a high "residual risk" of cardiovascular events. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of ezetimibe plus atorvastatin versus atorvastatin monotherapy on the lipid profile and coronary atherosclerosis in Japanese patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: This trial was a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study. Eligible patients who underwent PCI were randomly assigned to atorvastatin alone or atorvastatin plus ezetimibe (10 mg) daily. Atorvastatin was uptitrated with a treatment goal of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) <70 mg/dl. Serial volumetric intravascular ultrasound was performed at baseline and again at 9 to 12 months to quantify the coronary plaque response in 202 patients. RESULTS: The combination of atorvastatin/ezetimibe resulted in lower levels of LDL-C than atorvastatin monotherapy (63.2 ± 16.3 mg/dl vs. 73.3 ± 20.3 mg/dl; p < 0.001). For the absolute change in percent atheroma volume (PAV), the mean difference between the 2 groups (-1.538%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.079% to 0.003%) did not exceed the pre-defined noninferiority margin of 3%, but the absolute change in PAV did show superiority for the dual lipid-lowering strategy (-1.4%; 95% CI: -3.4% to -0.1% vs. -0.3%; 95% CI: -1.9% to 0.9% with atorvastatin alone; p = 0.001). For PAV, a significantly greater percentage of patients who received atorvastatin/ezetimibe showed coronary plaque regression (78% vs. 58%; p = 0.004). Both strategies had acceptable side effect profiles, with a low incidence of laboratory abnormalities and cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard statin monotherapy, the combination of statin plus ezetimibe showed greater coronary plaque regression, which might be attributed to cholesterol absorption inhibition-induced aggressive lipid lowering. (Plaque Regression With Cholesterol Absorption Inhibitor or Synthesis Inhibitor Evaluated by Intravascular Ultrasound [PRECISE-IVUS]; NCT01043380).

The effects of atorvastatin on antioxidant/antiinflammatory properties of HDLs in hypercholesterolemics.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Hypercholesterolemia is characterized by changes in lipid profile, nitric oxide pathway, and oxidative stress markers, but functions of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) were not well established in hypercholesterolemic subjects treated with atorvastatin. In this study, we aimed to evaluate effects of atorvastatin treatment on functionality of HDL, oxidative stress, and endothelial functions in hypercholesterolemic subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients (20 females, 10 males) aged from 40 to 60 years and diagnosed as hypercholesterolemic were included. Patients were treated with 10 mg/day atorvastatin for 3 months. Markers of endothelial functions, namely asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA), homocysteine, and nitric oxide (NO), and markers of oxidative status, namely malondialdehyde (MDA), antioxidant potential (AOP), paraoxonase 1 (PON1), and arylesterase, were measured. Before and after atorvastatin treatment, glucose, lipid parameters, and antioxidant/antiinflammatory HDL levels were also measured. RESULTS: ADMA and homocysteine levels were decreased whereas NO levels were increased with atorvastatin therapy. MDA levels were decreased but AOP, PON1, and arylesterase levels and antinflammatory characteristics of HDLs were increased. Furthermore, lipid profiles of the patients improved with atorvastatin therapy. CONCLUSION: Hypercholesterolemia is a cause of oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction, and proinflammatory HDL levels. Atorvastatin is a beneficial pharmacological modulator of impaired antiinflammatory HDL-C levels, endothelial functions, and oxidative status against atherosclerosis indicating pleiotropic effects of statins.

On-Statin Resistin, Leptin, and Risk of Recurrent Coronary Events After Hospitalization for an Acute Coronary Syndrome (from the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 22 Study).

Resistin is an adipokine secreted by macrophages and inflammatory cells linked to insulin resistance and inflammation. Leptin is an adipokine regulator of appetite and obesity. Although circulating levels of both have been associated with atherosclerosis, few data have reported their relation to coronary events in the context of statin therapy. This study measured on-statin levels of both resistin and leptin through enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in a nested case-control cohort (n = 176 cases with coronary death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina pectoris observed in follow-up matched 1:1 to 176 controls) derived from the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 22 study, a randomized controlled trial of atorvastatin 80 mg/day versus pravastatin 40 mg/day in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome. Resistin demonstrated a moderate association with high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP; Spearman rho = 0.25, p <0.0001). On-statin resistin levels were linked to recurrent coronary events in conditional logistic regression analysis adjusted for additional risk factors including hsCRP and history of diabetes (tertile 3 vs 1 adjusted odds ratio 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04 to 4.19). An additive risk was noted when patients were stratified by resistin and glycated hemoglobin levels. In contrast, leptin levels were associated with obesity, diabetes, triglycerides, and hsCRP (p <0.001 for each) but demonstrated no association with recurrent coronary events (tertile 3 vs 1 adjusted odds ratio 0.72; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.83). In conclusion, on-statin resistin, but not leptin, is an independent marker of residual risk for recurrent coronary events in patients after hospitalization for an acute coronary syndrome.

Cholesterol ester transfer protein inhibition by TA-8995 in patients with mild dyslipidaemia (TULIP): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Dyslipidaemia remains a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease and additional lipid-modifying treatments are warranted to further decrease the cardiovascular disease burden. We assessed the safety, tolerability and efficacy of a novel cholesterol esterase transfer protein (CETP) inhibitor TA-8995 in patients with mild dyslipidaemia. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 2 trial, we recruited patients (aged 18-75 years) from 17 sites (hospitals and independent clinical research organisations) in the Netherlands and Denmark with fasting LDL cholesterol levels between 2·5 mmol/L and 4·5 mmol/L, HDL cholesterol levels between 0·8 and 1·8 mmol/L and triglyceride levels below 4·5 mmol/L after washout of lipid-lowering treatments. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation schedule to receive one of the following nine treatments: a once a day dose of 1 mg, 2·5 mg, 5 mg, or 10 mg TA-8995 or matching placebo; 10 mg TA-8995 plus 20 mg atorvastatin; 10 mg TA-8995 plus 10 mg rosuvastatin or 20 mg atorvastatin or 10 mg rosuvastatin alone. We overencapsulated statins to achieve masking. The primary outcome was percentage change in LDL cholesterol and HDL cholesterol from baseline at week 12, analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01970215. FINDINGS: Between Aug 15, 2013, and Jan 10, 2014, 364 patients were enrolled. At week 12, LDL cholesterol levels were reduced by 27·4% in patients assigned to the 1 mg dose, 32·7% in patients given the 2·5 mg dose, 45·3% in those given the 5 mg dose, and 45·3% in those given the 10 mg dose (p<0·0001). LDL cholesterol levels were reduced by 68·2% in patients given 10 mg TA-8995 plus atorvastatin, and by 63·3% in patients given rosuvastatin plus 10 mg TA-8995 (p<0·0001). A daily dose of 1 mg TA-8995 increased HDL cholesterol levels by 75·8%, 2·5 mg by 124·3%, 5 mg by 157·1%, and 10 mg dose by 179·0% (p<0·0001). In patients receiving 10 mg TA-8995 and 20 mg atorvastatin HDL cholesterol levels increased by 152·1% and in patients receiving 10 mg TA-8995 and 10 mg rosuvastatin by 157·5%. We recorded no serious adverse events or signs of liver or muscle toxic effects. INTERPRETATION: TA-8995, a novel CETP inhibitor, is well tolerated and has beneficial effects on lipids and apolipoproteins in patients with mild dyslipidaemia. A cardiovascular disease outcome trial is needed to translate these effects into a reduction of cardiovascular disease events. FUNDING: Dezima.

Alirocumab as Add-On to Atorvastatin Versus Other Lipid Treatment Strategies: ODYSSEY OPTIONS I Randomized Trial.

CONTEXT: Despite current standard of care, many patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) still have elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Alirocumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody inhibitor of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the LDL-C-lowering efficacy of adding alirocumab vs other common lipid-lowering strategies. DESIGN, PATIENTS, AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients (n = 355) with very high CVD risk and LDL-C levels of 70 mg/dL or greater or high CVD risk and LDL-C of 100 mg/dL or greater on baseline atorvastatin 20 or 40 mg were randomized to one of the following: 1) add-on alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) sc; 2) add-on ezetimibe 10 mg/d; 3) double atorvastatin dose; or 4) for atorvastatin 40 mg regimen only, switch to rosuvastatin 40 mg. For patients not achieving protocol-defined LDL-C goals, the alirocumab dose was increased (blinded) at week 12 to 150 mg Q2W. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary end point was percentage change in calculated LDL-C from baseline to 24 weeks (intent to treat). RESULTS: Among atorvastatin 20 and 40 mg regimens, respectively, add-on alirocumab reduced LDL-C levels by 44.1% and 54.0% (P < .001 vs all comparators); add-on ezetimibe, 20.5% and 22.6%; doubling of atorvastatin dose, 5.0% and 4.8%; and switching atorvastatin 40 mg to rosuvastatin 40 mg, 21.4%. Most alirocumab-treated patients (87.2% and 84.6%) achieved their LDL-C goals. Most alirocumab-treated patients (86%) maintained their 75-mg Q2W regimen. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 65.4% of alirocumab patients vs 64.4% ezetimibe and 63.8% double atorvastatin/switch to rosuvastatin (data were pooled). CONCLUSIONS: Adding alirocumab to atorvastatin provided significantly greater LDL-C reductions vs adding ezetimibe, doubling atorvastatin dose, or switching to rosuvastatin and enabled greater LDL-C goal achievement.