Efficacy and Safety of Ertugliflozin Added to Metformin: A Pooled Population from Asia with Type 2 Diabetes and Overweight or Obesity.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin have not been well characterized in Asian populations with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and overweight or obesity as defined by the Chinese Diabetes Society [body mass index (BMI) ≥ 24 kg/m2]. METHODS: These post hoc analyses of pooled data from two randomized, double-blind, 26-week studies assessed the efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin (5 mg or 15 mg) compared with placebo in participants from Asia with T2D and baseline BMI ≥ 24 kg/m2, with inadequate glycemic control on metformin. Longitudinal analyses were used to calculate least squares (LS) mean [95% confidence interval (CI)] change from baseline in glycemic indices and body weight. The proportions of participants achieving efficacy targets and experiencing adverse events (AEs) were assessed. RESULTS: The 445 participants had a mean age of 55.5 years, T2D duration 6.6 years, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 8.1%, and BMI 27.6 kg/m2. At week 26, placebo-adjusted LS mean (95% CI) changes from baseline for ertugliflozin 5 mg and 15 mg, respectively, were - 0.78% (- 0.95% to - 0.61%) and - 0.80% (- 0.98% to - 0.63%) for HbA1c, and - 1.74 kg (- 2.29 kg to - 1.19 kg) and - 2.04 kg (- 2.60 kg to - 1.48 kg) for body weight. A greater proportion of participants receiving ertugliflozin 5 mg and 15 mg versus placebo, respectively, achieved HbA1c < 7.0% (42.1% and 46.3% vs. 13.9%), body weight reduction ≥ 5% (35.5% and 38.3% vs. 11.1%), and systolic blood pressure < 130 mmHg (42.4% and 34.5% vs. 21.7%). The proportion of participants with AEs was 52.6% (ertugliflozin 5 mg), 52.3% (ertugliflozin 15 mg), and 55.6% (placebo). CONCLUSIONS: In participants from Asia with T2D inadequately controlled by metformin monotherapy, and BMI ≥24 kg/m2, ertugliflozin (5 mg or 15 mg) resulted in greater glycemic and body weight reductions compared with placebo and was generally well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers NCT02033889, NCT02630706.

Ertugliflozin and incident obstructive sleep apnea: an analysis from the VERTIS CV trial.

PURPOSE: The sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) empagliflozin may reduce the incidence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular (CV) disease. This analysis of VERTIS CV, the CV outcome trial for the SGLT2i ertugliflozin conducted in a similar group of patients, explored the effects of ertugliflozin on reported incident OSA. METHODS: In VERTIS CV, patients ≥ 40 years with T2D and atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD) were randomized to ertugliflozin 5 or 15 mg or placebo. The primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse CV events. This exploratory analysis evaluated the impact of ertugliflozin (5 and 15 mg pooled) on incident OSA. Patients with prevalent OSA were excluded. Incident OSA events were based on investigator-reported events using the MedDRA SMQ term "sleep apnea syndrome." A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was constructed to assess the association between ertugliflozin and incident OSA. RESULTS: Of 8246 patients enrolled, 7697 (93.3%) were without baseline OSA (placebo, n = 2561; ertugliflozin, n = 5136; mean age 64.4 years; BMI 31.7 kg/m2; HbA1c, 8.2%; 69.2% male; 88.3% White). The OSA incidence rate was 1.44 per 1000 person-years versus 2.61 per 1000 person-years among patients treated with ertugliflozin versus placebo, respectively, corresponding to a 48% relative risk reduction (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.28-0.96; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In VERTIS CV, ertugliflozin reduced by nearly half the incidence of OSA in patients with T2D and ASCVD. These data contribute to the literature that SGLT2is may have a significant beneficial impact on OSA. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT01986881.

Cardiorenal outcomes by indices of liver steatosis and fibrosis in individuals with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: Analyses from VERTIS CV, a randomized trial of the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor ertugliflozin.

AIM: To conduct a post hoc analysis to explore indices of hepatic steatosis/fibrosis and cardiorenal outcomes in the VERTIS CV study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease were randomized to ertugliflozin or placebo. Liver steatosis and fibrosis were assessed post hoc using the hepatic steatosis index (HSI) and fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) index to explore associations with cardiorenal outcomes (ertugliflozin and placebo data pooled, intention-to-treat analysis set). Cardiorenal outcomes (major adverse CV events [MACE]; hospitalization for heart failure [HHF]/CV death; CV death; HHF; and a composite kidney outcome) were stratified by baseline HSI and FIB-4 quartiles (Q1-Q4). Change in liver indices and enzymes over time were assessed (for ertugliflozin vs. placebo). RESULTS: Amongst 8246 participants, the mean age was 64.4 years, body mass index 32.0 kg/m2 , HSI 44.0 and FIB-4 score 1.34. The hazard ratios (HRs) for MACE, HHF/CV death, CV death, and HHF by FIB-4 score quartile (Q4 vs. Q1) were 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25, 1.76), 2.0 (95% CI 1.63, 2.51), 1.85 (95% CI 1.45, 2.36), and 2.94 (95% CI 1.98, 4.37), respectively (P < 0.0001 for all). With HSI, the incidence of HHF was higher in Q4 versus Q1 (HR 1.52 [95% CI 1.07, 2.17]; P < 0.05). The kidney composite outcome did not differ across FIB-4 or HSI quartiles. Liver enzymes and HSI decreased over time with ertugliflozin. CONCLUSION: In VERTIS CV, higher FIB-4 score was associated with CV events. HSI correlated with HHF. Neither measure was associated with the composite kidney outcome. Ertugliflozin was associated with a reduction in liver enzymes and HSI.

Mediators of ertugliflozin effects on heart failure and kidney outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIMS: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and composite kidney outcomes, but the mediators underlying these benefits are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among participants from VERTIS CV, a trial of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease randomized to ertugliflozin versus placebo, Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate the percentage mediation of ertugliflozin efficacy on the first HHF and kidney composite outcome in 26 potential mediators. Time-dependent approaches were used to evaluate associations between early (change from baseline to the first post-baseline measurement) and average (weighted average of change from baseline using all post-baseline measurements) changes in covariates with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: For the HHF analyses, early changes in four biomarkers (haemoglobin, haematocrit, serum albumin and urate) and average changes in seven biomarkers (early biomarkers + weight, chloride and serum protein) were identified as fulfilling the criteria as mediators of ertugliflozin effects on the risk of HHF. Similar results were observed for the composite kidney outcome, with early changes in four biomarkers (glycated haemoglobin, haemoglobin, haematocrit and urate), and average changes in five biomarkers [early biomarkers (not glycated haemoglobin) + weight, serum albumin] mediating the effects of ertugliflozin on the kidney outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In these analyses from the VERTIS CV trial, markers of volume status and haemoconcentration and/or haematopoiesis were the strongest mediators of the effect of ertugliflozin on reducing risk of HHF and composite kidney outcomes in the early and average change periods. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01986881.

Efficacy of Ertugliflozin on Heart Failure-Related Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Established Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: Results of the VERTIS CV Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). We assessed the effect of ertugliflozin on HHF and related outcomes. METHODS: VERTIS CV (Evaluation of Ertugliflozin Efficacy and Safety Cardiovascular Outcomes Trial), a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease to once-daily ertugliflozin 5 mg, 15 mg, or placebo. Prespecified secondary analyses compared ertugliflozin (pooled doses) versus placebo on time to first event of HHF and composite of HHF/CV death, overall and stratified by prespecified characteristics. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used with the Fine and Gray method to account for competing mortality risk, and Andersen-Gill modeling to analyze total (first+recurrent) HHF and total HHF/CV death events. RESULTS: A total of 8246 patients were randomly assigned to ertugliflozin (n=5499) or placebo (n=2747); n=1958 (23.7%) had a history of heart failure (HF) and n=5006 (60.7%) had pretrial ejection fraction (EF) available, including n=959 with EF ≤45%. Ertugliflozin did not significantly reduce first HHF/CV death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.75-1.03]). Overall, ertugliflozin reduced risk for first HHF (HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.54-0.90]; P=0.006). Previous HF did not modify this effect (HF: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.44-0.90]; no HF: HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.54-1.15]; P interaction=0.40). In patients with HF, the risk reduction for first HHF was similar for those with reduced EF ≤45% versus preserved EF >45% or unknown. However, in the overall population, the risk reduction tended to be greater for those with EF ≤45% (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.30-0.76]) versus EF >45% (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.58-1.29]). Effect on risk for first HHF was consistent across most subgroups, but greater benefit of ertugliflozin was observed in 3 populations: baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2, albuminuria, and diuretic use (each P interaction <0.05). Ertugliflozin reduced total events of HHF (rate ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.56-0.87]) and total HHF/CV death (rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.72-0.96]). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, ertugliflozin reduced the risk for first and total HHF and total HHF/CV death, adding further support for the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in primary and secondary prevention of HHF. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01986881.

Efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin in East/Southeast Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIM: Post-hoc analysis of the efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin in East/Southeast (E/SE) Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Efficacy evaluations used data from randomized, double-blind, phase 3 studies: a pool of two 26-week placebo-controlled studies and one 52-week active-comparator (glimepiride) study. Least squares mean change from baseline was calculated for HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight (BW) and systolic blood pressure (SBP). Safety evaluation included overall and prespecified adverse events based on pooled data (broad pool) from seven phase 3 studies (including studies in the efficacy analysis). RESULTS: Among 161 E/SE Asian patients in the placebo pool (ertugliflozin, n = 106), ertugliflozin reduced HbA1c, FPG, BW and SBP from baseline at week 26. The placebo-adjusted changes from baseline for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg were: HbA1c, -0.9% and -1.0%; BW, -2.1 and -1.9 kg; and SBP, -3.3 and -3.5 mmHg, respectively. Among 174 E/SE Asian patients in the active-comparator study (ertugliflozin, n = 118), HbA1c changes from baseline at week 52 were -0.6%, -0.6% and -0.7% for ertugliflozin 5 mg, 15 mg and glimepiride, respectively. Ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg reduced BW from baseline by -4.3 and -4.1 kg, respectively, and SBP by -7.4 and -9.3 mmHg, respectively, compared with glimepiride. Safety findings were generally consistent with overall ertugliflozin safety data published to date. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with ertugliflozin was associated with reductions in HbA1c, FPG, BW and SBP, and was generally well tolerated in E/SE Asian patients with T2DM. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01986855, NCT01999218, NCT01958671, NCT02099110, NCT02036515, NCT02033889, NCT02226003.

Apixaban compared to heparin/vitamin K antagonist in patients with atrial fibrillation scheduled for cardioversion: the EMANATE trial.

Aim: The primary objective was to compare apixaban to heparin/vitamin K antagonist (VKA) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≤48 h anticoagulation prior to randomization undergoing cardioversion. Methods: One thousand five hundred patients were randomized. The apixaban dose of 5 mg b.i.d. was reduced to 2.5 mg b.i.d. in patients with two of the following: age ≥ 80 years, weight ≤ 60 kg, or serum creatinine ≥ 133 µmol/L. To expedite cardioversion, at the discretion of the investigator, imaging and/or a loading dose of 10 mg (down-titrated to 5 mg) was allowed. The endpoints for efficacy were stroke, systemic embolism (SE), and death. The endpoints for safety were major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding. Results: There were 1038 active and 300 spontaneous cardioversions; 162 patients were not cardioverted. Imaging was performed in 855 patients, and 342 received a loading dose of apixaban. Comparing apixaban to heparin/VKA in the full analysis set, there were 0/753 vs. 6/747 strokes [relative risk (RR) 0; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0-0.64; nominal P = 0.015], no SE, and 2 vs. 1 deaths (RR 1.98; 95% CI 0.19-54.00; nominal P > 0.999). In the safety population, there were 3/735 vs. 6/721 major (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.10-2.07; nominal P = 0.338) and 11 vs. 13 CRNM bleeding events (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.34-1.89; nominal P = 0.685). On imaging, 60/61 with thrombi continued randomized treatment; all (61) were without outcome events. Conclusions: Rates of strokes, systemic emboli, deaths, and bleeds were low for both apixaban and heparin/VKA treated AF patients undergoing cardioversion. Clinical Trials.gov number: NCT02100228.

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.

Adherence-adjusted efficacy with intensive versus standard statin therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction in the IDEAL study.

BACKGROUND: The Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering trial showed that the primary endpoint major coronary event was reduced by 11% (0.78-1.01) using atorvastatin 80 mg versus simvastatin 20-40 mg in patients with coronary heart disease (P=0.07). Adherence was high in both treatment groups but significantly higher in patients treated with simvastatin. DESIGN: The Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering was a prescription trial with a prospective randomized open label endpoint evaluation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Adherence was calculated as exposure time on prescribed drugs divided by total follow-up time until death or end of follow-up and was a potential confounder. Adjusting for categorical adherence below or above 80% by two methods revealed that the relative risk reduction of the primary endpoint was more in the region of 15% (P=0.02) than 11% as found unadjusted. Censoring at the first occurrence of a cardiovascular event rather than at death increased this estimate to 17% (P=0.02). Noncardiovascular mortality was reduced on atorvastatin treatment by 21% (1-37%) after adjustment for adherence, whereas such reduction was not observed for cardiovascular mortality. CONCLUSION: This study found that the difference in adherence between treatment groups may have underestimated the true effect of the treatment differential. Usage of prospective randomized open label endpoint evaluation design should be carefully considered when well-known treatments are compared with rather new ones and especially in segments where patients could be more vulnerable, as in the elderly. Nonadherers in a clinical trial may be at especially high risk of fatal and nonfatal endpoints from various diseases and should be carefully monitored.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of atorvastatin (80 mg) to simvastatin (20 to 40 mg) in patients aged <65 versus >or=65 years with coronary heart disease (from the Incremental DEcrease through Aggressive Lipid Lowering [IDEAL] study).

The efficacy and safety of atorvastatin (80 mg/day) versus simvastatin (20 to 40 mg/day) in older (age >or=65 years) versus younger (<65 years) patients were assessed in a prespecified secondary analysis of the 8,888 patients with myocardial infarction in the IDEAL trial, a randomized open-label study. Several cardiovascular end points were evaluated, including the occurrence of a first major coronary event (MCE; nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease death, or resuscitated cardiac arrest), the primary end point of the trial, and occurrence of any cardiovascular event (MCE, stroke, revascularization, unstable angina, congestive heart failure, and peripheral artery disease). Although there were no significant interactions between age and treatment, the magnitude of effect in favor of atorvastatin was higher in younger versus older patients (occurrence of first MCE, hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66 to 0.98; and HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.15, respectively; occurrence of any cardiovascular (CV) event, HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.89; and HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, respectively). These results were likely influenced by adherence, which was lower in older patients and those receiving atorvastatin compared with those receiving simvastatin. Rates of any reported serious adverse event were higher in older patients, but did not differ between the 2 statin groups. In conclusion, except for any CV events in the older group, significant reductions in primary and secondary end points were observed only in patients <65 years of age. The safety of atorvastatin (80 mg) and simvastatin (20 to 40 mg) was similar in patients aged <65 and >65 years with stable coronary disease.

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.

Lipids, apolipoproteins, and their ratios in relation to cardiovascular events with statin treatment.

BACKGROUND: Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is the principal target of lipid-lowering therapy, but recent evidence has suggested more appropriate targets. We compared the relationships of on-treatment levels of LDL cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B, as well as ratios of total/HDL cholesterol, LDL/HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B/A-I, with the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients receiving statin therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: A post hoc analysis was performed that combined data from 2 prospective, randomized clinical trials in which 10,001 ("Treating to New Targets") and 8888 ("Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering") patients with established coronary heart disease were assigned to usual-dose or high-dose statin treatment. In models with LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were positively associated with cardiovascular outcome, whereas a positive relationship with LDL cholesterol was lost. In a model that contained non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B, neither was significant owing to collinearity. Total/HDL cholesterol ratio and the apolipoprotein B/A-I ratio in particular were each more closely associated with outcome than any of the individual proatherogenic lipoprotein parameters. CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving statin therapy, on-treatment levels of non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were more closely associated with cardiovascular outcome than levels of LDL cholesterol. Inclusion of measurements of the antiatherogenic lipoprotein fraction further strengthened the relationships. These data support the use of non-HDL cholesterol or apolipoprotein B as novel treatment targets for statin therapy. Given the absence of interventions that have been proven to consistently reduce cardiovascular disease risk through raising plasma levels of HDL cholesterol or apolipoprotein A-I, it seems premature to consider the ratio variables as clinically useful.

Lipoprotein predictors of cardiovascular events in statin-treated patients with coronary heart disease. Insights from the Incremental Decrease In End-points Through Aggressive Lipid-lowering Trial (IDEAL).

BACKGROUND: Few studies have looked into the ability of measurements of apolipoprotein B (apoB) and apolipoprotein A-1 (apoA-1) or apoB/apoA-1 to predict new coronary heart disease (CHD) events in patients with CHD on statin treatment. AIMS: In the IDEAL trial, to compare lipoprotein components to predict CHD events and to what degree differences in those parameters could explain the observed outcome. METHODS: We compared the ability of treatment with atorvastatin 80 mg/day to that of simvastatin 20-40 mg/day to prevent CHD events in patients with CHD and used Cox regression models to study the relationships between on-treatment levels of lipoprotein components to subsequent major coronary events (MCE). FINDINGS: Variables related to low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) carried more predictive information than those related to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), but LDL-C was less predictive than both non-HDL-C and apoB. The ratio of apoB to apoA-1 was most strongly related to MCE. However, for estimating differences in relative risk reduction between the treatment groups, apoB and non-HDL-C were the strongest predictors. INTERPRETATION: The on-treatment level of apoB/apoA-1 was the strongest predictor of MCE in the pooled patient population, whereas apoB and non-HDL-C were best able to explain the difference in outcome between treatment groups. Measurements of apoB and apoA-1 should be more widely available for routine clinical assessments.

Responsiveness of plasma lipids and lipoproteins to plant stanol esters.

Plant stanols have been shown to reduce serum levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and they are an attractive adjunct in dietary therapy for elevated LDL cholesterol. This investigation addressed 3 questions through metabolic studies in human subjects: (1) whether plant stanol esters given at higher doses than the 2-g/day dose recommended by the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) will provide additional LDL-lowering efficacy (study 1); (2) whether substantial reduction in LDL cholesterol can be obtained in postmenopausal women with hypercholesterolemia by addition of plant stanol esters to the diet (study 2); and (3) whether ATP III goals can be obtained by adding plant stanol esters to an LDL-lowering regimen in high-risk patients who retain LDL cholesterol levels in the above-optimal range (ie, 2.6 to 3.3 mmol/L [100 to 129 mg/dL]), despite ongoing statin therapy (study 3). Study 1 showed that maximal LDL lowering with plant stanols in the form of esters can be achieved at a dose of 2 g/day. Higher doses do not provide additional efficacy. Study 2 demonstrated that stanol esters can reduce LDL cholesterol levels in postmenopausal women by about 13%, which makes use of stanol esters attractive as a component of nondrug therapy in these women who generally are at relatively low risk for coronary heart disease. Finally, study 3 found that plant stanols provide additional lowering of LDL cholesterol when added to ongoing statin therapy. This makes plant stanols an attractive dietary component to help to achieve the goals of LDL-lowering therapy in patients requiring an LDL-lowering drug.

Influence of extended-release nicotinic acid on nonesterified fatty acid flux in the metabolic syndrome with atherogenic dyslipidemia.

Nicotinic acid has favorable effects on atherogenic dyslipidemia. However, in some patients who have diabetes, crystalline nicotinic acid decreases glycemic control; this effect could be due to a marked rebound of nonesterified fatty acids (NEFAs) observed after nicotinic acid suppression of lipolysis in adipose tissue. Recent reports have indicated that small doses of extended-release nicotinic acid do not cause a substantial decrease in glucose levels. Therefore, in this study, we examined whether 2 g/day of extended-release nicotinic acid abolishes the NEFA rebound that is reported with crystalline nicotinic acid. Seventeen men who had the metabolic syndrome (8 did not have type 2 diabetes and 9 did) were treated for 4 months. At baseline and at 4 months, measurements were made of plasma glucose, insulin, and NEFA during an oral glucose tolerance test. At 3 months, effects of extended-release nicotinic acid on NEFA levels and flux rates were determined on 3 separate days at 3 separate intervals after the final dose of nicotinic acid (4, 9, and 28 hours). Values obtained at 28 hours were taken as baseline (i.e., no nicotinic acid remaining in the circulation). After 4 hours (percent baseline), NEFA levels were -30% without diabetes and -37% with diabetes, and flux rates were -21% without diabetes and -25% with diabetes; after 9 hours, NEFA levels were 43% without diabetes and 50% with diabetes, and flux rates were 38% without diabetes and 70% with diabetes. Extended-release nicotinic acid did not abolish NEFA rebound. Nonetheless, the rebound was much less than previously reported for crystalline nicotinic acid. Moreover, after 4 months of nicotinic acid therapy, levels of NEFA, glucose, and insulin during the oral glucose tolerance test were not significantly different from those before institution of nicotinic acid therapy, suggesting minimal changes in insulin sensitivity.

Free fatty acid metabolism during fenofibrate treatment of the metabolic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine whether fenofibrate modifies the metabolism of nonesterified (free) fatty acids as a component of its triglyceride-lowering action in male patients with the metabolic syndrome. DESIGN: In a placebo-controlled trial lasting 16 weeks, patients were randomly assigned to fenofibrate (200 mg/d) or placebo for 8 weeks. They were then crossed over to placebo or treatment with fenofibrate for another 8 weeks. METHODS: Thirteen adult men had clinical characteristics of the metabolic syndrome that included atherogenic dyslipidemia, hypertension, elevated fasting glucose levels, or central obesity or a combination of these. They had measurements of plasma lipid and lipoprotein levels, postheparin lipase activities, and fasting concentrations and turnover rates of nonesterified fatty acids, as well as oral glucose tolerance testing with insulin and nonesterified fatty acid measurements. Levels of apolipoprotein C-II, C-III, and B were also measured, along with levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in lipoprotein species. RESULTS: Fenofibrate therapy did not change plasma concentrations and turnover rates of nonesterified fatty acids. For fasting nonesterified fatty acids, the values (mean +/- SD) for placebo versus fenofibrate were 446 +/- 31 micromol/L versus 493 +/- 71 micromol/L, respectively (not significant); nonesterified fatty acid turnover rates were 336 +/- 36 micromol/min versus 334 +/- 42 micromol/min for placebo versus fenofibrate, respectively. Moreover, no changes were noted in fasting or postprandial levels of plasma glucose and insulin. Despite this lack of change, fenofibrate therapy reduced the plasma levels of triglyceride by 30% (305 +/- 143 mg/dL versus 206 +/- 90 mg/dL for placebo versus fenofibrate, respectively; P <.045), with a similar reduction in cholesterol levels of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins. Large low-density lipoprotein species were increased and small low-density lipoprotein species were decreased by fenofibrate therapy. Levels of apolipoprotein C-III were reduced significantly (P <.03), as were ratios of postheparin hepatic lipase to lipoprotein lipase (P <.05). CONCLUSION: Fenofibrate therapy markedly reduced plasma triglyceride levels. However, it did not lower concentrations or turnover rates of nonesterified fatty acids, nor did it change glucose or insulin responses to an oral glucose challenge. These findings indicate that fenofibrate modifies fatty acid metabolism either in the liver or in triglyceride-rich lipoproteins but not in adipose tissue. Multiple mechanisms are likely involved as a consequence of the action of fenofibrate to activate peroxisomal-proliferator-activated receptor alpha.

Effects of adding fenofibrate (200 mg/day) to simvastatin (10 mg/day) in patients with combined hyperlipidemia and metabolic syndrome.

Combined hyperlipidemia predisposes subjects to coronary heart disease. Two lipid abnormalities--increased cholesterol and atherogenic dyslipidemia--are potential targets of lipid-lowering therapy. Successful management of both may require combined drug therapy. Statins are effective low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol-lowering drugs. For atherogenic dyslipidemia (high triglycerides, small LDL, and low high-density lipoprotein [HDL]), fibrates are potentially beneficial. The present study was designed to examine the safety and efficacy of a combination of low-dose simvastatin and fenofibrate in the treatment of combined hyperlipidemia. It was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a crossover design. Three randomized phases were employed (double placebo, simvastatin 10 mg/day and placebo, and simvastatin 10 mg/day plus fenofibrate 200 mg/day). Each phase lasted 3 months, and in the last week of each phase, measurements were made of plasma lipids, lipoprotein cholesterol, plasma apolipoproteins B, C-II, and C-III and LDL speciation on 3 consecutive days. Simvastatin therapy decreased total cholesterol by 27%, non-HDL cholesterol by 30%, total apolipoprotein B by 31%, very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) + intermediate-density lipoprotein (IDL) cholesterol by 37%, VLDL + IDL apolipoprotein B by 14%, LDL cholesterol by 28%, and LDL apolipoprotein B by 21%. The addition of fenofibrate caused an additional decrease in VLDL + IDL cholesterol and VLDL + IDL apolipoprotein B by 36% and 32%, respectively. Simvastatin alone caused a small increase in the ratio of large-to-small LDL, whereas the addition of fenofibrate to simvastatin therapy caused a marked increase in the ratio of large-to-small LDL species. Simvastatin alone produced a small (6%) and insignificant increase in HDL cholesterol concentrations. When fenofibrate was added to simvastatin therapy, HDL cholesterol increased significantly by 23%. No significant side effects were observed with either simvastatin alone or with combined drug therapy. Therefore, a combination of simvastatin 10 mg/day and fenofibrate 200 mg/day appears to be effective and safe for the treatment of atherogenic dyslipidemia in combined hyperlipidemia.