Comparison of atorvastatin 80 mg/day versus simvastatin 20 to 40 mg/day on frequency of cardiovascular events late (five years) after acute myocardial infarction (from the Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering [IDEAL] trial).

Previous studies have demonstrated that benefits of intensive statin therapy compared to standard statin therapy begin shortly after an acute event and are continued up to 2 years of follow-up. However, whether efficacy and safety of intensive statin therapy in patients with a recent cardiac event are maintained in longer-term follow-up has not been evaluated. We conducted a post hoc analysis of a subgroup of 999 patients who had a first acute myocardial infarction (MI) <2 months before randomization in a prospective, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation trial of 8,888 patients with a history of MI that compared intensive statin therapy (atorvastatin 80 mg) to standard statin therapy (simvastatin 20 to 40 mg) over approximately 5 years of follow-up. We analyzed the same composite end point used in the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy (PROVE IT) trial (death, MI, hospitalization for unstable angina, revascularization, and stroke). Rates of the composite end point were 44.7% (n = 226) in the simvastatin group and 37.9% (n = 187) in the atorvastatin group (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.99, p = 0.04). Although statistical power was smaller than that of the PROVE IT trial, the relative risk decrease observed at 5 years is consistent with that in the 2-year follow-up in PROVE IT. The 2 treatment regimens were well tolerated. In conclusion, our analysis provides support for the strategy of placing patients with recent MI on intensive statin therapy and maintaining the high dose over the long term, beyond 2 years.

Comparative effect of atorvastatin (80 mg) versus simvastatin (20 to 40 mg) in preventing hospitalizations for heart failure in patients with previous myocardial infarction.

We investigated whether intensive cholesterol lowering could more effectively prevent heart failure (HF) in secondary prevention. The IDEAL study was a 4.8-year prospective, randomized trial comparing "usual" simvastatin treatment (20 to 40 mg/day, n = 4,449) with high-dose atorvastatin (80 mg/day, n = 4,439) in patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI). At baseline, 94% of patients (n = 8,351) had no history of HF. During the course of the trial, there were 222 new or recurrent hospitalizations for HF (57 and 165 in those with and without HF at baseline, respectively), 123 (2.8%) in the simvastatin group and 99 (2.2%) in the atorvastatin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62 to 1.05, p = 0.11). After adjustments, atorvastatin 80 mg was associated with a 26% decrease of new HF events compared with simvastatin 20 to 40 mg (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.97, p = 0.03). Atorvastatin tended to be associated with fewer HF events in those with HF at baseline (n = 537, HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.11, p = 0.11) and those without HF at baseline (n = 8,351, HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.09, p = 0.15). Also, HF without preceding MI (n = 187) was decreased (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.97, p = 0.03). In conclusion, atorvastatin 80 mg was more efficient than simvastatin 20 to 40 mg in preventing development of HF in patients with previous MI.

Total cardiovascular disease burden: comparing intensive with moderate statin therapy insights from the IDEAL (Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering) trial.

OBJECTIVES: This post-hoc analysis of the IDEAL (Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering) trial was designed to assess the comparative treatment efficacy of high-dose atorvastatin and usual-dose simvastatin for the prevention of events subsequent to the first event, using the Wei, Lin, and Weissfeld method. BACKGROUND: Time-to-first-event analysis of data is frequently utilized to provide efficacy outcome information in coronary heart disease prevention trials. However, during the course of such long-term trials, a large number of events occur subsequent to the first event, the analysis of which will be precluded by this approach. METHODS: The Wei, Lin, and Weissfeld method allows the analysis of repeated occurrence of events of the same type or of entirely different natures. It regards the recurrence times as multivariate event (failure) times, and models the marginal (individual) distribution for each event with the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: In the IDEAL trial, compared with patients taking simvastatin 20 to 40 mg daily, patients receiving atorvastatin 80 mg daily had their relative risk of a first cardiovascular event reduced by 17% (p < 0.0001), of a second by 24% (p < 0.0001), of a third by 19% (p = 0.035), of a fourth by 24% (p = 0.058), and of a fifth by 28% (p = 0.117). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that intensive statin therapy continues to be more effective than standard statin therapy, even beyond the first event, and suggest that clinicians should not hesitate to prescribe high-dose statin therapy for patients experiencing multiple recurrent cardiovascular events.

High-dose atorvastatin vs usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Evidence suggests that more intensive lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) than is commonly applied clinically will provide further benefit in stable coronary artery disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of 2 strategies of lipid lowering on the risk of cardiovascular disease among patients with a previous myocardial infarction (MI). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The IDEAL study, a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation trial conducted at 190 ambulatory cardiology care and specialist practices in northern Europe between March 1999 and March 2005 with a median follow-up of 4.8 years, which enrolled 8888 patients aged 80 years or younger with a history of acute MI. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive a high dose of atorvastatin (80 mg/d; n = 4439), or usual-dose simvastatin (20 mg/d; n = 4449). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Occurrence of a major coronary event, defined as coronary death, confirmed nonfatal acute MI, or cardiac arrest with resuscitation. RESULTS: During treatment, mean LDL-C levels were 104 (SE, 0.3) mg/dL in the simvastatin group and 81 (SE, 0.3) mg/dL in the atorvastatin group. A major coronary event occurred in 463 simvastatin patients (10.4%) and in 411 atorvastatin patients (9.3%) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78-1.01; P = .07). Nonfatal acute MI occurred in 321 (7.2%) and 267 (6.0%) in the 2 groups (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98; P = .02), but no differences were seen in the 2 other components of the primary end point. Major cardiovascular events occurred in 608 and 533 in the 2 groups, respectively (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.98; P = .02). Occurrence of any coronary event was reported in 1059 simvastatin and 898 atorvastatin patients (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P<.001). Noncardiovascular death occurred in 156 (3.5%) and 143 (3.2%) in the 2 groups (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73-1.15; P = .47). Death from any cause occurred in 374 (8.4%) in the simvastatin group and 366 (8.2%) in the atorvastatin group (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.13; P = .81). Patients in the atorvastatin group had higher rates of drug discontinuation due to nonserious adverse events; transaminase elevation resulted in 43 (1.0%) vs 5 (0.1%) withdrawals (P<.001). Serious myopathy and rhabdomyolysis were rare in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients with previous MI, intensive lowering of LDL-C did not result in a significant reduction in the primary outcome of major coronary events, but did reduce the risk of other composite secondary end points and nonfatal acute MI. There were no differences in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Patients with MI may benefit from intensive lowering of LDL-C without an increase in noncardiovascular mortality or other serious adverse reactions.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00159835.