Safety and Effectiveness of High-Intensity Statins Versus Low/Moderate-Intensity Statins Plus Ezetimibe in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease for Reaching LDL-C Goals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It remains controversial whether adding ezetimibe to low/moderate-intensity statins has a more beneficial impact on the treatment efficacy and safety of patients with existing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared to high-intensity statin regimens. HYPOTHESIS: A combination of low/moderate-intensity statins plus ezetimibe might be more effective and safer than high-intensity statin monotherapy. METHODS: We searched databases for randomized controlled trials comparing lipid profile alterations, drug-related adverse events, and MACE components between high-intensity statin monotherapy and low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy. Pooled risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Our comprehensive search resulted in 32 studies comprising 6162 patients treated with monotherapy against 5880 patients on combination therapy. Combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels compared to monotherapy (MD = -6.6, 95% CI: -10.6 to -2.5); however, no significant differences were observed in other lipid parameters. Furthermore, the combination therapy group experienced a lower risk of myalgia (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.57) and discontinuation due to adverse events (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.51-0.74). The occurrence of MACE was similar between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adding ezetimibe to low/moderate-intensity statins resulted in a greater reduction in LDL-C levels, a lower rate of myalgia, and less drug discontinuation compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with existing cardiovascular disease. However, according to our meta-analysis, the observed reduction in LDL-C levels in the combination group did not correlate with a reduction in MACE compared to the high-intensity statin group.

Repurposing ezetimibe as a neuroprotective agent in a rotenone-induced Parkinson's disease model in rats: Role of AMPK/SIRT-1/PGC-1α signaling and autophagy.

As a severe neurological disorder, Parkinson's disease (PD) is distinguished by dopaminergic neuronal degeneration in the substantia nigra (SN), culminating in motor impairments. Several studies have shown that activation of the AMPK/SIRT1/PGC1α pathway contributes to an increase in mitochondrial biogenesis and is a promising candidate for the management of PD. Furthermore, turning on the AMPK/SIRT1/PGC1α pathway causes autophagy activation, which is fundamental for maintaining neuronal homeostasis. Interestingly, ezetimibe is an antihyperlipidemic agent that was recently reported to possess pleiotropic properties in neurology by triggering the phosphorylation and activation of AMPK. Thus, our study aimed to investigate the neuroprotective potential of ezetimibe in rats with rotenone-induced PD by activating AMPK. Adult male Wistar rats received rotenone (1.5 mg/kg, s.c.) every other day for 21 days to induce experimental PD. Rats were treated with ezetimibe (5 mg/kg/day, i.p.) 1 h before rotenone. Ezetimibe ameliorated the motor impairments in open field, rotarod and grip strength tests, restored striatal dopamine and tyrosine hydroxylase in the SN, up-regulated p-AMPK, SIRT1, and PGC1α striatal expression, upsurged the expression of ULK1, beclin1, and LC3II/I, reduced Bax/Bcl2 ratio, and alleviated rotenone-induced histopathological changes in striatum and SN. Our findings also verified the contribution of AMPK activation to the neuroprotective effect of ezetimibe by using the AMPK inhibitor dorsomorphin. Together, this work revealed that ezetimibe exerts a neuroprotective impact in rotenone-induced PD by activating AMPK/SIRT-1/PGC-1α signaling, enhancing autophagy, and attenuating apoptosis. Thus, ezetimibe's activation of AMPK could hold significant therapeutic promise for PD management.

Preincubation-dependent inhibition of organic anion transporting polypeptide 2B1.

Preincubation with inhibitor in organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP) in vitro assays may increase the inhibition potency of inhibitors compared to conventional inhibition assays with only short inhibitor coincubation with substrate. The decrease in IC50 may affect prediction of drug-drug interactions (DDI) involving these transporters and inhibitors. Only few drugs, however, have been assessed for the preincubation-dependent inhibition of the OATP2B1 transporter. Therefore, we studied the effect of preincubation on OATP2B1 inhibition with five known OATP2B1 inhibitors (atorvastatin, erlotinib, ezetimibe, ticagrelor and simeprevir) in HEK293 cells transiently overexpressing OATP2B1. IC50 values were determined with and without inhibitor preincubation for 20 min with three different OATP2B1 substrates (dibromofluorescein, DBF; 5-carboxyfluorescein, 5-CF; estrone sulfate). Atorvastatin, ezetimibe, and simeprevir displayed more than 2-fold lower IC50 values after preincubation with at least one of the tested substrates. Altogether, 4 out of 15 inhibitor/substrate combinations exhibited more than 2-fold potentiation of IC50 after inhibitor preincubation. In addition, preincubation by itself, without inhibitor present with the substrate, resulted in more than 50% inhibition of OATP2B1-mediated uptake of DBF and/or 5-CF by atorvastatin, ticagrelor and simeprevir. Thus, erlotinib was the only inhibitor with no indication of potentiation of inhibition by preincubation with any of the tested substrates. In conclusion, preincubation resulted in inhibitor- and substrate-dependent inhibition of OATP2B1. These results support the conclusion that to reduce the risk of false negative DDI prediction, preincubation should be considered also in OATP2B1 inhibition assays.

Differential Adherence to Free and Single-Pill Combination of Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe: Findings from a Real-World Analysis in Italy.

INTRODUCTION: Adherence to cardiovascular drug treatment can significantly benefit from a reduced pill burden, but data on this matter derived from real-life settings are currently scanty. This analysis assessed the possible changes in adherence in patients treated with rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (ROS/EZE) as free multi-pill combination who switched to ROS/EZE as single-pill combination in the setting of real clinical practice in Italy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the administrative databases for a catchment area of about seven million health-assisted residents. Adults receiving ROS/EZE as a single-pill combination from January 2010 to June 2020 (followed up to 2021) were identified. The date of the first prescription of single-pill combination of ROS/EZE was considered as the index date. The analysis included the users of ROS/EZE as a free combination during the year before the index date. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were collected during the period of data availability prior to the index date. Adherence to therapy was evaluated as proportion of days covered (PDC), namely the percentage of days during which a patient had access to medication, in the 12-month interval preceding or following the index date (PDC < 25% non-adherence; PDC = 25-75% partial adherence; PDC > 75% adherence). RESULTS: A total of 1219 patients (61.1% male, aged 66.2 ± 10.4 years) were included. Cardiovascular comorbidities were found in 83.3% of them, diabetes in 26.4%, and a combination of both in 16.2%. Single-pill combination of ROS/EZE was associated with a higher proportion of adherent patients compared to free-pill combination (75.2% vs 51.8%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world analysis suggested that switching from a regimen based on separate pills to one based on a single-pill combination resulted in improved adherence to ROS/EZE therapy.

Lipid-lowering therapy to control low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels is essential for cardiovascular risk prevention. Successful therapy depends on the type of lipid-lowering therapy, i.e., low or high statin intensity and combination of statins with ezetimibe or proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, and adherence to therapy, i.e., whether the patient actually takes their pills as prescribed. If there are fewer pills to be taken, this can help patients to follow their treatment. Single-pill combinations of two drugs could facilitate adherence and thus the chances of reaching the recommended lipid targets. Here, we analyzed a sample of Italian patients with dyslipidemia to examine whether the switch from a free combination of two separate pills of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe to a single-pill combination of the same drugs could improve adherence to therapy. We found that the proportion of adherent patients increased from about just over half (51.8%) to about three-fourths (75.1%) when switching from two-pill to single-pill combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe. These findings suggest that simplifying therapy can help improve patient adherence, which is essential for reaching lipid targets and ultimately for alleviating atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Therapy for Hyperlipidemia.

Significant advances in atherosclerotic cardiovascular (ASCVD) risk stratification and treatment have occurred over the past 10 years. While the lipid panel continues to be the basis of risk estimation, imaging for coronary artery calcium is now widely used in estimating risk at the individual level. Statins remain first-line agents for ASCVD risk reduction but in high-risk patients, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin-9 inhibitors, and bempedoic acid can be added to further reduce individual cardiovascular risk based on results of cardiovascular outcomes trials. Results of randomized control trials do not support use of medications targeted at triglyceride lowering for ASCVD risk reduction, but icosapent ethyl can be considered.

Ezetimibe ketone protects against renal ischemia-reperfusion injury and attenuates oxidative stress via activation of the Nrf2/HO-1 signaling pathway.

Recently, ezetimibe (EZM) has been suggested to be a potent Nrf2 activator that is important for preventing oxidative stress. Interestingly, we found that its metabolite ezetimibe ketone (EZM-K) also has antioxidant effects. Thus, we investigated the role of EZM-K in preventing renal ischemia‒reperfusion injury (RIRI). Cultured NRK-52E cells were subjected to simulated IR with or without EZM-K. Rats were used to simulate in vivo experiments. EZM-K alleviated H2O2-induced apoptosis and reactive oxygen species (ROS) and upregulated Nrf2 and HO-1 levels in NRK-52E cells. A HO-1 and a Nrf2 inhibitor reversed the protective effects of EZM-K. In the rat RIRI model, pretreatment with EZM-K activated the Nrf2/HO-1 signaling pathway, suppressed tubular injury and inflammation, and improved renal function. EZM-K significantly prevented renal injury caused by ischemia‒reperfusion via the Nrf2/HO-1 signaling axis both in vivo and in vitro. The other metabolite of EZM, ezetimibe glucuronide (EZM-G) had no protective effects against ROS in RIRI. EZM-G also had no antioxidant effects and could not activate Nrf2/HO-1 signal pathway. Our findings also indicated the therapeutic potential of EZM-K in preventing RIRI.

Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between the Fixed-Dose Combination of Ezetimibe/Rosuvastatin 10/20 Mg and the Fixed-Dose Combination of Telmisartan/Amlodipine 80/5 Mg in Healthy Subjects.

Background: Management of hypertension and hyperlipidemia, which are common comorbid risk factors for cardiovascular diseases, require multiple medications. The development of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) containing ezetimibe, rosuvastatin, telmisartan, and amlodipine aims to enhance patient adherence and persistence, but the potential interactions among the four medications have not been studied. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions between the FDC of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin 10/20 mg (ER) and the FDC of telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg (TA). Methods: An open-label, single-sequence, three-period, three-treatment crossover study was conducted in healthy male subjects. All subjects received ER for 7 days, TA for 9 days and ER combined with TA for 7 days during each treatment period. For PK analysis of total/free ezetimibe, rosuvastatin, telmisartan, and amlodipine, serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours at steady state. Safety profiles were assessed throughout the study. Results: Thirty-eight subjects were enrolled, and 34 subjects completed the study. The systemic exposure to each active ingredient after coadministration of the two FDCs was similar to that after each FDC alone. The geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals for the maximum plasma concentration (µg/L) and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (h·µg/L) of the combination therapy to monotherapy, assessed at steady state, were as follows: total ezetimibe, 1.0264 (0.8765-1.2017) and 0.9359 (0.7847-1.1163); free ezetimibe, 1.5713 (1.2821-1.9257) and 0.9941 (0.8384-1.1788); rosuvastatin, 2.1673 (1.7807-2.6379) and 1.1714 (0.9992-1.3733); telmisartan, 1.0745 (0.8139-1.4186) and 1.1057 (0.8379-1.4591); and amlodipine, 0.9421 (0.8764-1.0126) and 0.9603 (0.8862-1.0405). Both combination therapy and monotherapy were well tolerated by the subjects. Conclusion: The coadministration of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin 10/20 mg and ezetimibe/rosuvastatin 10/20 mg was well tolerated in healthy subjects, and the PK interaction between those two FDCs was not clinically significant.

The impact of statin-ezetimibe combination therapy versus statin monotherapy on coronary plaque regression in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of statin monotherapy and statin-ezetimibe combination therapy on coronary plaque regression in acute coronary syndrome patients. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted from July to September 2022 and comprised search on PubMed, ScienceDirect and Cochrane databases to identify studies from January 2010 to July 2022 assessing the effects of statin-ezetimibe combination therapy versus statin monotherapy on coronary plaque regression in patients with acute coronary syndrome. The outcomes of interest were total atheroma volume, plaque volume, and percent atheroma volume assessed by intravascular ultrasound. Meta-analyses were performed on the studies, and mean differences with 95% confidence interval were estimated using Review Manager v5.4. RESULTS: Of the 730 studies identified, 12(1.64%) were shortlisted, and, of them, 5(41.7%) were analysed in detail. There were a total of 557 patients with a mean follow-up of 9 ± 2.43 months. The difference between baseline and follow-up showed significant lowering in total atheroma volume, plaque volume, and percent atheroma volume (p<0.05) in the patients who were receiving statin-ezetimibe combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adding ezetimibe to statin medication was found to be significantly more successful in reducing coronary plaque than statin monotherapy.

Continuous Monitoring of Pseudopolymorphic Transition in Ezetimibe Using T1 Relaxation with Time-Domain NMR.

The purpose of this study was to continuously monitor the pseudopolymorphic transition from anhydrate to monohydrate by measuring the NMR relaxation using time-domain NMR (TD-NMR). Taking advantage of the simplicity of the low-field NMR instrument configuration, which is an advantage of TD-NMR, the NMR instrument was connected to a humidity controller to monitor the pseudopolymorphic transition. First, ezetimibe (EZT) monohydrate was prepared from its anhydrate using a saturated salt solution method, and T1 relaxation of EZT monohydrate and anhydrate was measured without a humidity controller. The T1 relaxation results confirmed that EZT anhydrate and monohydrate could be distinguished using T1 relaxation measurement. Next, continuous monitoring was conducted by TD-NMR and connected to a humidity controller. Anhydrous EZT was placed in an NMR glass tube and the T1 relaxation measurement was repeated while maintaining the humidity on the side entering the NMR tube at 80% relative humidity. The T1 relaxation became gradually faster from the initial to middle monitoring phases. The final T1 relaxation was then recovered fully and these T1 relaxation times were the same as the T1 relaxation of EZT monohydrate. This study successfully monitored the pseudopolymorphic transition from EZT anhydrate to monohydrate via NMR relaxation.

The Effect of Different Statin-Based Lipid-Lowering Strategies on C-Reactive Protein Levels in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Statins are lipid-lowering drugs with favorable anti-inflammatory effects. This study aimed to explore different statin-based lipid-lowering strategies to reduce high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP). HYPOTHESIS: The hypothesis is that different statin-based lipid-lowering strategies might reduce hs-CRP. METHODS: This retrospective study included 3653 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Three statin-based lipid-lowering strategies were investigated, including different types of statins (atorvastatin vs. rosuvastatin), statin combined with ezetimibe therapy (vs. without), and intensive statin therapy (vs. regular). The hs-CRP levels and blood lipid indicators were measured at baseline and after 1-month lipid-lowering therapy. Multivariable linear regression analysis and structural equation mode analysis were conducted to verify the association between different lipid-lowering strategies, Δhs-CRP (%) and ΔLDL-C (%). RESULTS: Totally, 3653 patients were enrolled with an average age of 63.81 years. Multivariable linear regression demonstrated that statin combined with ezetimibe therapy was significantly associated with decreased Δhs-CRP (%) (ß = -0.253, 95% CI: [-0.501 to -0.005], p = 0.045). The increased ΔLDL-C (%) was an independent predictor of elevated levels of Δhs-CRP (%) (ß = 0.487, 95% CI: [0.15-0.824], p = 0.005). Furthermore, structural equation model analysis proved that statin combined with ezetimibe therapy (ß = -0.300, p < 0.001) and intensive statin therapy (ß = -0.032, p = 0.043) had an indirect negative effect on Δhs-CRP via ΔLDL-C. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with routine statin use, statin combined with ezetimibe therapy and intensive statin therapy could further reduce hs-CRP levels.

Metformin-Induced Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 Inhibition Further Decreases Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Following Statin Treatment in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Without Diabetes.

ABSTRACT: In vitro investigations have established metformin's capacity to downregulate proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) expression, suggesting a potential beneficial effect on atherogenic lipoprotein particles when combined with metformin therapy. Our objective was to assess whether metformin could mitigate statin-induced adverse effects on PCSK9, thereby improving lipid profiles in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) but without diabetes. Employing an open-label, placebo-controlled, randomized trial, we randomized patients with CAD but without diabetes into CLA (cholesterol-lowering agents alone: atorvastatin ± ezetimibe, n = 38) and Met + CLA groups (metformin plus CLA, n = 33) in a 1:1 ratio. The primary end point was the therapeutic impact of 1-month metformin combination treatment on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and PCSK9 levels. Baseline LDL-C and PCSK9 levels were 76.18 mg·dL -1 and 80.54 ng·mL -1 , respectively. After 1 month, metformin significantly reduced LDL-C (-20.81%, P < 0.001), enabling 72% of patients to attain guideline-recommended LDL-C goals. Noteworthy reductions in PCSK9 levels (-15.03%, P < 0.001) were observed. Moreover, Met + CLA markedly reduced LDL particle number more than CLA alone (-10.65% vs. 1.45%, P = 0.009), primarily due to diminished small-dense LDL particle count. Mechanistically, our study demonstrated metformin's inhibition of statin-induced PCSK9 expression in human hepatocellular cells. In summary, a 1-month metformin combination regimen reduced LDL-C levels in patients with CAD but without diabetes by inhibiting PCSK9 expression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier: ChiCTR1900026925 (26/10/2019).

Benefits and Risks of Antihyperlipidemic Medication in Adults with Different Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Based on the Number Needed to Treat.

PURPOSE: The objective of this investigation is to examine the benefits and potential risks of these drugs in individuals by varying baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) values, utilizing the concept of the number needed to treat (NNT). METHODS: We extensively searched electronic databases, such as PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science, up to 6 August 2023. Baseline LDL-C values were stratified into four categories: < 100, 100-129, 130-159, and ≥ 160 mg/dL. Risk ratios (RRs) and NNT values were computed. RESULTS: This analysis incorporated data from 46 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), encompassing a total of 237,870 participants. The meta-regression analysis demonstrated an incremental diminishing risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with increasing baseline LDL-C values. Statins exhibited a significant reduction in MACE [number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 25-37], but this effect was observed only in individuals with baseline LDL-C values of 100 mg/dL or higher. Ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors also were effective in reducing MACE (NNTB 18, 95% CI 11-41, and NNTB 18, 95% CI 16-24). Notably, the safety outcomes of statins and ezetimibe did not reach statistical significance, while the incidence of injection-site reactions with PCSK9 inhibitors was statistically significant [number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 41, 95% CI 80-26]. CONCLUSION: Statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors demonstrated a substantial capacity to reduce MACE, particularly among individuals whose baseline LDL-C values were relatively higher. The NNT visually demonstrates the gradient between baseline LDL-C and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Registration: PROSPERO identifier number: CRD42023458630.

Impact of Lipid-lowering Therapy on Cancer Risk: A Narrative Review.

PURPOSE: There are inconsistent reports of an association between low cholesterol, use of lipid-lowering agents, and carcinogenesis. The purpose of this paper was to examine the relationship between cancer, lipids, statin use, and use of other lipid-lowering therapies. METHODS: This comprehensive literature review incorporated article searches in electronic databases (Embase, PubMed, OVID) and reference lists of relevant articles, with the authors' expertise in lipidology. This review considered seminal and novel research looking at the relationship between cholesterol, lipid-lowering therapies, and cancer. FINDINGS: Statin use has been reported to reduce the risk for incident cancer or progression of cancer; however, it is unknown whether this reduced risk of carcinogenesis is due to the pleotropic properties of statins or the effects of low cholesterol. The effect of ezetimibe on carcinogenesis has been regarded as neutral, despite earlier concerns of increased cancer risk with its use. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin (PCSK)-9 monoclonal antibodies have been shown to have a neutral effect on carcinogenesis. Despite anti-cancer effects of fibrates in vitro, studies in humans have yielded inconsistent outcomes leaning toward protection against the development and progression of cancer. IMPLICATIONS: Statins, fibrates, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies, and ezetimibe have a neutral effect on cancer risk, and the first three may provide some protection. PSCK9 monoclonal antibodies have the potential to enhance the response to checkpoint inhibitor therapy for cancer. Further research is needed to determine which drugs can be issued in adjuvant therapy to improve outcomes in patients undergoing cancer treatment.

Pharmacokinetics of a Fixed-Dose Combination Product of Amlodipine, Losartan, Ezetimibe, and Rosuvastatin and Its Comparison with Co-administration of Four Individual Components in Healthy Participants.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess and compare the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of a fixed-dose combination product (FDCP) comprising four different drugs (two antihypertensive drugs, amlodipine and losartan, and two lipid-lowering agents, ezetimibe and rosuvastatin) with their separate tablets. METHODS: A total of 60 participants were enrolled in this open-label, randomized, single-dose crossover study. Each participant received a single dose of FDCP and individual tablets during each period, with a 14-day washout period between the periods. The pharmacokinetic parameters of amlodipine, losartan, EXP3174 (an active metabolite of losartan), rosuvastatin, free ezetimibe, and total ezetimibe were evaluated and compared. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic profiles of amlodipine, losartan, rosuvastatin, and ezetimibe after administration of the individual products were similar to those of FDCP. The geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals for maximum concentration (Cmax) and area under the curve (AUC) of FDCP to individual tablets were within 0.8-1.25 for all six analytes. No clinically relevant changes were observed in the vital signs or physical, biochemical, hematological, electrocardiographic, or urinalysis findings during the study, and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that a newly developed FDCP containing amlodipine, losartan, ezetimibe, and rosuvastatin exhibited pharmacokinetic equivalence with the individual products and met the regulatory criteria. Both formulations were well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial (NCT04322266) was retrospectively registered on 9 September 2019.

Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Fixed-Dose Combination of Simvastatin and Ezetimibe Tablets: A Randomized, Crossover, Open-Label Study in Healthy Volunteers.

The current study aimed to evaluate the bioequivalence of a new generic combination of simvastatin and ezetimibe with the reference formulation. An open-label, randomized, 3-period, 3-sequence, crossover study, including 60 healthy volunteers, was implemented. Participants received the test and reference formulation, each containing 20 mg of simvastatin and 10 mg of ezetimibe as a single-dose tablet, separated by a minimum of 2-week washout periods. Blood samples were collected for 20 time points from predose to 72 hours after the dose. The total ezetimibe assay was carried out using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, while unconjugated ezetimibe, simvastatin, and simvastatin ß-hydroxy acid determination was done via a validated ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Each assay was preceded by a liquid-liquid extraction step. The pharmacokinetic parameters were derived using noncompartmental analysis and then compared between the reference and test formulations via a multivariate analysis of variance. No statistical difference was found in under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration and maximum concentration of unconjugated ezetimibe, total ezetimibe, and simvastatin between the reference and test formulations. The 90% confidence intervals of unconjugated ezetimibe, total ezetimibe, and simvastatin natural log-transformed under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration, and maximum concentration were in the range of 80%-125% as per the bioequivalence acceptance criteria. Therefore, the test formulation was bioequivalent to the reference formulation.

Association of lipid-lowering drug targets with risk of cutaneous melanoma: a mendelian randomization study.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma proliferation is partly attributed to dysregulated lipid metabolism. The effectiveness of lipid-lowering drugs in combating cutaneous melanoma (CM) is a subject of ongoing debate in both in vitro and clinical studies. METHOD: This study aims to evaluate the causal relationship between various lipid-lowering drug targets, namely 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR, targeted by statins), Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9, targeted by alirocumab and evolocumab), and Niemann-Pick C1-like 1 (NPC1L1, targeted by ezetimibe), and the outcomes of cutaneous melanoma. To mimic the effects of lipid-lowering drugs, we utilized two genetic tools: analysis of polymorphisms affecting the expression levels of drug target genes, and genetic variations linked to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and drug target genes. These variations were sourced from genome-wide association studies (GWAS). We applied Summary-data-based Mendelian Randomization (SMR) and Inverse Variance Weighted Mendelian Randomization (IVW-MR) to gauge the effectiveness of these drugs. RESULTS: Our findings, with SMR results showing an odds ratio (OR) of 1.44 (95% CI: 1.08-1.92; P = 0.011) and IVW-MR results indicating an OR of 1.56 (95% CI: 1.10-2.23; P = 0.013), demonstrate a positive correlation between PCSK9 expression and increased risk of CM. However, no such correlations were observed in other analyses. CONCLUSION: The study concludes that PCSK9 plays a significant role in the development of CM, and its inhibition is linked to a reduced risk of the disease.

Degree of serum LDL cholesterol reduction by simvastatin and ezetimibe is dependent on baseline LDL cholesterol concentration but not on baseline values and changes in cholesterol synthesis and absorption parameters.

OBJECTIVE: We questioned whether the baseline status of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), cholesterol synthesis and absorption, and the changes in these parameters determine the change in serum LDL-C under statin or ezetimibe treatment or under combination treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 37 mildly hypercholesterolemic healthy male subjects were studied under placebo, simvastatin (20 mg/d), ezetimibe (10 mg/d), and combination treatment. We correlated the change of LDL-C (ΔLDL-C) under treatment with the placebo end values of LDL-C (baseline), whole-body cholesterol synthesis, and hepatic cholesterol synthesis (serum lathosterol to cholesterol ratio) as well as fractional absorption rate (FAR) of cholesterol and serum campesterol to cholesterol ratio. The change in serum LDL-C was also correlated with the changes in synthesis and absorption parameters. RESULTS: ΔLDL-C was highly negatively related to baseline LDL-C under ezetimibe (p < 0.0001), simvastatin (p < 0.0001), and combination treatment (p < 0.0001). Under combination treatment, LDL-C lowering appears possible from baseline values of 10 mg/dL upwards, while ΔLDL-C was independent of the baseline value (-50 to -60%). ΔLDL-C was positively associated with placebo FAR under ezetimibe (p = 0.0106) and combination treatment (p = 0.0457). No associations were found between ΔLDL-C and baseline values for synthesis nor between ΔLDL-C and changes in synthesis and absorption surrogate markers. CONCLUSION: Under ezetimibe, simvastatin, and combination treatment, ΔLDL-C is predominantly dependent on the baseline LDL-C concentration. We hypothesize that the concentration gradient between serum LDL-C and hepatic cellular cholesterol determines the efficiency of serum LDL-C lowering. Combination treatment is the preferred treatment.

Persistence and Adherence to PCSK9 Inhibitor Monoclonal Antibodies Versus Ezetimibe in Real-World Settings.

INTRODUCTION: The cardiovascular disease risk reduction benefits of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor monoclonal antibodies (PCSK9i mAb) and ezetimibe are dependent on remaining on treatment and being persistent and adherent. We estimated the percentage of patients on therapy, persistent and adherent at 182 and 365 days among US adults with health insurance who initiated a PCSK9i mAb (n = 16,588) or ezetimibe (n = 83,086) between July 2015 and December 2019. METHODS: Using pharmacy fill claims, being on therapy was defined as having a day of medication supply in the last 60 of 182 and 365 days following treatment initiation, being persistent was defined as not having a gap of 60 days or more between the last day of supply from one prescription fill and the next fill, and being adherent was defined by having medication available to take on ≥ 80% of the 182 and 365 days following treatment initiation. We estimated multivariable-adjusted risk ratios for being persistent and adherent comparing patients initiating PCSK9i mAb versus ezetimibe using Poisson regression. RESULTS: At 182 days following initiation, 80% and 68% were on therapy and 76% and 64% were persistent among patients who initiated a PCSK9i mAb and ezetimibe, respectively. Among patients who were on therapy and persistent at 182 days following initiation, 88% and 81% of those who initiated a PCSK9i mAb and ezetimibe, respectively, were on therapy at 365 days. Among those on therapy and persistent at 182 days following initiation, being persistent and being adherent at 365 days were each more common among PCSK9i mAb versus ezetimibe initiators (persistent: 82% versus 76%, multivariable-adjusted risk ratio 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.08; adherent: 74% versus 71%, multivariable-adjusted risk ratio 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest approaches to increase persistence and adherence to PCSK9i mAb and ezetimibe should be implemented prior to or within 182 days following treatment initiation.

Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Low/Moderate-Intensity Statin plus Ezetimibe Combination Therapy vs. High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

AIM: Statin therapy is considered the gold standard for treating hypercholesterolemia. This updated meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of a low/moderate-intensity statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS: A systematic search of two databases (PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL) was conducted from inception to January 2023 and a total of 21 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified and included in the analysis. Data were pooled using Hedges's g and a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to derive standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (Cis). The primary outcome studied was the effect of these treatments on lipid parameters and safety events. RESULTS: The results revealed that combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (SMD= - 0.41; CI - 0.63 to - 0.19; P = 0.0002). There was no significant change in the levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), Apo A1, or Apo B. The safety of these treatments was assessed by the following markers alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and creatine phosphokinase (CK), and a significant difference was only observed in CK (SMD: - 0.81; CI - 1.52 to - 0.10; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of low/moderate-intensity statin combination therapy significantly reduced LDL-C levels compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy, making it preferable for patients with related risks. However, further trials are encouraged to evaluate potential adverse effects associated with combined therapy.