Efficacy and safety of fenofibrate in combination with phototherapy for the treatment of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: a systematic review and meta-analyses.

Phototherapy is the standard treatment for neonatal jaundice. We aimed to review the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate as an adjunct therapy. Twelve databases were searched and a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Mean change (MC), mean difference (MD), and risk ratios (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the evidence's certainty. Nine randomized trials were included. The MC of total serum bilirubin (mg/dL) was significant at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 h with respective MC (95% CI) values of -0.46 (-0.61, -0.310), -1.10 (-1.68, -0.52), -2.06 (-2.20, -1.91), -2.15 (-2.74, -1.56), and -1.13 (-1.71, -0.55). The FEN + PT group had a shorter duration of phototherapy (MD: -14.36 h; 95% CI: -23.67, -5.06) and a shorter hospital stay (MD: -1.40 days; 95% CI: -2.14, -0.66). There was no significant difference in the risk of complications (RR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.46) or the need for exchange transfusion (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.12, 2.81). The certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes. In conclusion, fenofibrate might be a safe adjunct to neonatal phototherapy. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed for the confirmation of these results.

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.

Saroglitazar is noninferior to fenofibrate in reducing triglyceride levels in hypertriglyceridemic patients in a randomized clinical trial.

Saroglitazar, being a dual PPAR-α/γ agonist, has shown beneficial effect in diabetic dyslipidemia and hypertriglyceridemia. Fibrates are commonly used to treat severe hypertriglyceridemia. However, the effect of saroglitazar in patients with moderate to severe hypertriglyceridemia was not evaluated. We conducted a study to compare the efficacy and safety of saroglitazar (4 mg) with fenofibrate (160 mg) in patients with moderate to severe hypertriglyceridemia. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, double-dummy, active-control, and noninferiority trial in adult patients with fasting triglyceride (TG) levels of 500-1,500 mg/dl. The patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive daily dose of saroglitazar or fenofibrate for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the percent change in TG levels at week 12 relative to baseline. The study comprised of 41 patients in the saroglitazar group and 41 patients in the fenofibrate group. We found that the percent reduction from baseline in TG levels at week 12 was significantly higher in the saroglitazar group (least square mean = -55.3%; SE = 4.9) compared with the fenofibrate group (least square mean = -41.1%; SE = 4.9; P = 0.048). Overall, 37 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported in 24 patients (saroglitazar: 13; fenofibrate: 11). No serious AEs were reported, and no patient discontinued the study because of AEs. We conclude that saroglitazar (4 mg) is noninferior to fenofibrate (160 mg) in reducing TG levels after 12 weeks of treatment, was safe, and well tolerated.

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.

Effects of fenofibrate therapy on renal function in primary gout patients.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence and potential risk factors for development of fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity in gout patients. METHODS: A total of 983 gout patients on fenofibrate treatment who visited the dedicated Gout Clinic at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between September 2016 and June 2020 were retrospectively enrolled from the electronic records system. Fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity was defined as an increase in serum creatinine (SCr) ≥0.3 mg/dl within 6 months of fenofibrate initiation. The change trend of SCr and uric acid levels during the treatment period were assessed by a generalised additive mixed model (GAMM). Multivariate analysis was performed for risk factors affecting elevated SCr. RESULTS: A total of 100 (10.2%) patients experienced an increase in SCr ≥0.3 mg/dl within 6 months after fenofibrate initiation. The median change of SCr in the whole cohort was 0.11 mg/dl [interquartile range (IQR) 0.03-0.20], whereas it was 0.36 (0.33-0.45) in the fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity group. In a multivariable regression model, chronic kidney disease (CKD) [odds ratio (OR) 2.39 (95% CI 1.48, 3.86)] and tophus [OR 2.29 (95% CI 1.39, 3.78)] were identified to be risk predictors, independent of measured covariates, of fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity. During the treatment period, although SCr temporarily increased, serum urate and triglyceride concentrations decreased using the interaction analysis of GAMM. Of those with fenofibrate withdrawal records, the SCr increase in 65% of patients was reversed after an average of 49 days off the drug. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study implied that fenofibrate-associated nephrotoxicity occurs frequently in gout patients, especially in patients with tophi or CKD. The potential renal risks of fenofibrate usage in gout needs additional research.

Liver injury caused by fenofibrate within 48 h after first administration: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Fenofibrate is commonly used in the treatment of dyslipidemia. Fenofibrate is related to mild aminotransferase elevations and in some cases severe chronic injury such as fibrosis or cirrhosis, resulting in liver transplantation or death. The latency of disease has been reported to range between weeks to years. CASE PRESENTATION: A 63 years old male with hypertriglyceridemia developed symptoms of fatigue and anorexia 48 h after taking fenofibrate for the first time. The patient's aminotransferase level was more than 10 times ULN. Immediately, fenofibrate was discontinued and aminotransferase level returned to normal 23 days later. To assess causality between the drug and liver damage, the standardized Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) was used. The patient's RUCAM score was 7, which fell in the group of "probable". Eight months later, follow-up examination suggested the liver function was normal. CONCLUSIONS: Weakness, fatigue and abnormal liver function during fenofibrate therapy should be closely monitored and trigger prompt withdrawal if these symptoms occur.

Legacy effect of fibrate add-on therapy in diabetic patients with dyslipidemia: a secondary analysis of the ACCORDION study.

BACKGROUND: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD)-Lipid study found no evidence of a beneficial effect of statin-fibrate combined treatment, compared to statins alone, on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in type 2 diabetes mellitus after 5 years of active treatment. However, a beneficial reduction in major CVD events was shown in a pre-specified sub-group of participants with dyslipidemia. The extended follow-up of this trial provides the opportunity to further investigate possible beneficial effects of fibrates in this group of patients. We aimed to evaluate possible "legacy effects" of fibrate add-on therapy on mortality and major cardiovascular outcomes in patients with dyslipidemia. METHODS: The ACCORD-lipid study was a randomized controlled trial of 5518 participants assigned to receive simvastatin plus fenofibrate vs simvastatin plus placebo. After randomized treatment allocation had finished at the end of the trial, all surviving participants were invited to attend an extended follow-up study (ACCORDION) to continue prospective collection of clinical outcomes. We undertook a secondary analysis of trial and post-trial data in patients who had dyslipidemia. The primary outcome was all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, and secondary outcomes were nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, congestive heart failure and major coronary heart disease. We used an intention-to-treat approach to analysis to make comparisons between the original randomized treatment groups. RESULTS: 853 participants with dyslipidemia had survived at the end of the trial. Most participants continued to use statins, but few used fibrates in either group during the post-trial period. The incidence rates in the fenofibrate group were lower with respect to all-cause mortality, CVD mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure and major coronary heart disease than those in the placebo group over a post-trial follow-up. Allocation to the combined fibrate-statin treatment arm during the trial period had a beneficial legacy effect on all-cause mortality (adjusted HR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.45-0.94; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Fibrate treatment during the initial trial period was associated with a legacy benefit of improved survival over a post-trial follow-up. These findings support re-evaluation of fibrates as an add-on strategy to statins in order to reduce cardiovascular risk in diabetic patients with dyslipidemia. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT00000620.

Pemafibrate, a New Selective PPARα Modulator: Drug Concept and Its Clinical Applications for Dyslipidemia and Metabolic Diseases.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Reduction of serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels by statins, ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors has been shown to significantly reduce cardiovascular events risk. However, fasting and postprandial hypertriglyceridemia as well as reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) remain as residual risk factors of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD). To treat patients with hypertriglyceridemia and/or low HDL-C, drugs such as fibrates, nicotinic acids, and n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids have been used. However, fibrates were demonstrated to cause side effects such as liver dysfunction and increase in creatinine levels, and thus large-scale clinical trials of fibrates have shown negative results for prevention of ASCVD. The failure could be attributed to their low selectivity and potency for binding to peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) α. To resolve these issues, the concept of selective PPARα modulator (SPPARMα) with a superior balance of efficacy and safety has been proposed and pemafibrate (K-877) has been developed. RECENT FINDINGS: Pemafibrate, one of SPPARMsα, was synthesized by Kowa Company, Ltd. for better efficiency and safety. Clinical trials in Japan have established the superiority of pemafibrate on effects on serum triglycerides (TG) reduction and HDL-C elevation as well safety. Although available fibrates showed worsening of liver and kidney function test values, pemafibrate indicated improved liver function test values and was less likely to increase serum creatinine or decrease estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Very few drug-drug interactions were observed even when used concomitantly with statins. Furthermore, pemafibrate is metabolized in the liver and excreted into the bile, while many of available fibrates are mainly excreted from the kidney. Therefore, pemafibrate can be used safely even in patients with impaired renal function since there is no significant increase in its blood concentration. A large-scale trial of pemafibrate, PROMINENT, for dyslipidemic patients with type 2 diabetes is ongoing. Pemafibrate is one of novel SPPARMsα and has superior benefit-risk balance compared to conventional fibrates and can be applicable for patients for whom the usage of existing fibrates is difficult such as those who are taking statins or patients with renal dysfunction. In the current review, all the recent data on pemafibrate will be summarized.

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.

Fenofibrate-induced hepatotoxicity: A case with a special feature that is different from those in the LiverTox database.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: We report a special case of fenofibrate-induced acute severe DILI with sudden onset and rapid recovery, which is different from those in the LiverTox database. CASE SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: The acute severe DILI occurred within only 4 days after fenofibrate initial treatment for hypertriglyceridemia. Liver enzyme levels eventually declined to normal within two weeks after the discontinuation of fenofibrate. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Early detection of elevated hepatic enzymes after fenofibrate initial treatment helps physicians to avoid delayed diagnosis and subsequent treatment.

Association of Fenofibrate and Diabetic Retinopathy in Type 2 Diabetic Patients: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study in Taiwan.

Background and Objectives: Fenofibrate, a PPAR-α agonist, has been demonstrated to reduce the progression of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and the need for laser treatment in a FIELD (Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes) study. However, in the subgroup of patients without pre-existing DR, there was no significant difference in the progression of DR between the fenofibrate group and the placebo group. In this study, we aim to investigate whether fenofibrate can decrease the risk of incident DR in a population-based cohort study of type 2 diabetic patients in Taiwan. Materials and Methods: A total of 32,253 type 2 diabetic patients without previous retinopathy were retrieved from 892,419 patients in 2001-2002. They were then divided into two groups based on whether they were exposed to fenofibrate or not. The patients were followed until a diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy was made or until the year 2008. Results: With a follow-up period of 6.8 ± 1.5 years and 5.4 ± 2.6 years for 2500 fenofibrate users and 29,753 non-users, respectively, the Cox proportional hazard regression analysis revealed that the hazard ratio (HR) of new onset retinopathy was 0.57 (95% CI 0.57-0.62, p < 0.001). After adjusting for hypertension; the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI); and medications such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), anticoagulants, gemfibrozil, statins, and hypoglycemic agents, the adjusted HR was 0.75 (95% CI 0.68-0.82, p < 0.001). The need for laser treatment has an HR and adjusted HR of 0.59 (95% CI 0.49-0.71, p < 0.001) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.56-0.81, p < 0.001), respectively. Conclusion: Our study showed that the long-term and regular use of fenofibrate may decrease the risk of incident retinopathy and the need for laser treatment in type 2 diabetic patients. Since there are limitations associated with our study, further investigations are necessary to confirm such an association.

SPPARM alpha: the Lazarus effect.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Atherogenic dyslipidaemia, characterized by high plasma triglycerides (a surrogate for triglyceride-rich remnant lipoproteins) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), is prevalent in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and contributes to a high modifiable residual cardiovascular risk. Fibrates are effective in managing hypertriglyceridaemia but lack consistent cardiovascular benefit in clinical trials and exhibit pharmacokinetic interaction with statins (gemfibrozil) and renal and hepatic safety issues (fenofibrate). The selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha modulator (SPPARMα) paradigm offers potential for improving potency, selectivity and the benefit-risk profile. RECENT FINDINGS: The present review discusses evidence for the novel SPPARMα agonist, pemafibrate. Clinical trials showed robust lowering of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, elevation in HDL-C and nonlipid beneficial effects including anti-inflammatory activity. There was a favourable safety profile, with no increase in serum creatinine, evident with fenofibrate, and improved renal and hepatic safety. The cardiovascular outcomes study PROMINENT is critical to confirming the SPPARMα concept by validating reduction in residual cardiovascular risk in patients with T2DM and long-term safety. SUMMARY: SPPARMα offers a new paradigm for reducing residual cardiovascular risk in T2DM. PROMINENT will be critical to differentiating the first SPPARMα, pemafibrate, as a novel therapeutic class distinct from current fibrates.

Association of Liver Injury From Specific Drugs, or Groups of Drugs, With Polymorphisms in HLA and Other Genes in a Genome-Wide Association Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) to identify genetic risk factors for drug-induced liver injury (DILI) from licensed drugs without previously reported genetic risk factors. METHODS: We performed a GWAS of 862 persons with DILI and 10,588 population-matched controls. The first set of cases was recruited before May 2009 in Europe (n = 137) and the United States (n = 274). The second set of cases were identified from May 2009 through May 2013 from international collaborative studies performed in Europe, the United States, and South America. For the GWAS, we included only cases with patients of European ancestry associated with a particular drug (but not flucloxacillin or amoxicillin-clavulanate). We used DNA samples from all subjects to analyze HLA genes and single nucleotide polymorphisms. After the discovery analysis was concluded, we validated our findings using data from 283 European patients with diagnosis of DILI associated with various drugs. RESULTS: We associated DILI with rs114577328 (a proxy for A*33:01 a HLA class I allele; odds ratio [OR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-3.8; P = 2.4 × 10-8) and with rs72631567 on chromosome 2 (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.5; P = 9.7 × 10-9). The association with A*33:01 was mediated by large effects for terbinafine-, fenofibrate-, and ticlopidine-related DILI. The variant on chromosome 2 was associated with DILI from a variety of drugs. Further phenotypic analysis indicated that the association between DILI and A*33:01 was significant genome wide for cholestatic and mixed DILI, but not for hepatocellular DILI; the polymorphism on chromosome 2 was associated with cholestatic and mixed DILI as well as hepatocellular DILI. We identified an association between rs28521457 (within the lipopolysaccharide-responsive vesicle trafficking, beach and anchor containing gene) and only hepatocellular DILI (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.6-2.7; P = 4.8 × 10-9). We did not associate any specific drug classes with genetic polymorphisms, except for statin-associated DILI, which was associated with rs116561224 on chromosome 18 (OR, 5.4; 95% CI, 3.0-9.5; P = 7.1 × 10-9). We validated the association between A*33:01 terbinafine- and sertraline-induced DILI. We could not validate the association between DILI and rs72631567, rs28521457, or rs116561224. CONCLUSIONS: In a GWAS of persons of European descent with DILI, we associated HLA-A*33:01 with DILI due to terbinafine and possibly fenofibrate and ticlopidine. We identified polymorphisms that appear to be associated with DILI from statins, as well as 2 non-drug-specific risk factors.

Safety assessment of niacin in the US Food and Drug Administration's mini-sentinel system.

PURPOSE: The Heart Protection Study 2-Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events (HPS2-THRIVE) trial found higher incidence rates of adverse reactions, including bleeding, in patients receiving the combination of extended-release niacin and laropiprant versus placebo. It is not known whether these adverse events are attributable to laropiprant, not approved in the USA, or to extended-release niacin. We compared rates of major gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage among initiators of extended-release niacin and initiators of fenofibrate. METHODS: We used Mini-Sentinel (now Sentinel) to conduct an observational, new user cohort analysis. We included data from 5 Data Partners covering the period from January 1, 2007 to August 31, 2013. Individuals who initiated extended-release niacin were propensity score-matched to individuals who initiated fenofibrate. Within the matched cohorts, we used Cox proportional hazards models to compare rates of hospitalization for major gastrointestinal bleeding events and intracranial hemorrhage assessed using validated claims-based algorithms. RESULTS: A total of 234 242 eligible extended-release niacin initiators were identified, of whom 210 389 (90%) were 1:1 propensity score-matched to eligible fenofibrate initiators. In propensity score-matched analyses, no differences were observed between exposure groups in rates of major gastrointestinal bleeding (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.18) or intracranial hemorrhage (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.66 to 2.22). Results were similar in pre-specified sensitivity and subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe evidence for an association between extended-release niacin versus fenofibrate and rates of major gastrointestinal bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage.

Targeted Proteomics Identifies Paraoxonase/Arylesterase 1 (PON1) and Apolipoprotein Cs as Potential Risk Factors for Hypoalphalipoproteinemia in Diabetic Subjects Treated with Fenofibrate and Rosiglitazone.

Low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and high triglyceride levels contribute to the excess rate of cardiovascular events seen in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Fenofibrate treatment partially reverses dyslipidemia in these subjects. However, a paradoxical marked reduction in HDL-C and HDL's major protein, apolipoprotein A-I, is a complication of fenofibrate in combination with rosiglitazone, an insulin-sensitizing agent. Risk factors for this condition, termed hypoalphalipoproteinemia, have yet to be identified. Using a case-control study design with subjects enrolled in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial, we tested the hypothesis that alterations in HDL's protein cargo predispose diabetic subjects to fenofibrate/rosiglitazone-induced hypoalphalipoproteinemia. HDL was isolated from blood obtained from controls (no decreases or increase in HDL-C while receiving fenofibrate/rosiglitazone therapy) and cases (developed hypoalphalipoproteinemia after fenofibrate/rosiglitazone treatment) participating in the ACCORD study before they began fenofibrate/rosiglitazone treatment. HDL proteins were quantified by targeted parallel reaction monitoring (PRM) and selected reaction monitoring (SRM) with isotope dilution. This approach demonstrated marked increases in the relative concentrations of paraoxonase/arylesterase 1 (PON1), apolipoprotein C-II (APOC2), apolipoprotein C-I, and apolipoprotein H in the HDL of subjects who developed hypoalphalipoproteinemia. The case and control subjects did not differ significantly in baseline HDL-C levels or other traditional lipid risk factors. We used orthogonal biochemical techniques to confirm increased levels of PON1 and APOC2. Our observations suggest that an imbalance in HDL proteins predisposes diabetic subjects to develop hypoalphalipoproteinemia on fenofibrate/rosiglitazone therapy.

Efficacy and safety of fenofibrate add-on therapy for patients with primary biliary cholangitis and a suboptimal response to UDCA.

BACKGROUND: primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) patients with a suboptimal response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) have a significantly worse survival rate. Fenofibrate has been shown to improve the short-term biochemical response in this group of patients. However, there is limited data available on the safety and efficacy of its long-term use, especially in patients with cirrhosis. Methods：in this retrospective cohort study, fenofibrate was given to PBC patients with a suboptimal response to at least 12 months of UDCA (13-15 mg/kg/d) therapy. Biochemistry data, GLOBE score and UK-PBC risk score at baseline and at different time points of treatment were compared. The safety profiles were also compared between cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patient groups. Results：fenofibrate (200 mg/day) was given to 39 PBC patients with a suboptimal response to UDCA (15 cirrhotic and 24 non-cirrhotic patients). In the 26 patients who completed more than one year of combination therapy, the alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels were 215 (185, 326) U/l, 122 (110, 202) U/l, 128 (106, 194) U/l, 124 (100, 181) U/l and 120 (82, 168) U/l, at baseline, three months, six months, 12 months and 24 months, respectively. All p values were < 0.01 when compared to baseline values. After two years of combination therapy, the UK-PBC risk score and GLOBE score did not significantly improve. The overall rates of adverse events were not significantly different between the cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic group. The elevation of liver enzymes was the most frequent side effect (n = 7), leading to a discontinuation in four patients. Furthermore, after two years of combination therapy, the serum creatinine levels and estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR) were significantly worse in both groups. CONCLUSION: fenofibrate add-on therapy could improve ALP and γ-GT levels in both non-cirrhotic and cirrhotic PBC patients with a suboptimal response to UDCA. However, patients need to be monitored carefully for a potential liver injury and nephrotoxicity.

[Modern treatment of primary biliary cholangitis]. / Moderne Therapie der primär biliären Cholangitis.

For nearly 30 years ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) represented the only pharmacological treatment option available for primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). This changed at the end of 2016 when obeticholic acid was licensed in Europe for PBC patients not responding to UDCA. Novel treatment concepts involving the modulation of nuclear receptor signaling in cholestatic and other liver diseases have led to a host of new potential options, studies and drug candidates for the treatment of PBC. The analysis of large multinational cohorts has additionally confirmed the effectiveness of UDCA in slowing PBC progression, and has led to the development of new definitions for the risk assessment of PBC patients under therapy, which will be an asset for clinical decision making. One issue that remains unresolved is the therapeutic management of extrahepatic symptoms associated with PBC, namely fatigue and pruritus, which are the main factors influencing the quality of life of affected individuals. Their pathophysiological basis is poorly understood and treatment remains unsatisfactory.

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.

PPARα-dependent increase of mouse urine output by gemfibrozil and fenofibrate.

While gemfibrozil and fenofibrate are prescribed for anti-dyslipidemia treatment, a rational basis for the use of these drugs for treatment of dyslipidemia with concurrent metabolic syndrome has not been established. In this study, wild-type and Pparα-null mice were fed gemfibrozil- or fenofibrate-containing diets for 14 days. Urine output (24 h) was monitored, and urine, serum, and liver and kidney tissues were subjected to toxicity assessment. A 2-month challenge followed by a 2-week wash-out was performed for gemfibrozil to determine urine output and the potential toxicity. A therapeutically equivalent dose of gemfibrozil was more effective than fenofibrate in increasing urine output. This regulatory effect was not observed in Pparα-null mice. In contrast, hepatomegaly induced by fenofibrate was more pronounced than that of gemfibrozil. No significant toxicity was observed in liver or kidney in the 2-month treatment with gemfibrozil. These data demonstrated PPARα mediates the increased urine output by fibrates. Considering the relative action on hepatomegaly and the regulatory effect on urine output, gemfibrozil may be the preferable drug to increase urine output. These results revealed a new pharmacodynamic effect of clinically prescribed PPARα agonists and suggested the potential value of gemfibrozil in modification of blood pressure.

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.