Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe monotherapy in children with heterozygous familial or nonfamilial hypercholesterolemia.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe monotherapy in young children with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) or nonfamilial hypercholesterolemia (nonFH). STUDY DESIGN: One hundred thirty-eight children 6-10 years of age with diagnosed HeFH or clinically important nonFH (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] ≥ 160 mg/dL [4.1 mmol/L]) were enrolled into a multicenter, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Following screening/drug washout and a 5-week single-blind placebo-run-in with diet stabilization, subjects were randomized 2:1 to daily ezetimibe 10 mg (n = 93) or placebo (n = 45) for 12 weeks. Lipid-altering efficacy and safety were assessed in all treated patients. RESULTS: Overall, mean age was 8.3 years, 57% were girls, 80% were white, mean baseline LDL-C was 228 mg/dL (5.9 mmol/L), and 91% had HeFH. After 12 weeks, ezetimibe significantly reduced LDL-C by 27% after adjustment for placebo (P < .001) and produced significant reductions in total cholesterol (21%), nonhigh-density lipoprotein cholesterol (26%), and apolipoprotein B (20%) (P < .001 for all). LDL-C lowering response in sex, race, baseline lipids, and HeFH/nonFH subgroups was generally consistent with overall study results. Ezetimibe was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to studies in older children, adolescents, and adults. CONCLUSIONS: Ezetimibe monotherapy produced clinically relevant reductions in LDL-C and other key lipid variables in young children with primary HeFH or clinically important nonFH, with a favorable safety/tolerability profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00867165.

Influence of metabolic syndrome factors and insulin resistance on the efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin in patients with metabolic syndrome and atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and insulin resistance (IR) are increasing in prevalence, are associated with higher risk for coronary heart disease (CHD), and may potentially influence the responses to lipid-altering drug therapy. This study evaluated the effects of MetS factors (abdominal obesity, depleted high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and elevated triglycerides, blood pressure, and fasting glucose) and IR on ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin treatment efficacy in patients with MetS. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel group study of 1128 subjects with hypercholesterolemia, MetS, and moderately high/high CHD risk evaluated the effects of baseline MetS factors/IR on percent change from baseline in lipids, apolipoproteins, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), after treatment with the usual starting doses of ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 mg) versus atorvastatin (10 mg, 20 mg) and next higher doses (10/40 mg versus 40 mg). RESULTS: Ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin efficacy was generally consistent across MetS factor/IR subgroups. Ezetimibe/simvastatin produced greater incremental percent reductions in LDL-C, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, and lipoprotein ratios for all subgroups, and larger percent increases in HDL-C and apolipoprotein AI for all but non-obese and HDL-C ≥ 40 mg/dL subgroups than atorvastatin at the doses compared. Triglycerides, very-LDL-C, and hs-CRP results were more variable but similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of lipid-altering effects produced by each treatment regimen was generally similar across all MetS and IR subgroups. Ezetimibe/simvastatin produced greater percent reductions in most lipid fractions than atorvastatin at the dose comparisons studied, and all treatments were generally well tolerated. (Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00409773).

Atorvastatin 10 mg plus ezetimibe versus titration to atorvastatin 40 mg: attainment of European and Canadian guideline lipid targets in high-risk subjects ≥65 years.

BACKGROUND: Few clinical studies have focused on the efficacy of lipid-lowering therapies in patients ≥65 years. METHODS: After stabilization on atorvastatin 10 mg, hypercholesterolemic subjects ≥65 years at high/very high risk for CHD and not at LDL-C <1.81 mmol/L (with atherosclerotic vascular disease [AVD]) or <2.59 mmol/L (without AVD) were randomized to ezetimibe 10 mg plus atorvastatin 10 mg or uptitration to atorvastatin 20 mg (6 weeks) followed by uptitration to 40 mg (additional 6 weeks). A post-hoc analysis compared between-group differences in percent attainment of individual and combined LDL-C, non-HDL-C and Apo B targets based on recommendations from 2012 European and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) guidelines for dyslipidemia treatment. RESULTS: Atorvastatin 10 mg plus ezetimibe produced significantly greater attainment of LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and Apo B individual and dual/triple targets vs. atorvastatin 20 mg for the entire cohort and very high-risk groups at 6 weeks. After 12 weeks, very high-risk subjects maintained significantly greater achievement of LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L (47% vs. 35%), non-HDL-C <2.6 mmol/L (63% vs. 53%) and Apo B <0.8 g/L (47% vs. 38%) single targets and dual/triple targets with atorvastatin 10 mg plus ezetimibe vs. atorvastatin 40 mg, while attainment of European target for high-risk subjects was generally similar for both treatments. Achievement of Canadian targets was significantly greater with combination therapy vs. atorvastatin 20 mg (6 weeks) or atorvastatin 40 mg (12 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: Atorvastatin 10 mg plus ezetimibe provided more effective treatment than uptitration to atorvastatin 20/40 mg for attainment of most European and Canadian guideline-recommended lipid targets in older at-risk patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00418834.

Pharmacokinetics of vorapaxar and its metabolite following oral administration in healthy Chinese and American subjects.

AIM: Vorapaxar is a proteaseactivated receptor (PAR)-1 antagonist being developed for the prevention and treatment of thrombotic vascular events. To evaluate race/ethnic differences between Caucasians and Chinese in the pharmacokinetics of vorapaxar and its active metabolite SCH 2046273 (M20) or in the metabolite/parent ratio, we conducted a cross-study comparison on pharmacokinetic data of vorapaxar and M20 obtained from two similarly designed studies: one in healthy Chinese subjects and the other in a healthy Western (United States, [U.S.]) population. METHODS: The pharmacokinetic profiles of vorapaxar and M20 were characterized using open label, two treatment parallel group designs in men and women aged 18 - 45 years. Vorapaxar was administered orally as a single dose of 40 mg in Chinese subjects (n = 14) or 120 mg in U.S. subjects (n = 14), or 2.5 mg QD for 6 weeks in both studies (Chinese, n = 14; U.S., n = 23). RESULTS: Vorapaxar was rapidly absorbed in both Chinese and U.S. subjects. Vorapaxar and M20 had similar elimination half-lives. The range of metabolite/parent ratios after single dose or daily administration was largely overlapped in Chinese and U.S. subjects. Steady state was attained by day 21 for vorapaxar and M20 in both race/ethnic groups. The accumulation ratios for vorapaxar and M20 during daily administration were similar in Chinese and U.S. subjects. Vorapaxar was well-tolerated in Chinese and U.S. subjects. CONCLUSION: The pharmacokinetic profiles of vorapaxar and M20 and the metabolite/parent ratios in healthy Chinese were generally comparable to those in a healthy Western population.

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe added to atorvastatin versus atorvastatin uptitration or switching to rosuvastatin in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.

Hypercholesterolemic patients (n = 1,547) at high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels ≥100 and ≤160 mg/dl while treated with atorvastatin 10 mg/day entered a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, clinical trial using two 6-week study periods. Period I compared the efficacy/safety of (1) adding ezetimibe 10 mg (ezetimibe) to stable atorvastatin 10 mg, (2) doubling atorvastatin to 20 mg, or (3) switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg. Subjects in the latter 2 groups who persisted with elevated LDL-C levels (≥100 and ≤160 mg/dl) after period I, entered period II; subjects on atorvastatin 20 mg had ezetimibe added to their atorvastatin 20 mg, or uptitrated their atorvastatin to 40 mg; subjects on rosuvastatin 10 mg switched to atorvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe or uptitrated their rosuvastatin to 20 mg. Some subjects on atorvastatin 10 mg plus ezetimibe continued the same treatment into period II. At the end of period I, ezetimibe plus atorvastatin 10 mg reduced LDL-C significantly more than atorvastatin 20 mg or rosuvastatin 10 mg (22.2% vs 9.5% or 13.0%, respectively, p <0.001). At the end of period II, ezetimibe plus atorvastatin 20 mg reduced LDL-C significantly more than atorvastatin 40 mg (17.4% vs 6.9%, p <0.001); switching from rosuvastatin 10 mg to ezetimibe plus atorvastatin 20 mg reduced LDL-C significantly more than uptitrating to rosuvastatin 20 mg (17.1% vs 7.5%, p <0.001). Relative to comparative treatments, ezetimibe added to atorvastatin 10 mg (period I) or atorvastatin 20 mg (period II) produced significantly greater percent attainment of LDL-C targets <100 or <70 mg/dl, and significantly greater percent reductions in total cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, most lipid and lipoprotein ratios, and apolipoprotein B (except ezetimibe plus atorvastatin 20 vs atorvastatin 40 mg). Reports of adverse experiences were generally similar among groups. In conclusion, treatment of hypercholesterolemic subjects at high cardiovascular risk with ezetimibe added to atorvastatin 10 or 20 mg produced significantly greater improvements in key lipid parameters and significantly greater attainment of LDL-C treatment targets than doubling atorvastatin or switching to (or doubling) rosuvastatin at the compared doses.

Age, abdominal obesity, and baseline high-sensitivity C-reactive protein are associated with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B responses to ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin in patients with metabolic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Treatment response to lipid-lowering therapy can vary in patients with the metabolic syndrome (MetS) due to various patient demographic and baseline characteristics. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the relationships between baseline characteristics and changes in lipid variables, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and attainment of prespecified low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels in MetS patients treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin. METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, 6-week parallel study in >1000 hypercholesterolemic subjects (median age of 59 years) with MetS and moderately high/high coronary heart disease risk who were treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 and 10/40 mg) or atorvastatin (10, 20, 40 mg). Factors that could affect these treatments were assessed by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Increasing age, abdominal obesity (waist circumference ≥ 40/35 inches for men/women), and lower baseline hs-CRP were significant predictors of greater reductions in LDL-C, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol but not for changes in HDL-C or apolipoprotein AI; effects of race and baseline triglycerides, non-HDL-C, LDL-C, or HDL-C levels were more limited. Age ≥ 65 years (versus <65 years) was also associated with significantly greater attainment of all LDL-C and non-HDL-C targets, whereas abdominal obesity, gender (female > male) and lower baseline LDL-C, non-HDL-C, triglycerides, and hs-CRP were associated with improved attainment for some of these targets. Blood pressure, fasting glucose, Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance tertiles, and diabetes did not predict response for any efficacy variable. Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment (versus atorvastatin) was a significant predictor for change in most efficacy variables. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment responses to ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin in at-risk patients with the MetS were related to age (≥ 65 years), abdominal obesity, and lower baseline hs-CRP. Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment was found to be consistently more effective than atorvastatin at the specified dose comparisons across these subgroups. The clinical value of predictive factors requires further study in outcome trials.

Lipid-altering efficacy of ezetimibe plus statin and statin monotherapy and identification of factors associated with treatment response: a pooled analysis of over 21,000 subjects from 27 clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with dyslipoproteinemia constitute the largest risk group for development of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite extensive statin use, many patients with CVD risk do not achieve guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets. This pooled analysis of 27 previously published clinical trials conducted between 1999 and 2008 evaluated the lipid-altering efficacy and factors related to treatment response of ezetimibe combined with statin and statin monotherapy. METHODS: Patient-level data were combined from double-blind, placebo-controlled or active comparator studies randomizing adult subjects to ezetimibe 10mg plus statin (n=11,714) versus statin alone (n=10,517) for 6-24 weeks (mean=9 weeks). Association of factors with treatment response, percent change from baseline LDL-C and other lipids, and attainment of guideline-recommended lipid and lipoprotein targets were evaluated. RESULTS: Higher baseline LDL-C, diabetes mellitus, Black race, greater age, and male gender were associated with small but significantly greater percent reductions in LDL-C regardless of treatment. Treatment influenced efficacy, with ezetimibe plus statin producing significantly greater reductions in LDL-C, total-cholesterol, non-HDL-C, ApoB, triglycerides, lipid ratios, hs-CRP; significantly larger increases in HDL-C and ApoA1; and significantly higher achievement of LDL-C (<70mg/dl, <100mg/dl), non-HDL-C (<100mg/dl, <130mg/dl), and ApoB (<80mg/dl, <90mg/dl) targets than statin monotherapy at statin potencies compared (p<0.0001 for all). Differential treatment effects were seen with first-/second-line therapy and statin potency. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that patient characteristics have a limited influence on response to lipid-lowering therapy and demonstrate the consistent treatment effect of ezetimibe combined with statin and statin monotherapy across a diverse patient population.

Effects of ezetimibe added to statin therapy on markers of cholesterol absorption and synthesis and LDL-C lowering in hyperlipidemic patients.

OBJECTIVE: Statins inhibit cholesterol synthesis but can upregulate cholesterol absorption, with higher doses producing larger effects. Ezetimibe inhibits cholesterol absorption but also upregulates synthesis. We tested whether ezetimibe added to on-going statin therapy would be most effective in lowering LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) in subjects on high-potency statins and whether these effects would be related to alterations in cholesterol absorption (ß-sitosterol) and synthesis (lathosterol) markers. METHODS: Hypercholesterolemic subjects (n = 874) on statins received ezetimibe 10 mg/day. Plasma lipids, lathosterol, and ß-sitosterol were measured at baseline and on treatment. Subjects were divided into low- (n = 133), medium- (n = 582), and high- (n = 159) statin potency groups defined by predicted LDL-C-lowering effects of each ongoing statin type and dose (reductions of ~20-30%, ~31-45%, or ~46-55%, respectively). RESULTS: The high-potency group had significantly lower baseline lathosterol (1.93 vs. 2.58 vs. 3.17 µmol/l; p < 0.001) and higher baseline ß-sitosterol values (6.21 vs. 4.58 vs. 4.51 µmol/l, p < 0.001) than medium-/low-potency groups. Ezetimibe treatment in the high-potency group produced significantly greater reductions from baseline in LDL-C than medium-/low-potency groups (-29.1% vs. -25.0% vs. -22.7%; p < 0.001) when evaluating unadjusted data. These effects and group differences were significantly (p < 0.05) related to greater ß-sitosterol reductions and smaller lathosterol increases. However, LDL-C reduction differences between groups were no longer significant after controlling for placebo effects, due mainly to modest LDL-C lowering by placebo in the high-potency group. CONCLUSION: Patients on high-potency statins have the lowest levels of cholesterol synthesis markers and the highest levels of cholesterol absorption markers at baseline, and the greatest reduction in absorption markers and the smallest increases in synthesis markers with ezetimibe addition. Therefore, such patients may be good candidates for ezetimibe therapy if additional LDL-C lowering is needed.

Effects of ezetimibe on atherosclerosis in preclinical models.

Ezetimibe (Zetia(®), Ezetrol(®), Merck, Whitehouse Station, NJ) is a potent inhibitor of sterol absorption, which selectively blocks the uptake of biliary and dietary cholesterol in the small intestine. Clinical trials have demonstrated the beneficial effects of ezetimibe on the reduction of atherogenic lipoproteins and the attainment of guideline-recommended lipid levels. Direct evidence that these improvements translate to a reduction in atherosclerosis or cardiovascular events is limited, although reductions in major atherosclerotic events that are consistent with the LDL-C lowering achieved have recently been presented for patients with chronic kidney disease treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20mg in the SHARP trial. Animal models of atherosclerosis have played a central role in defining the mechanisms involved in initiation and development of disease and have been used in drug development to evaluate potential therapeutic efficacy. The effect of ezetimibe on atherosclerosis has been examined in several of these animal model systems. ApoE knockout mice develop severe hypercholesterolemia and premature atherosclerosis with features similar to that seen in humans and techniques ranging from gross visualization of plaque to high-resolution MRI have demonstrated the consistent ability of ezetimibe to significantly inhibit atherosclerosis. sr-b1(-/-)/apoE(-/-) double knockout mice exhibit additional characteristics common to human coronary heart disease (CHD), and the one study of ezetimibe in sr-b1(-/-)/apoE(-/-) mice showed a significant reduction in aortic sinus plaque (57%), coronary arterial occlusion (68%), myocardial fibrosis (57%), and cardiomegaly (12%) compared with untreated controls. The effects of ezetimibe have also been evaluated in ldlr(-/-)/apoE(-/-) double knockout mice, demonstrating that functional LDL receptors were not required for ezetimibe-mediated reduction of plasma cholesterol or atherosclerosis. For the few studies that have been conducted in rabbits, ezetimibe has been shown to significantly inhibit diet and vascular-injury-induced atherosclerosis as measured by intima/media thickness, atherosclerotic lesion composition, and thrombosis. The current body of preclinical evidence consistently demonstrates that ezetimibe reduces atherosclerosis in animals, presumably due primarily to the decrease in circulating levels of atherogenic lipoproteins that the drug produces. Demonstration that ezetimibe-mediated lowering of atherogenic lipoproteins in humans has a similar effect on atherosclerosis and cardiovascular risk awaits additional results from recently completed and ongoing outcomes trials.

Influence of age, gender, and race on the efficacy of adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin vs. atorvastatin up-titration in patients at moderately high or high risk for coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Age, gender, and race are factors that influence atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD) risk and may conceivably affect the efficacy of lipid-altering drugs. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of two multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trials assessed age (<65 and ≥ 65 years), gender, and race (white, black, and other) effects on atorvastatin plus ezetimibe versus up-titration of atorvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients with CHD risk. High CHD risk subjects with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels ≥ 70 mg/dL (~1.81 mmol/L) during stable atorvastatin 40 mg therapy were randomized to atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe 10mg, or up-titrated to atorvastatin 80 mg. Moderately high CHD risk subjects with LDL cholesterol levels ≥ 100 mg/dL (~2.59 mmol/L) with atorvastatin 20mg were randomized to atorvastatin 20mg plus ezetimibe 10mg, or atorvastatin 40 mg. RESULTS: Although some variability existed, age, gender, and race subgroups did not substantially differ from the entire patient population with regard to lipid-altering findings. Ezetimibe plus atorvastatin produced greater percent reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B than up-titration of atorvastatin for all subgroups. HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein AI changes were small and variable. CONCLUSION: Treatment efficacy in age, gender, and race subgroups did not substantially differ from the entire study population. Ezetimibe combined with atorvastatin generally produced greater incremental reductions in LDL cholesterol and several other key lipid parameters compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose in hypercholesterolemic patients with high or moderately high CHD risk. These results suggest that co-administration of ezetimibe with statins is a useful therapeutic option for treatment of dyslipidemia in differing patient populations.

Safety and efficacy of ezetimibe added on to rosuvastatin 5 or 10 mg versus up-titration of rosuvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia (the ACTE Study).

The present multicenter, 6-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, clinical trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of ezetimibe (10 mg) added to stable rosuvastatin therapy versus up-titration of rosuvastatin from 5 to 10 mg or from 10 to 20 mg. The study population included 440 subjects at moderately high/high risk of coronary heart disease with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels higher than the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III recommendations (<100 mg/dl for moderately high/high-risk subjects without atherosclerotic vascular disease or <70 mg/dl for high-risk subjects with atherosclerotic vascular disease). Pooled data demonstrated that ezetimibe added to stable rosuvastatin 5 mg or 10 mg reduced LDL cholesterol by 21%. In contrast, doubling rosuvastatin to 10 mg or 20 mg reduced LDL cholesterol by 5.7% (between-group difference of 15.2%, p <0.001). Individually, ezetimibe plus rosuvastatin 5 mg reduced LDL cholesterol more than did rosuvastatin 10 mg (12.3% difference, p <0.001), and ezetimibe plus rosuvastatin 10 mg reduced LDL cholesterol more than did rosuvastatin 20 mg (17.5% difference, p <0.001). Compared to rosuvastatin up-titration, ezetimibe add-on achieved significantly greater attainment of LDL cholesterol levels of <70 or <100 mg/dl (59.4% vs 30.9%, p <0.001), and <70 mg/dl in all subjects (43.8% vs 17.5%, p <0.001); produced significantly greater reductions in total cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B (p <0.001); and resulted in similar effects on other lipid parameters. Adverse experiences were generally comparable among the groups. In conclusion, compared to up-titration doubling of the rosuvastatin dose, ezetimibe 10 mg added to stable rosuvastatin 5 mg or 10 mg produced greater improvements in many lipid parameters and achieved greater attainment of the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III recommended LDL cholesterol targets in subjects with elevated LDL cholesterol and at moderately high/high coronary heart disease risk.

Achievement of specified low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol apolipoprotein B, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels with ezetimibe/simvastatin or atorvastatin in metabolic syndrome patients with and without atherosclerotic vascular disease (from the VYMET study).

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and atherosclerotic vascular disease (AVD) are associated with increased coronary heart disease risk. OBJECTIVE: To assess percent change from baseline in lipids and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels and the proportion of subjects reaching specified low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (Apo B) single, dual, and triple targets and hs-CRP <2 mg/L among subjects with and without AVD treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin or atorvastatin for 6 weeks. METHODS: Adults (N = 1143) with MetS and hypercholesterolemia were randomized to starting and next higher doses of ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 or 10/40 mg) or atorvastatin (10, 20, or 40 mg). RESULTS: Ezetimibe/simvastatin produced significantly greater reductions in evaluated lipids than atorvastatin for most prespecified dose comparisons. More subjects without AVD achieved LDL-C levels <100 mg/dL, non-HDL-C levels <130 mg/dL, and dual LDL-C/non-HDL targets (83%-92% vs 62%-76%) and Apo B <90 mg/dL or triple targets (65%-75% vs 41%-49%) with 40 mg of atorvastatin or 10/20-40 mg of ezetimibe/simvastatin compared with 10 or 20 mg of atorvastatin, respectively. More subjects with AVD achieved LDL-C<70 mg/dL and non-HDL-C<100 mg/dL single and dual targets (65%-80%) and Apo B <80 mg/dL (53%-63%) with 10/20-40 mg of ezetimibe/simvastatin than with 40 mg of atorvastatin (40%-49%). More subjects achieved triple lipid targets with 10/20-40 mg of ezetimibe/simvastatin versus 10-40 mg of atorvastatin (50%-63% vs 24%-40%). Achievement of hs-CRP <2 mg/L was similar across all doses regardless of AVD status. CONCLUSIONS: More intensive therapy was required for >80% of subjects to achieve LDL-C <100 mg/dL and non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL and for the majority of subjects to achieve lower levels of LDL-C <70 mg/dL, non-HDL-C <100 mg/dL, and/or Apo B <90 mg/dL. The effect of ezetimibe on cardiovascular risk reduction has yet to be established. (Clintrials.gov no: NCT00409773).

Safety and efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin combination versus atorvastatin alone in adults ≥65 years of age with hypercholesterolemia and with or at moderately high/high risk for coronary heart disease (the VYTELD study).

Higher than 80% of coronary heart disease-related mortality occurs in patients ≥65 years of age. Guidelines recommend low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol targets for these at-risk patients; however, few clinical studies have evaluated lipid-lowering strategies specifically in older adults. This multicenter, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of the usual starting dose of ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 mg) versus atorvastatin 10 or 20 mg and the next higher dose of ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/40 mg) versus atorvastatin 40 mg in 1,289 hypercholesterolemic patients ≥65 years of age with or without cardiovascular disease. Patients randomized to ezetimibe/simvastatin had greater percent decreases in LDL cholesterol (-54.2% for 10/20 mg vs -39.5% and -46.6% for atorvastatin 10 and 20 mg, respectively; -59.1% for 10/40 mg vs -50.8% for atorvastatin 40 mg; p <0.001 for all comparisons) and the number attaining LDL cholesterol <70 mg/dl (51.3% for 10/20 mg, 68.2% for 10/40 mg) and <100 mg/dl (83.6% for 10/20 mg; 90.3% for 10/40 mg) was significantly larger compared to those receiving atorvastatin for all prespecified dose comparisons (p <0.05 to <0.001). A significantly larger percentage of high-risk patients achieved LDL cholesterol <70 mg/dl on ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg (54.3%) versus atorvastatin 10 mg (10.9%, p <0.001) or 20 mg (28.9%, p <0.001) and ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/40 mg (69.2%) versus atorvastatin 40 mg (38.2%, p <0.001), and a significantly larger percentage of intermediate-risk patients achieved LDL cholesterol <100 mg/dl on ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg (82.1%) versus atorvastatin 10 mg (59.3%, p <0.05). Improvements in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and lipoprotein ratios were significantly greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin than atorvastatin for all comparisons (p <0.01 to <0.001). High-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglyceride results were variable. All treatments were generally well tolerated. In conclusion, ezetimibe/simvastatin provided significantly greater improvements in key lipid parameters and higher attainment of LDL cholesterol targets than atorvastatin, with comparable tolerability.

Indices of cholesterol metabolism and relative responsiveness to ezetimibe and simvastatin.

CONTEXT: The level and duration of exposure to circulating low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) are major contributors to coronary atherosclerosis. Therefore, optimal prevention will require long-term LDL-C reduction, making it important to select the most effective agent for each individual. OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that individuals with high fractional absorption of cholesterol respond better to the cholesterol absorption inhibitor ezetimibe than to simvastatin, whereas low absorbers, who have elevated rates of cholesterol synthesis, respond better to simvastatin. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial was performed in 215 African- and European-American men. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomized to placebo, ezetimibe (10 mg/d), simvastatin (10 mg/d), and both drugs for 6 wk each. MAIN OUTCOME: Plasma levels of LDL-C, surrogate markers for cholesterol absorption (campesterol) and synthesis (lathosterol), and proprotein convertase subtilisin-like kexin type 9 were measured at baseline and after treatment. RESULTS: LDL-C levels were reduced by 19% (ezetimibe), 25% (simvastatin), and 41% (ezetimibe+simvastatin) from a baseline of 146 +/- 20 mg/dl; results were similar between ethnic groups. Reduction in LDL-C correlated poorly with baseline levels of noncholesterol sterols and proprotein convertase subtilisin-like kexin type 9. Although individual responses varied widely, change in LDL-C on ezetimibe correlated with response to simvastatin (r = 0.46, P < 0.001). Combination therapy lowered LDL-C by 15% or greater in more than 95% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline cholesterol absorption and synthesis did not predict responsiveness to LDL-lowering drugs. Responsiveness to simvastatin and ezetimibe were highly correlated, suggesting that factors downstream of the primary sites of action of these drugs are a major determinant of response.

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe added on to atorvastatin (20 mg) versus uptitration of atorvastatin (to 40 mg) in hypercholesterolemic patients at moderately high risk for coronary heart disease.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe 10 mg added to atorvastatin 20 mg compared with doubling atorvastatin to 40 mg in patients with hypercholesterolemia at moderately high risk for coronary heart disease who did not reach low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels <100 mg/dl with atorvastatin 20 mg. In this 6-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study, 196 patients treated with atorvastatin 20 mg received atorvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg or atorvastatin 40 mg for 6 weeks. Adding ezetimibe 10 mg to atorvastatin 20 mg produced significantly greater reductions in LDL cholesterol than increasing atorvastatin to 40 mg (-31% vs -11%, p <0.001). Significantly greater reductions were also seen in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B (p <0.001). Significantly more patients reached LDL cholesterol levels <100 mg/dl with atorvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe compared with atorvastatin 40 mg (84% vs 49%, p <0.001). The 2 treatment groups had comparable results for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, apolipoprotein A-I, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. The incidences of clinical and laboratory adverse experiences were generally similar between groups. In conclusion, the addition of ezetimibe 10 mg to atorvastatin 20 mg was generally well tolerated and resulted in significantly greater lipid-lowering efficacy compared with doubling atorvastatin to 40 mg in patients with hypercholesterolemia at moderately high risk for coronary heart disease.

Infectious virions produced from a human papillomavirus type 18/16 genomic DNA chimera.

The organotypic raft culture system has allowed the study of the differentiation-dependent aspects of the human papillomavirus (HPV) life cycle. However, genetic strategies to more completely understand the HPV life cycle are limited. The generation of chimeric viruses has been a useful tool in other virus systems to analyze infection and replication. To investigate the specificity of the interaction of nonstructural genes of one HPV type with the structural genes of another HPV type, we have replaced the L2 and L1 open reading frames (ORFs) of HPV type 18 (HPV18) with the L2 and L1 ORFs of HPV type 16 (HPV16). The resulting HPV18/16 chimeric construct was introduced into primary keratinocytes, where it was stably maintained episomally at a range of 50 to 100 copies of HPV genomic DNA, similar to that typically found in HPV-infected cells in vivo. The integrity of the HPV18/16 genomic DNA chimera was demonstrated. Upon differentiation in raft cultures, late viral functions, including viral DNA amplification, capsid gene expression, and virion morphogenesis, occurred. Chimeric HPV18/16 virions were purified from the raft cultures and were capable of infecting keratinocytes in vitro. Additionally, infection was specifically neutralized with human HPV16 virus-like particle (VLP)-specific antiserum and not with human HPV18 VLP-specific antiserum. Our data demonstrate that the nonstructural genes of HPV18 functionally interact with the structural genes of HPV16, allowing the complete HPV life cycle to occur. We believe that this is the first report of the propagation of chimeric HPV by normal life cycle pathways.