Fenofibrate for diabetic retinopathy.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) remains a major cause of sight loss worldwide, despite new therapies and improvements in the metabolic control of people living with diabetes. Therefore, DR creates a physical and psychological burden for people, and an economic burden for society. Preventing the development and progression of DR, or avoiding the occurrence of its sight-threatening complications is essential, and must be pursued to save sight. Fenofibrate may be a useful strategy to achieve this goal, by reversing diabetes' effects and reducing inflammation in the retina, as well as improving dyslipidaemia and hypertriglyceridaemia.  OBJECTIVES: To investigate the benefits and harms of fenofibrate for preventing the development and progression of diabetic retinopathy in people with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D), compared with placebo or observation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three trials registers (February 2022). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included people with T1D or T2D, when these compared fenofibrate with placebo or with observation, and assessed the effect of fenofibrate on the development or progression of DR (or both). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods for data extraction and analysis. Our primary outcome was progression of DR, a composite outcome of 1) incidence of overt retinopathy for participants who did not have DR at baseline, or 2) advancing two or more steps on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) severity scale for participants who had any DR at baseline (or both), based on the evaluation of stereoscopic or non-stereoscopic fundus photographs, during the follow-up period. Overt retinopathy was defined as the presence of any DR observed on stereoscopic or non-stereoscopic colour fundus photographs. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of overt retinopathy, reduction in visual acuity of participants with a reduction in visual acuity of 10 ETDRS letters or more, proliferative diabetic retinopathy, and diabetic macular oedema; mean vision-related quality of life, and serious adverse events of fenofibrate. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies and their eye sub-studies (15,313 participants) in people with T2D. The studies were conducted in the US, Canada, Australia, Finland, and New Zealand; follow-up period was four to five years. One was funded by the government, the other by industry. Compared to placebo or observation, fenofibrate likely results in little to no difference in progression of DR (risk ratio (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 1.25; 1 study, 1012 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) in a population with and without overt retinopathy at baseline. Those without overt retinopathy at baseline showed little or no progression (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.47; 1 study, 804 participants); those with overt retinopathy at baseline found that their DR progressed slowly (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.71; 1 study, 208 people; test for interaction P = 0.02). Compared to placebo or observation, fenofibrate likely resulted in little to no difference in either the incidence of overt retinopathy (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.09; 2 studies, 1631 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or the incidence of diabetic macular oedema (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.12 to 1.24; 1 study, 1012 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The use of fenofibrate increased severe adverse effects (RR 1.55; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.27; 2 studies, 15,313 participants; high-certainty evidence). The studies did not report on incidence of a reduction in visual acuity of 10 ETDRS letters or more, incidence of proliferative diabetic retinopathy, or mean vision-related quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current, moderate-certainty evidence suggests that in a mixed group of people with and without overt retinopathy, who live with T2D, fenofibrate likely results in little to no difference in progression of diabetic retinopathy. However, in people with overt retinopathy who live with T2D, fenofibrate likely reduces the progression. Serious adverse events were rare, but the risk of their occurrence was increased by the use of fenofibrate. There is no evidence on the effect of fenofibrate in people with T1D. More studies, with larger sample sizes, and participants with T1D are needed. They should measure outcomes that are important to people with diabetes, e.g. change in vision, reduction in visual acuity of 10 ETDRS letters or more, developing proliferative diabetic retinopathy; and evaluating the requirement of other treatments, e.g. injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapies, steroids.

Fenofibrate mitigates testosterone induced benign prostatic hyperplasia via regulation of Akt/FOXO3a pathway and modulation of apoptosis and proliferation in rats.

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most age-related health problems that commonly affect men. Regrettably, many individuals may not respond to current medical therapies or develop resistance to them. Accordingly, this study aimed to uncover how potentially fenofibrate, a lipid lowering agent, can ameliorate the induced BPH in rats. Forty rats were categorized randomly into four groups; the control group was given the vehicle (olive oil); the BPH model received testosterone propionate (20 mg/kg daily; s.c.) for 4 weeks; BPH-induced group received finasteride (10 mg/kg daily; p.o.) and BPH-induced group received fenofibrate (80 mg/kg daily; p.o.). After testosterone administration, both weight and relative weight of the prostate increased. Additionally, testosterone upregulated androgen receptor (AR), 5α-reductase gene expression and increased prostate proliferation. Histopathological examination confirmed that testosterone disrupted the histo-architecture of the prostate and caused marked hyperplasia of glands and stroma. On the other hand, fenofibrate administration reverted most hyperplastic changes of testosterone, it significantly reduced weight, relative weight of the prostate and dihydrotestosterone (DHT) level compared to BPH group. Also fenofibrate significantly decreased AR and 5α-reductase gene expression. Fenofibrate significantly suppressed ps473 Akt expression causing FOXO3a nuclear inclusion, which triggered induction of apoptosis. As well, Bax/Bcl2 ratio and caspase 3 content were significantly enhanced. Fenofibrate significantly diminished cyclin D1 immunoexpression and restored normal histo-architecture. In conclusion, this study emphasizes the preventive effect of fenofibrate in BPH rat model. This can be accredited, at least partly, to inhibiting AR and 5α-reductase expressions, the anti-proliferative, and pro-apoptotic activity of fenofibrate via modulation of Akt/FOXO3a pathway.

Association of Fenofibrate Use and the Risk of Progression to Vision-Threatening Diabetic Retinopathy.

Importance: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) may progress from nonproliferative DR (NPDR) to vision-threatening DR (VTDR). Studies have investigated fenofibrate use as a protective measure with conflicting results, and fenofibrate is not typically considered by ophthalmologists in the management of DR currently. Objective: To assess the association between fenofibrate use and the progression from NPDR to VTDR, proliferative DR (PDR), or diabetic macular edema (DME). Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study used medical claims data from a large US insurer. Cohorts were created from all patients with NPDR 18 years or older who had laboratory values from January 1, 2002, to June 30, 2019. Exclusion criteria consisted of any previous diagnosis of PDR, DME, proliferative vitreoretinopathy, or treatment used in the care of VTDR. Patients were also excluded if they had a diagnosis of VTDR within 2 years of insurance plan entry, regardless of when NPDR was first noted in the plan. Exposures: Fenofibrate use. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were a new diagnosis of VTDR (a composite outcome of either PDR or DME) or DME and PDR individually. A time-updating model for all covariates was used in multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression to determine hazards of progressing to an outcome. Additional covariates included NPDR severity scale, systemic illnesses, demographics, kidney function (based on estimated glomerular filtration rate level), hemoglobin A1c, hemoglobin, and insulin use. Results: A total of 5835 fenofibrate users with NPDR at baseline (mean [SD] age, 65.3 [10.4] years; 3564 [61.1%] male; 3024 [51.8%] White) and 144 417 fenofibrate nonusers (mean [SD] age, 65.7 [12.3] years; 73 587 [51.0%] male; 67 023 [46.4%] White) were included for analysis. Of these, 27 325 (18.2%) progressed to VTDR, 4086 (2.71%) progressed to PDR, and 22 750 (15.1%) progressed to DME. After controlling for all covariates, Cox model results showed fenofibrates to be associated with a decreased risk of VTDR (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.87-0.98]; P = .01) and PDR (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.64-0.90]; P = .001) but not DME (hazard ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.90-1.03]; P = .27). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, fenofibrate use was associated with a decreased risk of PDR and VTDR but not DME alone. These findings support the rationale for additional clinical trials to determine if these associations may be representative of a causal relationship between fenofibrate use and reduced risk of PDR or VTDR.

Effects of fenofibrate and its combination with lovastatin on the expression of genes involved in skeletal muscle atrophy, including FoxO1 and its targets.

Fibrates and statins have been widely used to reduce triglyceride and cholesterol levels, respectively. Besides its lipid-lowering effect, the side effect of muscle atrophy after fibrate administration to humans has been demonstrated in some studies. Combination therapy with fibrates and statins also increases the risk of rhabdomyolysis. FoxO1, a member of the FoxO forkhead type transcription factor family, is markedly upregulated in skeletal muscle in energy-deprived states and induces muscle atrophy via the expression of E3-ubiquitine ligases. In this study, we investigated the changes in FoxO1 and its targets in murine skeletal muscle with fenofibrate treatment. High doses of fenofibrate (greater than 0.5% (wt/wt)) over one week increased the expression of FoxO1 and its targets in the skeletal muscles of mice and decreased skeletal muscle weight. These fenofibrate-induced changes were diminished in the PPARα knockout mice. When the effect of combination treatment with fenofibrate and lovastatin was investigated, a significant increase in FoxO1 protein levels was observed despite the lack of deterioration of muscle atrophy. Collectively, our findings suggest that a high dose of fenofibrate over one week causes skeletal muscle atrophy via enhancement of FoxO1, and combination treatment with fenofibrate and lovastatin may further increase FoxO1 protein level.

A Randomised Controlled Trial Assessing the Effects of Peri-operative Fenofibrate Administration on Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Pathology: Outcomes From the FAME Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Experimental studies suggest that fenofibrate prevents abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) development by lowering aortic osteopontin (OPN) concentration and reducing the number of macrophages infiltrating the aortic wall. The current study examined the effects of a short course of fenofibrate on AAA pathology in people with large AAAs awaiting aortic repair. METHODS: This randomised double blind parallel trial included male and female participants aged ≥ 60 years who had an asymptomatic AAA measuring ≥ 50 mm and were scheduled to undergo open AAA repair. Participants were allocated to fenofibrate (145 mg/day) or matching placebo for at least two weeks before elective AAA repair. Blood samples were collected at recruitment and immediately prior to surgery. AAA biopsies were obtained during aortic surgery. The primary outcomes were (1) AAA OPN concentration; (2) serum OPN concentration; and (3) number of AAA macrophages. Exploratory outcomes included circulating and aortic concentrations of other proteins previously associated with AAA. Outcomes assessed at a single time point were compared using logistic regression. Longitudinal outcomes were compared using linear mixed effects models. RESULTS: Forty-three participants were randomised. After three withdrawals, 40 were followed until the time of surgery (21 allocated fenofibrate and 19 allocated placebo). As expected, serum triglycerides reduced significantly from recruitment to the time of surgery in participants allocated fenofibrate. No differences in any of the primary and exploratory outcomes were observed between groups. CONCLUSION: A short course of 145 mg of fenofibrate/day did not lower concentrations of OPN or aortic macrophage density in people with large AAAs.

Efficacy of fenofibrate for diabetic retinopathy: A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have reported the efficacy of fenofibrate for patients with diabetic retinopathy (DRP). No systematic review has, however, addressed its efficacy for DRP. Thus, this systematic review will firstly evaluate the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate for patients with DRP. METHODS: This study will search the following databases: PUMBED, EMBASE, CINAHI, ACMD, CENTRAL, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and WANGFANG, along with grey literature from inception to the present. We will accept randomized controlled trials on evaluating the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate for DRP. The primary outcome is the progression of DRP. The secondary outcomes are vision loss, development of diabetic macular edema, aggravation of hard exudates, quality of life, and any adverse events. Methodological quality of each included study will be assessed by using Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. In addition, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool will also be used to evaluate the overall strength of the evidence. Two independent reviewers will conduct all procedures of study selection, data extraction, and methodological assessment. Any disagreements will be consulted with a third reviewer. RevMan 5.3 software will be used to pool data and to carry out the meta-analysis if it is possible. RESULTS: In present study, we anticipate to find a considerable number of published studies presenting evidence on efficacy and safety of fenofibrate for DRP. CONCLUSION: The findings of this systematic review will provide latest evidence of fenofibrate for patients with DRP. DISSEMINATION AND ETHICS: The findings of this scoping review will be disseminated in print, conferences, or by peer-reviewed journals. No ethical approval is needed for this systematic review, because it is a literature-based study. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019121869.

Efficacy and safety of pemafibrate (K-877), a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α modulator, in patients with dyslipidemia: Results from a 24-week, randomized, double blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: To overcome the concerns associated with the use of fibrates, pemafibrate (K-877), a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor modulator, was developed. In a previous phase 2 trial, we showed excellent efficacy and safety of pemafibrate in patients with dyslipidemia. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pemafibrate over 24 weeks in adults with dyslipidemia in comparison with fenofibrate. METHODS: In this multicenter, 24-week, double-blind, clinical study, 225 patients with high triglyceride (TG; ≥150 mg/dL [1.7 mmol/L] and <500 mg/dL [5.7 mmol/L]) and relatively low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (<50 mg/dL [1.3 mmol/L] in men or 55 mg/dL [1.4 mmol/L] in women) levels were randomized to receive either pemafibrate at 0.2 or 0.4 mg/d or fenofibrate 106.6 mg/d. RESULTS: Pemafibrate 0.2, 0.4 mg/d and fenofibrate significantly reduced TG levels from baseline by -46.2%, -45.9%, and -39.7%, respectively. As compared with fenofibrate, the least squares mean differences (95% confidence intervals) in TG were -6.5% (-12.0, -1.1) and -6.2% (-11.6, -0.8) in pemafibrate 0.2 and 0.4 mg/d respectively, which showed the superiority of these doses of pemafibrate to 106.6 mg/d of fenofibrate. The incidence rates of adverse drug reactions in pemafibrate groups (2.7% and 6.8%) were significantly lower than that in the fenofibrate group (23.7%). Pemafibrate significantly decreased alanine aminotransferase and gamma-glutamyltransferase levels, whereas fenofibrate increased both of them. The increments of serum creatinine and cystatin C were smaller in pemafibrate than those in fenofibrate. CONCLUSIONS: Pemafibrate was superior to fenofibrate in terms of serum TG-lowering effect and hepatic and renal safety.

Identification and Characterization of Fenofibrate-Induced Liver Injury.

BACKGROUND: Fenofibrate is a commonly used hypolipidemic associated with rare instances of hepatotoxicity, and routine liver biochemistry monitoring is recommended. AIMS: The aim of this study is to describe the presenting clinical features, liver histopathology, and outcomes of 7 cases of acute liver injury associated with fenofibrate. METHODS: All cases of definite, very likely, and probable drug-induced liver injury (DILI) attributed to fenofibrate enrolled in the DILI Network study between 2004 and 2015 were reviewed. RESULTS: Among 1229 patients with confirmed DILI, 7 cases (0.6%) were attributed to fenofibrate. The median age was 43 (range 37-61) years, and latency to onset was short (5-8 weeks) in 4 patients but more prolonged (18-56 weeks) in the rest. Laboratory results at presentation showed hepatocellular, mixed, and cholestatic injury, but 6 cases presented with jaundice. No patient had undergone routine monitoring. Four patients required hospitalization and 2 in whom drug discontinuation was delayed had a severe outcome, 1 undergoing liver transplantation, and 1 developing chronic injury and death. Liver biopsy was available in 4 patients and showed diverse injury patterns. Genetic studies showed the presence of the rare HLA-A*33:01 in 3 patients (43 vs. 1% in control populations). The causality scores were highly likely in 5 and probable in 2. CONCLUSIONS: Liver injury after fenofibrate exposure occurs with variable latency, enzyme elevation, and histology. Although most cases are self-limited, severe injury and mortality can occur, particularly if drug withdrawal is delayed. Jaundice or abnormal laboratory tests during fenofibrate therapy should trigger prompt discontinuation.

Fenofibrate decreases the bone quality by down regulating Runx2 in high-fat-diet induced Type 2 diabetes mellitus mouse model.

BACKGROUND: This study is to investigate the effect of fenofibrate on the bone quality of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) mouse model. METHODS: T2DM mouse model was induced by high-fat-diet, and the mice were treated with fenofibrate (100 mg/kg) (DIO-FENO) or PBS (DIO-PBS) for 4 weeks. The bone microstructure and biomechanical properties of femora were analyzed by micro-CT and 3-Point bending test. The protein expression was detected by immunohistochemical staining and Western blot. The cell apoptosis was evaluated by TUNEL staining. The Bcl2, caspase 3, and osteoblast marker genes were detected by RT-qPCR. RESULTS: The biomechanical properties of bones from DIO-FENO group were significantly lower than those in the control and DIO-PBS groups. Besides, the trabecular number was lower than those of the other groups, though the cortical porosity was decreased compared with that of DIO-PBS group because of the increase of apoptotic cells. The expression of osteocalcin and collagen I were decreased after treatment with fenofibrate in T2DM mice. Moreover, the cell viability was decreased after treated with different concentrations of fenofibrate, and the expression of Runx2 decreased after treated with high dose of fenofibrate. CONCLUSION: Fenofibrate decreases the bone quality of T2DM mice through decreasing the expression of collagen I and osteocalcin, which may be resulted from the down regulation of Runx2 expression.

Fenofibrate in the management of AbdoMinal aortic anEurysm (FAME): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a slowly progressive destructive process of the main abdominal artery. Experimental studies indicate that fibrates exert beneficial effects on AAAs by mechanisms involving both serum lipid modification and favourable changes to the AAA wall. METHODS/DESIGN: Fenofibrate in the management of AbdoMinal aortic anEurysm (FAME) is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the effect of orally administered therapy with fenofibrate on key pathological markers of AAA in patients undergoing open AAA repair. A total of 42 participants scheduled for an elective open AAA repair will be randomly assigned to either 145 mg of fenofibrate per day or identical placebo for a minimum period of 2 weeks prior to surgery. Primary outcome measures will be macrophage number and osteopontin (OPN) concentration within the AAA wall as well as serum concentrations of OPN. Secondary outcome measures will include levels of matrix metalloproteinases and proinflammatory cytokines within the AAA wall, periaortic fat and intramural thrombus and circulating concentrations of AAA biomarkers. DISCUSSION: At present, there is no recognised medical therapy to limit AAA progression. The FAME trial aims to assess the ability of fenofibrate to alter tissue markers of AAA pathology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12612001226897 . Registered on 20 November 2012.

New Fixed-Dose Combinations of Fenofibrate/Simvastatin Therapy Significantly Improve the Lipid Profile of High-Risk Patients with Mixed Dyslipidemia Versus Monotherapies.

AIMS: Guidelines propose additional therapy to statin to treat elevated triglycerides (TG) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC) in dyslipidemic patients. We evaluated the effects of new fixed-dose combinations (FDC) of fenofibrate/simvastatin on plasma lipids versus simvastatin or fenofibrate monotherapies. METHODS: Subjects with mixed dyslipidemia at high or very high cardiovascular risk on stable statin therapy for at least 3 months were included in a randomized, double-blind, active-control, parallel-group study. Patients were treated with FDC fenofibrate/simvastatin 145/20 mg or 145/40 mg, simvastatin 20 mg or 40 mg, or fenofibrate 145 mg for 12 weeks. Plasma lipids, C-reactive protein, and cystatin C were measured before and after treatments. Differences in % changes were compared between FDC fenofibrate/simvastatin and monotherapies. RESULTS: Significant differences between FDC fenofibrate/simvastatin and simvastatin monotherapies were observed for the % change of TG (LS mean difference [two-sided 95% CI]: -32.2% [-38.6%, -25.8%], P < 0.001) and HDL-C (7.5% [4.7%, 10.2%], P < 0.001). A significant difference between the FDC fenofibrate/simvastatin and fenofibrate was observed for LDLC % changes (-34.7% [-40.8%, -28.5%], P < 0.001). Significant differences between FDC fenofibrate/simvastatin and their respective monotherapies were also observed for Apo B and non-HDLC % changes. The FDC were well tolerated with a similar safety profile compared with monotherapies. CONCLUSIONS: FDC fenofibrate/simvastatin are effective and well-tolerated therapies to improve the TG and HDLC profile in high-risk patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

Fenofibrate causes elevation of betaine excretion but not excretion of other osmolytes by healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Cross-sectional data suggest that bezafibrate increases betaine excretion in dyslipidemic patients. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to demonstrate that fenofibrate induces increased betaine excretion in normal subjects and explore whether other 1-carbon metabolites and osmolytes are similarly affected. METHODS: Urine was collected from 26 healthy adults before and after treatment with fenofibrate (145 mg/day for 6 weeks). Excretions of betaine, N,N-dimethylglycine, free choline, myo-inositol, taurine, trimethylamine-N-oxide, carnitine, and acetylcarnitine were measured by liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection. RESULTS: Fenofibrate increased the median betaine excretion from 7.5 to 25.8 mmol/mole creatinine (median increase 3-fold), P < .001. The median increase in N,N-dimethylglycine excretion was 2-fold (P < .001). Median choline excretion increased 12% (significant, P = .029). Participants with higher initial excretions tended to have larger increases (P < .001 in all 3 cases). Fenofibrate did not significantly change the median excretions of myo-inositol, taurine, trimethylamine-N-oxide, and carnitine. The excretion of acetylcarnitine decreased 4-fold on treatment, with no correlation between the baseline and after-treatment excretions. Changes in all urine components tested, except trimethylamine-N-oxide, positively correlated with changes in betaine excretion even when the median excretions before and after were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Fibrates increase betaine, and to a lesser extent N,N-dimethylglycine and choline, excretion. Other osmolytes are not elevated. Because the increase in betaine excretion depends on the baseline excretion, large increases in excretion in the metabolic syndrome and diabetes (where baseline excretions are high) could be expected. Replacement with betaine supplements may be considered.

PPARα-dependent exacerbation of experimental colitis by the hypolipidemic drug fenofibrate.

Fibrates, such as fenofibrate, are peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α (PPARα) agonists and have been used for several decades as hypolipidemic agents in the clinic. However, contradictory observations exist on the role of fibrates in host response to acute inflammation, with unclear mechanisms. The role of PPARα in colitis was assessed using fenofibrate and Ppara-null mice. Wild-type or Ppara-null mice were subjected to acute colitis under three distinct protocols, dextran sulfate sodium, trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid, and Salmonella Typhi. Serum and colon lipidomics were analyzed to characterize the metabolic profiles by ultra-performance liquid chromatography-coupled with electrospray ionization quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Messenger RNAs of PPARα target genes and genes involved in inflammation were determined by qunatitative PCR analysis. Fenofibrate treatment exacerbated inflammation and tissue injury in acute colitis, and this was dependent on PPARα activation. Lipidomics analysis revealed that bioactive sphingolipids, including sphingomyelins (SM) and ceramides, were significantly increased in the colitis group compared with the control group; this was further potentiated following fenofibrate treatment. In the colon, fenofibrate did not reduce the markedly increased expression of mRNA encoding TNFα found in the acute colitis model, while it decreased hydrolysis and increased synthesis of SM, upregulated RIPK3-dependent necrosis, and elevated mitochondrial fatty acid ß-oxidation, which were possibly related to the exacerbated colitis.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α activation induces hepatic steatosis, suggesting an adverse effect.

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is characterized by hepatic triglyceride accumulation, ranging from steatosis to steatohepatitis and cirrhosis. NAFLD is a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases and is associated with metabolic syndrome. Antihyperlipidemic drugs are recommended as part of the treatment for NAFLD patients. Although fibrates activate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα), leading to the reduction of serum triglyceride levels, the effects of these drugs on NAFLD remain controversial. Clinical studies have reported that PPARα activation does not improve hepatic steatosis. In the present study, we focused on exploring the effect and mechanism of PPARα activation on hepatic triglyceride accumulation and hepatic steatosis. Male C57BL/6J mice, Pparα-null mice and HepG2 cells were treated with fenofibrate, one of the most commonly used fibrate drugs. Both low and high doses of fenofibrate were administered. Hepatic steatosis was detected through oil red O staining and electron microscopy. Notably, in fenofibrate-treated mice, the serum triglyceride levels were reduced and the hepatic triglyceride content was increased in a dose-dependent manner. Oil red O staining of liver sections demonstrated that fenofibrate-fed mice accumulated abundant neutral lipids. Fenofibrate also increased the intracellular triglyceride content in HepG2 cells. The expression of sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1c (SREBP-1c) and the key genes associated with lipogenesis were increased in fenofibrate-treated mouse livers and HepG2 cells in a dose-dependent manner. However, the effect was strongly impaired in Pparα-null mice treated with fenofibrate. Fenofibrate treatment induced mature SREBP-1c expression via the direct binding of PPARα to the DR1 motif of the SREBP-1c gene. Taken together, these findings indicate the molecular mechanism by which PPARα activation increases liver triglyceride accumulation and suggest an adverse effect of fibrates on the pathogenesis of hepatic steatosis.

Differential effects of fenofibrate and extended-release niacin on high-density lipoprotein particle size distribution and cholesterol efflux capacity in dyslipidemic patients.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of therapies that raise high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) to lower cardiovascular disease risk is currently under debate, and further research into the relationship between HDL-C and function is required. OBJECTIVE: o investigate whether 2 established HDL-C-raising therapies had differential effects on parameters of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) quality and function, such as HDL particle profile and cholesterol efflux capacity (CEC), in patients with dyslipidemia. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-six patients with dyslipidemia, 24 with low HDL-C levels (<40 mg/dL) and 42 with normal HDL-C levels (40-59 mg/dL), were treated for 6 weeks with fenofibrate (160 mg/d) or extended-release (ER) niacin (0.5 g/d for 3 weeks, then 1 g/d) with 4 weeks of washout between treatments. Lipoprotein particle size distribution was determined using nuclear magnetic resonance, and pathway-specific serum CECs were assessed in J774 macrophages, hepatoma, and Chinese hamster ovary-human adenosine triphosphate-binding cassette transporter G1 cells. Comparable increases in HDL-C and apolipoprotein A-I levels were seen with fenofibrate and ER niacin. There was a shift toward larger HDL, predominantly to medium-size HDL particles for fenofibrate (+209%) and to large HDL particles for ER niacin (+221%). Minor changes in serum CECs were observed with fenofibrate and ER niacin for all the efflux pathways measured. Small increases in plasma cholesteryl ester transfer protein and lecithin: cholesterol acyltransferase concentrations, and decreases in cholesteryl ester transfer protein activity were seen with both drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Fenofibrate and ER niacin increased plasma HDL-C level similarly, but modulated HDL particle size distribution differently; however, these changes did not result in differential effects on serum CECs.

Reversibility of fenofibrate therapy-induced renal function impairment in ACCORD type 2 diabetic participants.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reversibility of the elevation of serum creatinine levels in patients with diabetes after 5 years of continuous on-trial fenofibrate therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: An on-drug/off-drug ancillary study to the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Lipid Trial to investigate posttrial changes in serum creatinine and cystatin C. Eligible participants were recruited into a prospective, nested, three-group study based on retrospective on-trial serum creatinine levels: fenofibrate case subjects (n = 321, ≥ 20% increase after 3 months of therapy); fenofibrate control subjects (n = 175, ≤ 2% increase); and placebo control subjects (n = 565). Serum creatinine and cystatin C were measured at trial end and 6-8 weeks after discontinuation of trial therapy. RESULTS At trial end, case subjects had the highest adjusted serum creatinine (± SE) mg/dL (1.11 ± 0.02) and the lowest adjusted estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (± SE) mL/min/1.73 m(2) (68.4 ± 1.0) versus control subjects (1.01 ± 0.02; 74.8 ± 1.3) and placebo subjects (0.98 ± 0.01; 77.8 ± 0.7). After 51 days off-drug, serum creatinine in case subjects was still higher (0.97 ± 0.02) and eGFR still lower (77.8 ± 1.0) than control subjects (0.90 ± 0.02; 81.8 ± 1.3) but not different from placebo subjects (0.99 ± 0.01; 76.6 ± 0.7). Changes in serum cystatin C recapitulated the serum creatinine changes. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with significant initial on-trial increases in serum creatinine (≥ 20%) returned to the same level of renal function as participants receiving placebo while participants who had ≤ 2% increase in serum creatinine had net preservation of renal function compared with the same unselected placebo reference group. The fenofibrate-associated on-trial increases in serum creatinine were reversible, and the reversal was complete after 51 days off-drug. The similarity of the cystatin C results suggests that the mechanism of this change is not specific for serum creatinine.

[Possibilities of improvement of prognosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after coronary interventions].

We present results of investigation of fenofibrate in patients with ischemic heart disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus after myocardial revascularization at various terms of its administration. We have shown its efficacy in correction of diabetic dyslipidemia, positive influence on clinical status and long term result of coronary intervention. We have established that early (first 7 days) prescription of fenofibrate - Tricor to patients with ischemic heart disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus after myocardial revascularization lowers number of diagnostic coronary angiograms and repeat percutaneous coronary interventions by 11% during first year of follow-up.

Fenofibrate, homocysteine and renal function.

Fibrates or PPAR alpha agonists, in particular fenofibrate, are known to increase homocysteine levels (Hcy). A 3 to 5 micromol/L increase in Hcy is commonly observed within the first few weeks of fenofibrate treatment; it then persists in plateau when treatment is continued and is reversible upon its cessation. Since its description in 1999, this pharmacological effect attracted a great deal of attention as epidemiological studies in most populations have shown that elevated Hcy levels i.e.Hcy> or =15 micromol/L are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events (CVD), venous thromboembolic events (VTE) and possibly cognitive disorders and bone fractures. Chronic kidney disease is also associated with elevated Hcy levels and since fenofibrate increases creatinine levels by about 10-12 micromol/L, a relationship between Hcy and creatinine was postulated. Animal studies have shown that the Hcy increase is PPARalpha dependent but to date animal or human studies have not provided a clear mechanism. In particular, fenofibrate treatment does not change vitamin B levels; however, vitamin B supplements reduce fenofibrate-induced Hcy elevation but not the concomitant cysteine elevation. Similarly, the increase in creatinine with fenofibrate only partially accounted for by a reduction in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) since creatinine production is also increased by 5-10%. In the FIELD study, a placebo-controlled study in 9795 patients with type 2 diabetes, fenofibrate over 5 years reduced non-fatal cardiovascular events and microvascular events such as albuminuria, the need for laser treatment for proliferative retinopathy or maculopathy and amputations but did not reduce fatal events. The increase in Hcy was indeed much larger that what would be explained by creatinine elevation and independent from baseline kidney function. Although baseline Hcy and creatinine levels were associated with subsequent risk of CVD, as suggested by epidemiology, their respective elevation was not. Of interest, after withdrawal of fenofibrate, a potential renoprotective effect was unmasked, as estimated GFR was 5 ml/min/1.73 m2 higher in previous fenofibrate-allocated patients than in previous placebo-allocated patients. There was no suggestion that Hcy elevation was associated with VTE (which were increased by an unknown mechanism) or bone disorders. In conclusion, the discrepancy between the role of baseline Hcy levels in epidemiology and the absence of effect when altering its levels by either decreasing them with vitamin B supplements or increasing them with fenofibrate, suggests that the risk factor(s) behind homocysteine should be found. Nevertheless, other studies are also needed to understand the mechanism and the implications of the moderate homocysteine and creatinine elevations with fenofibrate and other PPARalpha agonists.

Efficacy and safety of coadministration of fenofibrate and ezetimibe compared with each as monotherapy in patients with type IIb dyslipidemia and features of the metabolic syndrome: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, three-parallel arm, multicenter, comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type IIb, or mixed, dyslipidemia have high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) with predominance of small dense LDL particles, high levels of triglycerides (TG), and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). Fenofibrate significantly reduces TG and, more moderately, LDL-C, increases HDL-C and produces a shift from small to large LDL particle size; the main effect of ezetimibe is a reduction in LDL-C levels. Combined treatment with fenofibrate and ezetimibe may correct all the abnormalities of type IIb dyslipidemia. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of coadministration of fenofibrate (NanoCrystal(R)) and ezetimibe in patients with type IIb dyslipidemia and the metabolic syndrome compared with administration of fenofibrate and ezetimibe alone (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00349284; Study ID: CLF178P 04 01). METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, three-parallel arm, multicenter, comparative study. Sixty ambulatory patients (mean age 56 years; 50% women, 50% men) were treated in each group. For inclusion in the study, patients were required to have LDL-C >or=4.13 mmol/L (>or=160 mg/dL), TG >or=1.71 mmol/L and or=150 mg/dL and

Fenofibrate-induced rhabdomyolysis in a patient with chronic kidney disease: an unusual presenting feature of hypothyroidism / Rabdomiólise induzida por fenofibrato em paciente com doença renal crônica: uma apresentação clínica incomum do hipotireoidismo

Clinical and most often moderate skeletal muscle involvement is a frequent problem in adults with hypothyroidism, and includes a number of different manifestations. Severe involvement with rhabdomyolysis, however, is very rare, and only a few cases have been reported to date, most of them with an additional factor of muscle injury. We described a patient with stage 3 chronic kidney disease who presented with rhabdomyolysis while taking fenofibrate, and was found to have hypothyroidism. We also highlighted the importance of excluding the diagnosis of thyroid dysfunction before treatment with lipid-lowering agents.

Manifestações musculoesqueléticas variadas e de moderada intensidade são comuns em adultos com hipotireoidismo. No entanto, o envolvimento muscular grave, caracterizado por rabdomiólise, é incomum. Até o momento, poucos casos foram descritos na literatura, e a maior parte deles em associação com um fator adicional de dano muscular. Descrevemos um paciente com doença renal crônica (estádio 3) que se apresentou com rabdomiólise durante o tratamento com fenofibrato e cuja investigação adicional evidenciou hipotireoidismo primário. Enfatizamos, ainda, a importância da exclusão de disfunção tireoidiana antes de iniciar terapia com agentes hipolipemiantes.