Effectiveness and tolerability of simvastatin plus fenofibrate for combined hyperlipidemia (the SAFARI trial)

Safety and efficacy of statin treatment alone and in combination with fibrates in patients with dyslipidemia: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dyslipidemia is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and is treated with many effective lipid-lowering agents. Statins are often used alone or in combination with fibrates. Combination therapy is more effective due to their comparative actions, but the increased incidence of side effects should be considered carefully.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A meta-analysis of published data was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of statins alone versus statins plus fibrates in patients with dyslipidemia. In total, nine articles were assessed for efficacy analysis and ten articles were assessed for safety analysis.

RESULTS

In the efficacy analysis, a combination of statins and fibrates provided significantly greater reductions in total cholesterol (SE = 0.430; 95% CI 0.315-0.545), LDL cholesterol (SE = 0.438; 95% CI 0.321-0.555) and triglycerides (SE = 0.747; 95% CI 0.618-0.876), and a significantly greater increase in HDL cholesterol (SE = 0.594; 95% CI 0.473-0.715) than treatment with statins alone. In the safety analysis, treatment with statins alone was associated with a significant reduction in the numbers of total adverse events (RR = 0.665; 95% CI 0.539-0.819), liver-related adverse events (RR = 0.396; 95% CI 0.206-0.760) and kidney-related adverse events (RR = 0.146; 95% CI 0.075-0.285).

CONCLUSION

We suggest that treatment with statins plus fibrates provides clinical benefits over treatment with statins alone but increased risks, especially of hepatic or renal side effects, should be monitored carefully.

Obesity, metabolic syndrome and diabetes mellitus after renal transplantation: prevention and treatment

The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in dialysis patients is high and further increases after transplantation due to weight gain and the detrimental metabolic effects of immunosuppressive drugs. Corticosteroids cause insulin resistance, hyperlipidemia, abnormal glucose metabolism and arterial hypertension. The calcineurin inhibitor tacrolimus is diabetogenic by inhibiting insulin secretion, whereas cyclosporine causes hypertension and increases cholesterol levels. Mtor antagonists are responsible for hyperlipidemia and abnormal glucose metabolism by mechanisms that also implicate insulin resistance. The metabolic syndrome in transplant recipients has numerous detrimental effects such as increasing the risk of new onset diabetes, cardiovascular disease events and patient death. In addition, it has also been linked with accelerated loss of graft function, proteinuria and ultimately graft loss. Prevention and management of the metabolic syndrome are based on increasing physical activity, promotion of weight loss and control of cardiovascular risk factors. Bariatric surgery before or after renal transplantation in patients with body mass index >35 kg/m(2) is an option but its long term effects on graft and patient survival have not been investigated. Steroid withdrawal and replacement of tacrolimus with cyclosporine facilitate control of diabetes, whereas replacement of cyclosporine and mtor antagonists can improve hyperlipidemia. The new costimulation inhibitor belatacept has potent immunosuppressive properties without metabolic adverse effects and will be an important component of immunosuppressive regimens with better metabolic risk profile. Medical treatment of cardiovascular risk factors has to take potential drug interactions with immunosuppressive medication and drug accumulation due to renal insufficiency into account.

Does combination therapy with statins and fibrates prevent cardiovascular disease in diabetic patients with atherogenic mixed dyslipidemia?

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with the development and progression of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Statins have an established efficacy in the management of dyslipidemia primarily by decreasing the levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and thus decreasing CVD risk. They also have a favorable safety profile. Despite the statin-mediated benefit of CVD risk reduction a residual CVD risk remains, especially in T2DM patients with high triglyceride (TG) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) values. Fibrates decrease TG levels, increase HDL-C concentrations, and improve many other atherosclerosis-related variables. Fibrate/statin co-administration improves the overall lipoprotein profile in patients with mixed dyslipidemia and may reduce the residual CVD risk during statin therapy. However, limited data exists regarding the effects of statin/fibrate combination on CVD outcomes in patients with T2DM. In the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study the statin/fibrate combination did not significantly reduce the rate of CVD events compared with simvastatin/placebo in patients with T2DM. However, it did show a possible benefit in a pre-specified analysis in the subgroup of patients with high TG and low HDL-C levels. Furthermore, in the ACCORD study the simvastatin/fenofibrate combination significantly reduced the rate of progression of retinopathy compared with statin/placebo administration in patients with T2DM. The present review presents the available data regarding the effects of statin/fibrate combination in patients with T2DM and atherogenic mixed dyslipidemia.

Molecular mechanism of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α activation by WY14643: a new mode of ligand recognition and receptor stabilization

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are members of a superfamily of nuclear transcription factors. They are involved in mediating numerous physiological effects in humans, including glucose and lipid metabolism. PPARα ligands effectively treat dyslipidemia and have significant antiinflammatory and anti-atherosclerotic activities. These effects and their ligand-dependent activity make nuclear receptors obvious targets for drug design. Here, we present the structure of the human PPARα in complex with WY14643, a member of fibrate class of drug, and a widely used PPAR activator. The crystal structure of this complex suggests that WY14643 induces activation of PPARα in an unusual bipartite mechanism involving conventional direct helix 12 stabilization and an alternative mode that involves a second ligand in the pocket. We present structural observations, molecular dynamics and activity assays that support the importance of the second site in WY14643 action. The unique binding mode of WY14643 reveals a new pattern of nuclear receptor ligand recognition and suggests a novel basis for ligand design, offering clues for improving the binding affinity and selectivity of ligand. We show that binding of WY14643 to PPARα was associated with antiinflammatory disease in a human corneal cell model, suggesting possible applications for PPARα ligands.

Adverse events of statin-fenofibric acid versus statin monotherapy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with mixed dyslipidemia can benefit from the combination of fenofibric acid (FA) with statins, but concerns about adverse events make physicians reluctant to prescribe the combination therapy.

OBJECTIVE

In the present study, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and adverse events in patients taking statins and FA.

METHODS

Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify studies that reported adverse events. Finally, five trials covering 2704 patients were selected in this study.

RESULTS

There were significant decreases in TG and increases in HDL-C in patients receiving combination therapy compared with statin monotherapy. The incidence of hepatic toxicity (OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.17-10.83; P < 0.05) and increased creatinine (OR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.28-8.11; P < 0.05) was significantly higher in the FA + low-dose statin group than in the corresponding statin monotherapy. The incidence of CK elevations and muscle-associated AEs was not statistically different between the two groups. The adverse events in the FA + moderate-dose statin group were almost identical to those in the FA + low-dose statin group.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, combination therapy could improve the blood lipid profile. Addition of FA to statins therapy is more frequently associated with hepatic and renal toxicity than muscle-associated AEs. Therefore patients taking the combination of FA with statins should have liver enzyme and renal function monitored. However, we still need large-scale and long follow-up period RCTs to definitively confirm the adverse events of FA-statin therapy.

Case report of exercise and statin-fibrate combination therapy-caused myopathy in a patient with metabolic syndrome: contradictions between the two main therapeutic pathways

Background

Lifestyle modifications including exercise are beneficial and fundamentally part of the therapy of metabolic syndrome, although in most of the cases medical interventions are also required to reach the target values in the laboratory parameters. Statin and fibrate combination therapy is considered to be safe and effective in dyslipidaemia and metabolic syndrome. However, increased physical activity can enhance the statin and fibrate-associated myopathy. Myositis and the rare but life-threatening rhabdomyolysis are causing a conflict between exercise and statin-fibrate therapy, which is yet to be resolved.

Case presentation

We present a case of a 43-year-old Caucasian man with metabolic syndrome who had the side-effect of exercise and drug-associated myositis. The patient had only transient moderate complaints and rhabdomyolysis could be avoided with the one-month creatine kinase control, a test which is not recommended routinely by the new guidelines.

Conclusions

We would like to turn the spotlight on the possible complications of statin-fibrate therapy and exercise, when strict follow-up is recommended. In this condition high number of patients can be affected and the responsibility of general practitioners is accentuated.

Effect of combination therapy with fenofibrate and simvastatin on postprandial lipemia in the ACCORD lipid trial

OBJECTIVE

The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes lipid study (ACCORD Lipid), which compared the effects of simvastatin plus fenofibrate (FENO-S) versus simvastatin plus placebo (PL-S) on cardiovascular disease outcomes, measured only fasting triglyceride (TG) levels. We examined the effects of FENO-S on postprandial (PP) lipid and lipoprotein levels in a subgroup of ACCORD Lipid subjects.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We studied 139 subjects (mean age of 61 years, 40% female, and 76% Hispanic or black) in ACCORD Lipid, from a total 529 ACCORD Lipid subjects in the Northeast Clinical Network. PP plasma TG, apolipoprotein (apo)B48, and apoCIII were measured over 10 h after an oral fat load.

RESULTS

The PP TG incremental area under the curve (IAUC) above fasting (median and interquartile range [mg/dL/h]) was 572 (352-907) in the FENO-S group versus 770 (429-1,420) in the PL-S group (P = 0.008). The PP apoB48 IAUC (mean ± SD [μg/mL/h]) was also reduced in the FENO-S versus the PL-S group (23.2 ± 16.3 vs. 35.2 ± 28.6; P = 0.008). Fasting TG levels on the day of study were correlated with PP TG IAUC (r = 0.73 for FENO-S and r = 0.62 for PL-S; each P < 0.001). However, the fibrate effect on PP TG IAUC was a constant percentage across the entire range of fasting TG levels, whereas PP apoB48 IAUC was only reduced when fasting TG levels were increased.

CONCLUSIONS

FENO-S lowered PP TG similarly in all participants compared with PL-S. However, levels of atherogenic apoB48 particles were reduced only in individuals with increased fasting levels of TG. These results may have implications for interpretation of the overall ACCORD Lipid trial, which suggested benefit from FENO-S only in dyslipidemic individuals.

The impact of stress systems and lifestyle on dyslipidemia and obesity in anxiety and depression

BACKGROUND

Dyslipidemia and obesity have been observed in persons with severe anxiety or depression, and in tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) users. This likely contributes to the higher risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in anxiety and depressive disorders. We aimed to elucidate whether biological stress systems or lifestyle factors underlie these associations. If so, they may be useful targets for CVD prevention and intervention.

METHODS

Within 2850 Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA) participants, we evaluated the explaining impact of biological stress systems (i.e., the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal [HPA] axis, autonomic nervous system [ANS] and inflammation) and lifestyle factors (i.e., tobacco and alcohol use, and physical activity) on adverse associations of anxiety and depression severity and TCA use with high and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, body mass index and waist circumference. Through linear regression analyses, percentual change (%Δ) in β was determined and considered significant when %Δ>10.

RESULTS

The inflammatory marker C-reactive protein had the most consistent impact (explaining 14-53% of the associations of anxiety and depression severity and TCA use with lipid and obesity levels), followed by tobacco use (explaining 34-43% of the associations with lipids). The ANS mediated all associations with TCA use (explaining 32-61%). The HPA axis measures did not explain any of the associations.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased dyslipidemia and (abdominal) obesity risk in patients with more severe anxiety disorders and depression may be partly explained by chronic low-grade inflammation and smoking. TCAs may increase metabolic risk through enhanced sympathetic and decreased parasympathetic ANS activity. That the HPA axis had no impact in our sample may reflect the possibility that the HPA axis only plays a role in acute stress situations rather than under basal conditions.

Patterns of serum laboratory monitoring for safety and efficacy in patients on chronic statin therapy

OBJECTIVE

To describe safety and efficacy laboratory monitoring of statin therapy at the University of Colorado Hospital Outpatient Clinics over a period of 3 years prior to the revised United States Food and Drug Administration statin labeling.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study evaluated serum laboratory monitoring for safety and efficacy of statin therapy between July 2008 and June 2011. Adult patients prescribed chronic statin therapy were included. The primary objective of this study was to describe the frequency of outpatient liver function tests, lipid panels, and creatine kinase for patients on chronic statin therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 143 patients met study criteria. Over a 3-year period, the mean maximum frequency of measurements per patient of serum hepatic transaminases, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) was higher than lipid panel measurements (5.2 ± 4.4 and 4.2 ± 2.0 respectively, p = 0.021). Only 22 of 143 patients (15.4%) had an elevation in ALT or AST. All elevations were less than three times the upper limit of normal and statin therapy was continued without changes in response to these elevations. Creatine kinase, though not a routine monitoring test, was infrequently measured (mean maximum frequency of measurements per patient 0.3 ± 0.8).

CONCLUSION

Serum hepatic transaminases were routinely monitored in patients treated with chronic statin therapy. Given the absence of significant serum hepatic transaminase elevations, and clinician response to minor elevations, our data indicate that routine serum laboratory evaluations for statin toxicity are excessive.

Use of fibrates in clinical practice: Queensland Lipid Group consensus recommendations

BACKGROUND

Fibrates have been prescribed for decades as 'broad-spectrum' lipid modifying agents that can improve plasma levels of triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, including very low- and intermediate-density lipoproteins. Fibrates are variably effective in lowering low-density cholesterol levels. Available fibrates include gemfibrozil, fenofibrate, bezafibrate, etiofibrate and ciprofobrate; only fenofibrate and gemfibrozil are available in Australia.

METHODS

Members of the Queensland Lipid Group provided consensus grades of recommendations for the clinical use of fibrates based on PubMed searches, product information, and personal clinical experience.

RESULTS

Fibrates are well tolerated, and the combination of fenofibrate with statins appears to be safer than gemfibrozil, particularly with regard to adverse effects on muscle. Evidence has been provided recently for the efficacy of fenofibrate in reducing microvascular complications in diabetic patients, including progression of retinopathy, progression of microalbuminuria and nephropathy, development of sensory neuropathy, and leg amputation. Macrovascular benefits appear to be confined to those with reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and/or increased triglyceride levels, and the relationship of microvascular benefits of fenofibrate to baseline lipid levels is variable and requires further assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

  Indications for fibrate therapy may be extended in the future to include protection from both macro- and micro-vascular disease, particularly in diabetic patients and patients with residual dyslipidaemia in spite of statin therapy. We provide recommendations on the use of fibrates in clinical practice to highlight these potential indications.

Study design, rationale, and baseline characteristics: evaluation of fenofibric acid on carotid intima-media thickness in patients with type IIb dyslipidemia with residual risk in addition to atorvastatin therapy (FIRST) trial

PURPOSE

Elevated triglycerides (TG) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels contribute to cardiovascular disease risk and can be effectively treated with fenofibric acid. A trial is under way to evaluate the effect of once-daily fenofibric acid or placebo on carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) progression in patients with controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels achieved through atorvastatin treatment, but with high TG and low HDL-C levels.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind study, 682 patients were randomized to once-daily delayed-release capsules of choline fenofibrate 135 mg (fenofibric acid [Trilipix(®); Abbott, North Chicago, IL]) or placebo plus atorvastatin treatment after a 2- to 10-week diet and atorvastatin run-in period. Key inclusion criteria included age ≥45 years; posterior-wall common CIMT ≥0.7 mm on at least one side at baseline; fasting results of TG ≥150 mg/dL, and HDL-C ≤45 mg/dL for men or HDL-C ≤55 mg/dL for women at screening while receiving atorvastatin; controlled LDL-C; and known coronary heart disease (CHD) or a CHD risk equivalent. The primary efficacy variable is the rate of change from baseline through week 104 in the mean posterior-wall intima-media thickness of the common carotid arteries (composite value of left and right sides).

CONCLUSIONS

This trial is the first to examine the effect of fenofibric acid on CIMT and the first CIMT trial to select patients with controlled LDL-C and elevated TG and low HDL-C as inclusion criteria. Also, this trial will prospectively evaluate the effect of treatment on LDL particles and address shortcomings of previous CIMT trials.

Meta-analysis of safety of the coadministration of statin with fenofibrate in patients with combined hyperlipidemia

Addition of fenofibrate to statin therapy might represent a viable treatment option for patients whose high risk for coronary heart disease is not controlled by a statin alone. However, safety of coadministration of statin with fenofibrate has been a great concern. The present study tested the safety of coadministration of statin with fenofibrate. We systematically searched the literature to identify randomized controlled trials examining safety of coadministration of statin with fenofibrate. A meta-analysis was performed to estimate safety of coadministration of statin with fenofibrate using fixed-effects models. There were 1,628 subjects in the identified 6 studies. Discontinuation attributed to any adverse events (4.5% vs 3.1%, p = 0.20), any adverse events (42% vs 41%, p = 0.82), adverse events related to study drug (10.9% vs 11.0%, p = 0.95), and serious adverse events (2.0% vs 1.5%, p = 0.71) were not significantly different in the 2 arms. Incidence of alanine aminotransferase and/or aspartate aminotransferase ≥3 times upper limit of normal in the combination therapy arm was significantly higher than in the statin monotherapy arm (3.1% vs 0.2%, p = 0.0009). In the 6 trials with 1,628 subjects no case of myopathy or rhabdomyolysis was reported. In conclusion, statin-fenofibrate combination therapy was tolerated as well as statin monotherapy. Physicians should consider statin-fenofibrate combination therapy to treat patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

Relative Efficacy of Antilipemic Agents in Non–High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction

The investigators sought to summarize the percentage reduction in non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) achieved with various antilipemic regimens and to determine whether certain antilipemic regimens have been proven more effective in lowering non-HDL-C. A search of MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Iowa Drug Information Service Database from 1970 to May 2011 was performed. Criteria were used to exclude studies not published in English, studies with methodology limitations, and studies with variables that may affect efficacy beyond the antilipemic agent administered. Only randomized, controlled trials comparing medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration were reviewed to determine whether significant differences in percentage reduction in non-HDL-C had been observed between different medication regimens. A total of 51 trials reported data that could be used to determine the range of percentage reduction in non-HDL-C achieved by select antilipemic regimens. Of these 51 trials, 38 provided head-to-head comparisons of antilipemic regimens. Rosuvastatin and atorvastatin are the most potent 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) in lowering non-HDL-C. Adding ezetimibe, fibric acid derivatives, and omega-3 fatty acids to antilipemic monotherapy may result in further reduction in non-HDL-C. Subjects with certain characteristics (eg, nonwhite) were not prevalent in these studies.

Safety of a fixed-dose combination of fenofibrate/pravastatin 160 mg/40 mg in patients with mixed hyperlipidaemia: a pooled analysis from a database of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Fenofibrate can be prescribed concomitantly with an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) to improve achievement of lipid goals in patients with atherogenic mixed hyperlipidaemia. However, some safety concerns, particularly an increased risk of myopathy, have been reported when these drugs are taken together.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this analysis was to assess the general safety and tolerability of a fenofibrate/pravastatin (FF/PRA) 160 mg/40 mg fixed-dose combination (FDC) capsule based on a pooled database of phase III clinical trials in patients with mixed hyperlipidaemia.

METHODS

Safety data were pooled from five phase III studies (four double-blind with an uncontrolled extension and one open) of ≥12 to 64 weeks' duration. Adverse event (AE) profiles of FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg (n=645 in the double-blind cohort) were evaluated relative to comparators (statins, n=519 or fenofibrate, n=122). Absolute incidence rates were calculated in both the double-blind cohort and the all-studies cohort (FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg, n=1566) for all AEs, drug-related AEs, serious AEs, discontinuations due to AEs, AEs of specific interest including abnormal laboratory data, and deaths.

RESULTS

The frequency and/or intensity of overall AEs, drug-related AEs, serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs were not significantly increased for the FDC (36.0%, 12.3%, 1.7% and 5.1%, respectively) versus the statin (28.7%, 8.9%, 0.8% and 2.7%, respectively) and fenofibrate (59.0%, 21.3%, 0% and 4.9%, respectively) monotherapies. No deaths were reported during the course of treatment in clinical trials. Nevertheless, three deaths were reported more than 30 days after the patients completed the study; none of these deaths were assessed as being related to FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg treatment. Among the AEs of special interest, no myopathy or rhabdomyolysis were reported; no patients were considered to have experienced a drug-induced liver injury; no case of pancreatitis occurred in the double-blind cohort and four patients reported pancreatitis in the all-studies cohort, two of them being study-treatment related; no case of pulmonary embolism was reported in the double-blind cohort and two patients presented with pulmonary embolism, unrelated to the study drug, in the all-studies cohort; there were more cases of decreased creatinine clearance in the FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg group (1.7%) than in the statin group (0.6%).

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this database (notably low percentage of very elderly patients, limited sample size of patients with mild renal insufficiency, and mode of selection in the clinical trials), no particular safety concern was raised with FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg in the double-blind cohort as compared with statin and fenofibrate monotherapies. The acceptable long-term safety profile of FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg was confirmed with a low frequency of AEs of interest, comparable to that observed in the 12-week double-blind cohort. Emergent effects possibly related to FF/PRA 160 mg/40 mg were mainly those attributable to fenofibrate (decrease in creatinine clearance and pancreatitis).

Pravastatin and fenofibrate in combination (Pravafenix(®)) for the treatment of high-risk patients with mixed hyperlipidemia

Pravafenix(®) is a fixed-dose combination of pravastatin 40 mg and fenofibrate 160 mg. The rationale for the use of Pravafenix is based on the increased residual cardiovascular risk observed for high-risk patients with either increased triglycerides or low HDL cholesterol levels despite statin monotherapy. This article reviews the current available information on the pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety of Pravafenix. Pravafenix is recommended to be taken with food in the evening. In clinical trials, Pravafenix consistently produces complementary benefits on the overall atherogenic lipid profile of high-risk patients with mixed hyperlipidemia not controlled by either pravastatin 40 mg or simvastatin 20 mg. Within the limitations of the database, Pravafenix seems to be well tolerated up to 64 weeks, with an overall tolerability and safety profile consistent with findings generally observed with fenofibrate treatment. In particular, no myopathy or rhabdomyolysis has been reported. The actual European indication is restricted to high-risk patients with mixed hyperlipidemia whose LDL cholesterol levels are adequately controlled on pravastatin 40 mg monotherapy. Whether Pravafenix confers additional cardiovascular benefits in high-risk patients treated with a statin remains to be determined.

Determinants of uncontrolled dyslipidaemia among adult type 2 diabetes in Malaysia: the Malaysian Diabetes Registry 2009

Numerous studies with compelling evidence had shown a clear relationship between dyslipidaemia and cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with diabetes mellitus. This was an observational study based on secondary data from the online registry database Adult Diabetes Control and Management (ADCM) looking into the determinants of uncontrolled dyslipidaemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. Independent predictors were identified using multivariate logistic regression. A total of 303 centres (289 health clinics, 14 hospitals) contributed a total of 70,889 patients (1972 or 2.8% patients were from hospital). About thirty eight percent were reported to have dyslipidaemia. There were 40.7% patients on lipid-lowering agents and of those above age 40 years old, only 38.1% of them were on a statin. Malay ethnicity and younger age groups (<50 years old) were two major determinants of uncontrolled LDL-C, TG and HDL-C. Female gender and uncontrolled blood pressure were determinants of uncontrolled LDL-C, and poor glycaemic control was related independently to high TG. This study has highlighted the suboptimal management of diabetic dyslipidaemia in Malaysia. Pharmacological treatment of dyslipidaemia could be more effective. Healthcare stakeholders in this country, especially in the primary care, have to recognize these shortfalls and take immediate remedial measures.

Interplay between statins and PPARs in improving cardiovascular outcomes: a double-edged sword?

Statins are best-selling medications in the management of high cholesterol and associated cardiovascular complications. They inhibit 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA)-reductase in order to prevent disproportionate cholesterol synthesis. Statins slow the progression of atherosclerosis, prevent the secondary cardiovascular events and improve the cardiovascular outcomes in patients with elevated cholesterol levels. The underlying mechanisms pertaining to the cardioprotective role of statins are linked with numerous pleiotropic actions including inhibition of inflammatory events and improvement of endothelial function, besides an effective cholesterol-lowering ability. Intriguingly, recent studies suggest possible interplay between statins and nuclear transcription factors like PPARs, which should also be taken into consideration while analysing the potential of statins in the management of cardiovascular complications. It could be suggested that statins have two major roles: (i) a well-established cholesterol-lowering effect through inhibition of HMG-CoA-reductase; (ii) a newly explored PPAR-activating property, which could mediate most of cardiovascular protective pleiotropic effects of statins including anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and anti-fibrotic properties. The present review addressed the underlying principles pertaining to the modulatory role of statins on PPARs.

Attainment of goal/desirable lipid levels in patients with mixed dyslipidemia after 12 weeks of treatment with fenofibric acid and rosuvastatin combination therapy: a pooled analysis of controlled studies

BACKGROUND

Goal/desirable lipid levels are underachieved in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. These patients may have substantial residual risk of cardiovascular disease even while receiving optimal LDL-C-lowering therapy and may require additional therapy to improve multiple lipid/lipoprotein levels.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate attainment of goal/desirable levels of lipids/lipoproteins after 12-week treatment with combination rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid versus rosuvastatin monotherapy.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of patients with mixed dyslipidemia who enrolled in one of two randomized controlled trials, and were treated (N = 2066) with rosuvastatin (5, 10, or 20 mg), fenofibric acid 135 mg, or rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid for 12 weeks. Data were pooled across doses of rosuvastatin as monotherapy and combination therapy.

RESULTS

Compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy, combination therapy had comparable effects in achieving risk-stratified LDL-C goals; however, measures of total atherogenic burden were improved because significantly greater percentages of patients attained non-HDL-C goal in high- (62.9% vs 50.4%, P = .006) and moderate-risk groups (87.6% vs 80.4%, P = .016) and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) <90 mg/dL in high-risk group (59.8% vs 43.8%, P < .001). In the overall population, more patients treated with the combination therapy achieved desirable levels of HDL-C >40/50 mg/dL in men/women (P < .001), triglycerides <150 mg/dL (P < .001), and ApoB <90 mg/dL (P < .001), compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy. Furthermore, combination therapy resulted in significantly greater percentages of patients achieving simultaneous specified levels of LDL-C + non-HDL-C (P < .015); LDL-C + HDL-C + TG (P < .001); and LDL-C + HDL-C + triglycerides + non-HDL-C + ApoB (P < .001), compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid may be more efficacious than rosuvastatin alone in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9: a new target molecule for gene therapy

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) has emerged as a novel target for controlling plasma levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and decreasing the risk of cardiovascular diseases. At present it is clear that the major classes of commonly prescribed lipid-lowering medications increase serum PCSK9 levels and fail to protect a significant percentage of patients from cardiovascular events. Therefore development of new LDL-C lowering medications that either do not increase circulating PCSK9 levels or work through inhibition of PCSK9 expression and protease activity is a highly desirable approach to overcome hypercholesterolemia. Since there are several agents which are being evaluated in human preclinical and clinical trials, this review summarizes current therapeutic strategies targeting PCSK9, including specific antibodies, antisense oligonucleotides, small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) and other small-molecule inhibitors.

LPL gene variants affect apoC-III response to combination therapy of statins and fenofibric acid in a randomized clinical trial of individuals with mixed dyslipidemia

ApoC-III is a proatherogenic protein associated with elevated triglycerides; its deficiency is associated with reduced atherosclerosis. Mixed dyslipidemia, characterized by elevated triglyceride and apoC-III levels and low HDL cholesterol level, with or without elevated LDL cholesterol, increases cardiovascular disease risk and is commonly treated with combined statin and fibrate therapy. We sought to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with apoC-III level response to combination therapy with statins and fenofibric acid (FA) in individuals with mixed dyslipidemia. Participants (n = 1,250) in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study examining response to FA alone and in combination with statin were genotyped for candidate SNPs. Multivariate linear regression and two-way ANOVA for percent change in apoC-III level were performed. SNPs in the lipoprotein lipase (LPL) gene region, rs1801177 (P = 4.7 × 10(-8)), rs7016529 (P = 1.2 × 10(-6)), and rs249 (P = 4.1 × 10(-5)), were associated with apoC-III response to combination therapy. A haplotype composed of the minor alleles of these SNPs, with 2% population frequency, was associated with an unexpected apoC-III increase in response to statins and FA. This is the first report to show that genetic variation within the LPL gene region can affect the response of apoC-III levels to combined statin and FA therapy.

Personality traits and childhood trauma as correlates of metabolic risk factors: the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA)

OBJECTIVE

Personality and childhood trauma may affect cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. However, evidence for an association with metabolic risk factors for CVD is limited and ambiguous. Moreover, despite their interrelatedness, personality and childhood trauma were not yet studied simultaneously. Therefore, we aimed to explore whether personality and childhood trauma are correlates of metabolic risk factors.

METHODS

Among 2755 participants of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA), we investigated through linear regression models whether Big Five personality traits (i.e., extraversion, openness, agreeableness, neuroticism and conscientiousness) and childhood trauma type (i.e., emotional neglect, and psychological, physical and sexual abuse) were correlates of metabolic risk factors (i.e., lipids, waist circumference (WC), glucose and blood pressure). Basic covariates (i.e., age, sex and income level), lifestyle, severity of depressive symptoms and years of education were taken into account.

RESULTS

Openness was the most robust favorable correlate, and sexual abuse was the most robust unfavorable correlate of lipids and WC, and of overall metabolic risk (β=-.070; p<.001 and β=.035; p=.04, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

People with a low openness trait and those who experienced childhood sexual abuse are at higher risk of dyslipidemia and abdominal obesity.

Fenofibrate: a review of its use in dyslipidaemia

Fenofibrate is a fibric acid derivative indicated for the treatment of severe hypertriglyceridaemia and mixed dyslipidaemia in patients who have not responded to nonpharmacological therapies. The lipid-modifying effects of fenofibrate are mediated by the activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α. Fenofibrate also has nonlipid, pleiotropic effects (e.g. reducing levels of fibrinogen, C-reactive protein and various pro-inflammatory markers, and improving flow-mediated dilatation) that may contribute to its clinical efficacy, particularly in terms of improving microvascular outcomes. Fenofibrate improves the lipid profile (particularly triglyceride [TG] and high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol [HDL-C] levels) in patients with dyslipidaemia. Compared with statin monotherapy, fenofibrate monotherapy tends to improve TG and HDL-C levels to a significantly greater extent, whereas statins improve low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) and total cholesterol levels to a significantly greater extent. Fenofibrate is also associated with promoting a shift from small, dense, atherogenic LDL particles to larger, less dense LDL particles. Combination therapy with a statin plus fenofibrate generally improves the lipid profile to a greater extent than monotherapy with either agent in patients with dyslipidaemia and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus or the metabolic syndrome. In the pivotal FIELD and ACCORD trials in patients with type 2 diabetes, fenofibrate did not significantly reduce the risk of coronary heart disease events to a greater extent than placebo, and simvastatin plus fenofibrate did not significantly reduce the risk of major cardiovascular (CV) events to a greater extent than simvastatin plus placebo. However, the risk of some nonfatal macrovascular events and the incidence of certain microvascular outcomes were reduced significantly more with fenofibrate than with placebo in the FIELD trial, and in the ACCORD trial, patients receiving simvastatin plus fenofibrate were less likely to experience progression of diabetic retinopathy than those receiving simvastatin plus placebo. Subgroup analyses in the FIELD and ACCORD Lipid trials indicate that fenofibrate is of the greatest benefit in decreasing CV events in patients with atherogenic dyslipidaemia. Fenofibrate is generally well tolerated when administered alone or in combination with a statin. Thus, in patients with dyslipidaemia, particularly atherogenic dyslipidaemia, fenofibrate is a useful treatment option either alone or in combination with a statin.

Long-term safety and efficacy of fenofibrate/pravastatin combination therapy in high risk patients with mixed hyperlipidemia not controlled by pravastatin monotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of a fenofibrate/pravastatin 160/40 mg fixed-dose combination in high-risk patients with mixed hyperlipidemia not controlled by pravastatin 40 mg monotherapy.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

After an 8-week pravastatin 40 mg and diet run-in period, high-risk patients (n = 248) with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥ 100 mg/dL and triglycerides (TG) ≥ 150 and ≤400 mg/dL, were randomized to fenofibrate/pravastatin combination therapy or to pravastatin monotherapy for 12 weeks, followed by an open-label, 52-week safety phase on the combination therapy.

RESULTS

Of the 224 patients who continued after the double-blind phase, 211 completed the one-year safety period. Overall, fenofibrate/pravastatin combination therapy was well tolerated during this extension study. Only three patients had an elevation of ALAT > 3 times the upper limit of normal and one patient a CPK elevation ≥5, but <10 times the upper limit of normal. At week 64, and by comparison to baseline levels on pravastatin 40 mg, the fenofibrate/pravastatin combination therapy significantly reduced non-high-density lipoprotein (non-HDL) cholesterol by 16.3%, LDL-C by 12.2%, TG by 31.6%, apolipoprotein B by 11.0% and increased HDL-cholesterol and apolipoprotein A1 respectively by 4.8 and 9.6% (p < 0.0001 for all the variables). A limitation of this trial is that the study was not powered to assess clinical events.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term co-administration of fenofibrate/pravastatin 160/40 mg in a single capsule was well tolerated and produced complementary benefits on the overall lipid profile of high-risk patients with mixed hyperlipidemia not controlled by pravastatin 40 mg.

Triple combinations of neuraminidase inhibitors, statins and fibrates benefit the survival of patients with lethal avian influenza pandemic

The high mortality of highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H5N1) viruses infection in humans gives rise to considerable concern that it might someday cause another lethal pandemic. At present there is no other effective alternative besides the early and enough administration of neuraminidase inhibitors, which may be crucial for the patient management. However, its efficacy is sometimes limited because of the late administration in some patients especially the seriously ill ones and the continual occurrence of oseltamivir resistant A (H5N1) strains. The specific candidate vaccine are still under development and the practical value of passive immunization is hard to be widely applied because of the scarcity of convalescent human plasma, especially in the early stage of a serious and rapidly progressing pandemic. Statins and fibrates, both of which are used in clinical practice, have anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects and other multiple biologic activities. So we hypothesized that the two immunomodulatory agents may exhibit synergistic effects when they were combined to neuraminidase inhibitors to treat the A (H5N1) viruses infections via inhibiting the production of either the early inflammatory mediators (e.g., many cytokine/chemokine) or the late mediator (e.g., High Mobility Group Box Protein 1), even showing the anti-viral activities with the prevention of the development of antiviral resistance. Therefore, the novel triple combinations may be an optimal management to confront the next lethal influenza pandemic on its very beginning.

Variants in the APOA5 gene region and the response to combination therapy with statins and fenofibric acid in a randomized clinical trial of individuals with mixed dyslipidemia

OBJECTIVE

Atherogenic dyslipidemia is highly associated with coronary heart disease and is characterized by elevated triglycerides (TG), low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). The combination of statins and fibrates is a common modality to treat individuals with atherogenic dyslipidemia. We sought to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with HDL-C, TG, and apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA-I) response to combination therapy with statins and fenofibric acid (FA) in individuals with atherogenic dyslipidemia.

METHODS

2228 individuals with mixed dyslipidemia who were participating in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study comparing FA alone, in combination with a statin, or statin alone for a 12-week period, were genotyped for 304 candidate SNPs. A multivariate linear regression analysis for percent change in HDL-C, ApoA-I and TG levels was performed.

RESULTS

SNPs in the apolipoprotein (APO) A5-ZNF259 region rs3741298 (P = 1.8 × 10(-7)), rs964184 (P = 3.6 × 10(-6)), rs651821 (P = 4.5 × 10(-5)), and rs10750097 (P = 1 × 10(-4)), were significantly associated with HDL-C response to combination therapy with statins and FA, with a similar association identified for ApoA-I. A haplotype composed of the minor alleles of SNPs rs3741298, rs964184, and rs10750097, was associated with a positive response to statins and FA (P = 8.7 × 10(-7)) and had a frequency of 18% in the study population.

CONCLUSION

In a population with atherogenic dyslipidemia, common SNPs and haplotypes within the APOA5-ZNF259 region are highly associated with HDL-C and ApoA-I response to combination therapy with statins and FA.

Opening a new lipid "apo-thecary": incorporating apolipoproteins as potential risk factors and treatment targets to reduce cardiovascular risk

Statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) represent the cornerstone of drug therapy to reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and cardiovascular risk. However, even optimal statin management of LDL cholesterol leaves many patients with residual cardiovascular risk, in part because statins are more effective in reducing LDL cholesterol than apolipoprotein B (Apo B). Apo B may be a better marker of atherogenic risk than LDL cholesterol because Apo B measures the total number of all atherogenic particles (total atherosclerotic burden), including LDL, very low-density lipoprotein, intermediate-density lipoprotein, remnant lipoproteins, and lipoprotein(a). To determine whether Apo B is a better indicator of baseline cardiovascular risk and residual risk after lipid therapy compared with LDL cholesterol, a MEDLINE search of the literature published in English from January 1, 1975, through December 1, 2010, was conducted. On the basis of data from most population studies, elevated Apo B was more strongly associated with incident coronary heart disease than similarly elevated LDL cholesterol. Apo B was also a superior benchmark (vs LDL cholesterol) of statins' cardioprotective efficacy in both primary-prevention and secondary-prevention trials. To minimize cardiovascular risk among persons with hypercholesterolemia or dyslipidemia, the best available evidence suggests that intensive therapy with statins should be initiated to achieve the lowest possible Apo B level (with adequate drug toleration) and then other therapies (eg, niacin, bile acid resins, ezetimibe) added to potentiate these Apo B-lowering effects. In future consensus lipid-lowering treatment guidelines, Apo B should be considered as an index of residual risk, a potential parameter of treatment efficacy, and a treatment target to minimize risk of coronary heart disease.

Hyperlipidaemia and cardiovascular disease: do fibrates have a role?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Fibrates continue to be a viable treatment option for mixed atherogenic dyslipidemia, and recent reports from clinical studies have shed new light on the therapeutic utility of fibrates for the prevention of microvascular and macrovascular disease, especially in combination with statins.

RECENT FINDINGS

Data from randomized placebo-controlled trials have shown that fibrates reduce nonfatal coronary events but do not confer any benefit on mortality or other adverse cardiovascular outcomes. The ACCORD Lipid trial studied the additive effect of fenofibrate therapy along with low-dose simvastatin therapy in 5,518 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and found that fenofibrate did not affect any of the adverse cardiovascular outcomes, either individually or as part of a composite outcome, after 4.7 years of follow-up. An a priori subgroup analysis showed a significant benefit from fenofibrate-simvastatin combination therapy over simvastatin alone in participants with moderate hypertriglyceridemia and low HDL-cholesterol on major cardiovascular events, consistent with post-hoc analyses of previous fibrate trials. The ACCORD-Eye study adds to the sparse clinical data on the effect of fenofibrate on diabetic retinopathy, and showed that fenofibrate may be used to reduce the risk of progression of diabetic retinopathy even in patients with established disease. The combination of statin and fibrate was well tolerated.

SUMMARY

Fibrate therapy does not reduce mortality but may reduce nonfatal coronary events in patients at risk for cardiovascular disease, including those with type 2 diabetes. The ACCORD Lipid study shows that the combination of low-dose simvastatin and fenofibrate is well tolerated, and is potentially cardioprotective in patients with atherogenic 'mixed' dyslipidemia.

Effects of prescription omega-3-acid ethyl esters on fasting lipid profile in subjects with primary hypercholesterolemia

This double-blind, randomized crossover study investigated the effects of 6 weeks of treatment with prescription omega-3-acid ethyl esters (POM3, 4 g/day) versus placebo (soy oil) on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and other aspects of the fasting lipid profile in 31 men and women with primary, isolated hypercholesterolemia (LDL-C 130-220 mg/dL and triglycerides less than 150 mg/dL while free of lipid-altering therapies). Mean ± standard error of the mean baseline concentrations of total cholesterol, LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides were 229 ± 3, 146 ± 3, 60 ± 2, 23 ± 2, and 113 ± 8 mg/dL, respectively. POM3 produced a modest increase from baseline in LDL-C (3.4%) versus the placebo response (-0.7%, P = 0.010). Significant changes (P < 0.05) for POM3 (placebo-corrected) were observed for very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-18.8%), triglycerides (-18.7%), and HDL-C (3.3%). Nuclear magnetic resonance-determined very-low-density lipoprotein particle concentration and size and HDL particle concentration decreased significantly more with POM3 versus placebo, whereas LDL and HDL particle sizes increased significantly more with POM3 versus placebo. Total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, apolipoproteins A1 and B, and LDL particle concentration responses did not differ between treatments. These results did not confirm the hypothesis that POM3 treatment would lower LDL-C in primary, isolated hypercholesterolemia. Effects on other variables were consistent with prior results in mixed dyslipidemia.

Fenofibrate plus simvastatin (fixed-dose combination) for the treatment of dyslipidaemia

INTRODUCTION

Statin use results in a significant reduction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. However, patients still have residual CVD risk, even if they are receiving optimal statin treatment.

AREAS COVERED

This review, based on a Pubmed/Scopus search, discusses the available evidence regarding the use of a fixed-dose fenofibrate plus simvastatin combination. This combination is useful for patients with mixed dyslipidaemia because it improves the overall lipoprotein profile. Although in clinical trials the rate of adverse events was not significantly greater than monotherapy, patients who receive combination treatment should be monitored carefully. Furthermore, in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Study, this combination did not result in a significant reduction of CVD events compared with simvastatin monotherapy. However, a possible benefit in this trial was observed in the subgroup of patients with high triglyceride and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.

EXPERT OPINION

The fixed-dose fenofibrate plus simvastatin combination treatment produces additive results and is safe when patients are properly monitored. Existing evidence appears to support the addition of fenofibrate to simvastatin treatment for the reduction of residual CVD risk in patients with atherogenic dyslipidaemia. However, this combination did not lead to better clinical outcomes in the absence of dyslipidaemia.

Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin 5 mg in combination with fenofibric acid 135 mg in patients with mixed dyslipidemia - a phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Patients with mixed dyslipidemia characterized by elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), elevated triglycerides (TG), and reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) often require combination therapy to improve multiple lipid and nonlipid parameters. This phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin 5 mg coadministered with fenofibric acid 135 mg in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

METHODS

A total of 760 patients with TG ≥ 150 mg/dL, HDL-C <40 mg/dL (<50 mg/dL for women), and LDL-C ≥ 130 mg/dL were randomized for a 12-week treatment period to rosuvastatin 5 mg, fenofibric acid 135 mg, or rosuvastatin 5 mg + fenofibric acid 135 mg. The primary efficacy comparisons were mean percentage changes in HDL-C and TG (rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid vs. rosuvastatin monotherapy), and LDL-C (rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid vs. fenofibric acid monotherapy).

RESULTS

Treatment with rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid resulted in statistically significant greater improvements in HDL-C (23.0% vs. 12.4%; P < 0.001) and TG (-40.3% vs. -17.5%; P < 0.001), compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy; and LDL-C (-28.7% vs. -4.1%; P < 0.001), compared with fenofibric acid monotherapy. All secondary efficacy variables improved with combination therapy. Combination therapy was generally well tolerated with a safety profile consistent with individual monotherapies. No unexpected muscle, hepatic, or renal safety signals were identified with combination therapy versus individual monotherapies.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, rosuvastatin 5 mg + fenofibric acid 135 mg resulted in comprehensive improvements in the lipid profile of patients with mixed dyslipidemia without unanticipated adverse events.

Comparisons of apolipoprotein B levels estimated by immunoassay, nuclear magnetic resonance, vertical auto profile, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in subjects with hypertriglyceridemia (SAFARI Trial)

Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglyceride-rich lipoproteins constitute non-high-density lipoprotein (non-HDL) cholesterol. These are atherogenic lipoproteins and non-HDL cholesterol is a secondary target of treatment beyond LDL cholesterol in patients with hypertriglyceridemia. Some investigators favor total apolipoprotein B over non-HDL cholesterol as the secondary target of treatment. This is based on publications suggesting that total apolipoprotein B is more predictive of cardiovascular events than non-HDL cholesterol. Several methods are available for estimating total apolipoprotein B. This study compared total apolipoprotein estimated by immunonephelometric assay (INA), vertical auto profile (VAP), nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and non-HDL cholesterol levels in patients with hypertriglyceridemia from the previously reported Simvastatin plus Fenofibrate for Combined Hyperlipidemia (SAFARI) trial. Total apolipoprotein B levels were found to be highest by INA, intermediate by NMR and non-HDL cholesterol, and lowest by VAP. Concordance for non-HDL cholesterol levels among the INA, VAP, and NMR methods was better than that for total apolipoprotein B levels; the correlation between non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B by INA was strongest (0.929). In patients with a low triglyceride/HDL cholesterol ratio (<3.5), total apolipoprotein B determined by INA was higher than that estimated from non-HDL cholesterol levels, whereas in patients with a high triglyceride/HDL C ratio (≥3.5), apolipoprotein B predicted using non-HDL cholesterol was in better agreement with INA-determined apolipoprotein B levels. Similar trends were observed with VAP using equations specific for LDL particle size. In conclusion, more work is needed to improve agreement of apolipoprotein B measurements among methods employed clinically. Non-HDL cholesterol is also useful to predict total apolipoprotein B and some improvement may be attained by taking into account the ratio of triglyceride/HDL cholesterol as a measurement of LDL particle size.

Fixed-dose combination fenofibrate/pravastatin 160/40 mg versus simvastatin 20 mg monotherapy in adults with type 2 diabetes and mixed hyperlipidemia uncontrolled with simvastatin 20 mg: a double-blind, randomized comparative study

BACKGROUND

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mixed hyperlipidemia have an increased cardiovascular risk and may not achieve recommended LDL-C and non-HDL-C goals on statin monotherapy. This study was designed to obtain regulatory approval of a fenofibrate/pravastatin 160/40 mg fixed-dose combination (FDC) capsule.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of this FDC and simvastatin 20 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-arm study was conducted in patients with type 2 diabetes and mixed hyperlipidemia, without cardiovascular disease, and who were not at lipid goals with simvastatin 20 mg monotherapy. After a 6-week run-in period during which patients received simvastatin 20 mg, those with non-HDL-C concentrations ≥130 mg/dL or LDL-C concentrations ≥100 mg/dL and triglyceride concentrations 150 to 600 mg/dL were enrolled. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive 12-week treatment with fenofibrate/pravastatin 160/40 mg FDC or simvastatin 20 mg once daily, followed by a 12-week open-label tolerability-assessment period during which all patients received the FDC. The primary efficacy outcome was the mean percentage change in non-HDL-C after 12 weeks. Secondary efficacy outcomes included changes in other lipid and lipoprotein parameters, fibrinogen, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. Tolerability was assessed based on the prevalence of adverse events and abnormal laboratory data in each treatment group.

RESULTS

A total of 291 patients were randomized to receive fenofibrate/pravastatin (n= 145) or simvastatin (n = 146). The mean (SD) age of the participants was 56.6 (8.9) years, 48.1% were men, and the body mass index was 31.3 (4.6) kg/m(2). The FDC was associated with a significantly greater reduction in non-HDL-C (primary end point) compared with simvastatin monotherapy (-12.9% [1.8] vs -6.8% [1.8]; P = 0.008). Triglyceride (-28.6% [3.7] vs +5.0% [3.6]; P < 0.001), fibrinogen (-11.5% [1.6] vs +0.3% [1.6]; P < 0.001), and HDL-C (+6.3% [1.3] vs +1.8% [1.3]; P = 0.008) concentrations also were significantly improved with the FDC compared with simvastatin monotherapy. The proportions of patients who achieved the LDL-C target (<100 mg/dL) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The proportion of patients who achieved the combined end point of non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL and LDL-C <100 mg/dL was significantly greater with fenofibrate/pravastatin compared with simvastatin monotherapy (41 [28.5%] vs 26 [17.9%]; P < 0.05). The prevalences of patients who experienced ≥1 adverse event were not statistically different between the fenofibrate/pravastatin and simvastatin groups (17.2% vs 15.1%). However, compared with simvastatin monotherapy, the combination treatment was associated with significantly greater increases in alanine aminotransferase (+9.6% vs +1.5%; P = 0.03 between groups), creatinine (+13.7% vs +6.8%; P = 0.002 between groups), and homocysteine (+36.5% vs +1.6%; P < 0.001 between groups) concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

In this selected population of adults with type 2 diabetes, the fenofibrate/pravastatin 160/40 mg FDC was associated with significantly greater changes from baseline in non-HDL-C, triglyceride, and HDL-C concentrations compared with simvastatin 20 mg. Both treatments were well tolerated.

Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease: evidence and guidance for management

Even at low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal, patients with cardiometabolic abnormalities remain at high risk of cardiovascular events. This paper aims (i) to critically appraise evidence for elevated levels of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs) and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) as cardiovascular risk factors, and (ii) to advise on therapeutic strategies for management. Current evidence supports a causal association between elevated TRL and their remnants, low HDL-C, and cardiovascular risk. This interpretation is based on mechanistic and genetic studies for TRL and remnants, together with the epidemiological data suggestive of the association for circulating triglycerides and cardiovascular disease. For HDL, epidemiological, mechanistic, and clinical intervention data are consistent with the view that low HDL-C contributes to elevated cardiovascular risk; genetic evidence is unclear however, potentially reflecting the complexity of HDL metabolism. The Panel believes that therapeutic targeting of elevated triglycerides (≥ 1.7 mmol/L or 150 mg/dL), a marker of TRL and their remnants, and/or low HDL-C (<1.0 mmol/L or 40 mg/dL) may provide further benefit. The first step should be lifestyle interventions together with consideration of compliance with pharmacotherapy and secondary causes of dyslipidaemia. If inadequately corrected, adding niacin or a fibrate, or intensifying LDL-C lowering therapy may be considered. Treatment decisions regarding statin combination therapy should take into account relevant safety concerns, i.e. the risk of elevation of blood glucose, uric acid or liver enzymes with niacin, and myopathy, increased serum creatinine and cholelithiasis with fibrates. These recommendations will facilitate reduction in the substantial cardiovascular risk that persists in patients with cardiometabolic abnormalities at LDL-C goal.

Triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease: evidence and guidance for management

Even at low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal, patients with cardiometabolic abnormalities remain at high risk of cardiovascular events. This paper aims (i) to critically appraise evidence for elevated levels of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs) and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) as cardiovascular risk factors, and (ii) to advise on therapeutic strategies for management. Current evidence supports a causal association between elevated TRL and their remnants, low HDL-C, and cardiovascular risk. This interpretation is based on mechanistic and genetic studies for TRL and remnants, together with the epidemiological data suggestive of the association for circulating triglycerides and cardiovascular disease. For HDL, epidemiological, mechanistic, and clinical intervention data are consistent with the view that low HDL-C contributes to elevated cardiovascular risk; genetic evidence is unclear however, potentially reflecting the complexity of HDL metabolism. The Panel believes that therapeutic targeting of elevated triglycerides (≥1.7 mmol/L or 150 mg/dL), a marker of TRL and their remnants, and/or low HDL-C (<1.0 mmol/L or 40 mg/dL) may provide further benefit. The first step should be lifestyle interventions together with consideration of compliance with pharmacotherapy and secondary causes of dyslipidaemia. If inadequately corrected, adding niacin or a fibrate, or intensifying LDL-C lowering therapy may be considered. Treatment decisions regarding statin combination therapy should take into account relevant safety concerns, i.e. the risk of elevation of blood glucose, uric acid or liver enzymes with niacin, and myopathy, increased serum creatinine and cholelithiasis with fibrates. These recommendations will facilitate reduction in the substantial cardiovascular risk that persists in patients with cardiometabolic abnormalities at LDL-C goal.

Symptom dimensions of depression and anxiety and the metabolic syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between depression and anxiety symptoms and the metabolic syndrome (MetSyn), using a dimensional approach. The association between depression and anxiety, on the one hand, and the MetSyn as a cluster or its individual components, on the other hand, is equivocal. The categorical nature of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition might partly explain the inconsistent findings.

METHODS

In 2,433 Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety participants (mean age, 42.3 years; 33.1% male), three symptoms dimensions-lack of positive affect (PA, depression specific); negative affect (NA, aspecific); and somatic arousal (SA, anxiety specific)-were assessed by a shortened adaptation of the Mood and Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire. The association between symptom dimensions and MetSyn components (waist circumference, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, glucose, and mean blood pressure) was analyzed, using linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

The occurrence rate of the MetSyn was 20.1% (n = 490). SA, but not PA and NA, was strongly associated with four out of five MetSyn components, especially waist circumference, triglycerides, and blood pressure (β = 0.046, p = .01; β = 0.077, p < .001; and β = 0.069, p < .001, respectively), and with the total number of MetSyn components (β = 0.098, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate a strong association of most of the MetSyn components with the SA dimension, but not with the NA and PA scales.

Efficacy of fenofibric acid plus statins on multiple lipid parameters and its safety in women with mixed dyslipidemia

The combination of fibrate and statin therapies may be a treatment option for women with multiple lipid abnormalities. We, therefore, initiated the present safety and efficacy analysis to address the paucity of such data in women with mixed dyslipidemia. A total of 1,393 women with mixed dyslipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dl, triglycerides [TG] ≥ 150 mg/dl, high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol <50 mg/dl), who had enrolled in any 1 of 3 randomized clinical trials, were evaluated. The eligible women were randomized to receive fenofibric acid plus a low- or moderate-dose statin (combination treatment); or low-, moderate-, or high-dose statin monotherapy; or fenofibric acid monotherapy. With low-dose combination treatment, the baseline HDL cholesterol level increased 20% and TG decreased 46% compared to an 8% HDL cholesterol increase and 20% TG decrease with low-dose statins alone. With the moderate-dose combination, the baseline HDL cholesterol increased 21% and TG decreased 44% compared to an 8% HDL cholesterol increase and 26% TG decrease with moderate-dose statins alone. The reduction in baseline LDL cholesterol with low-dose and moderate-dose combinations (37% and 39%, respectively) was comparable to the reduction with corresponding-dose statins (36% and 43%, respectively). High-dose statins decreased the baseline LDL cholesterol 47%; however, the increase in HDL cholesterol (9%) and decrease in TG (25%) were similar to the changes observed with lower doses of statins. The safety profiles of the combinations were comparable to those of the component therapies. In conclusion, these data suggest that a combination of fenofibric acid and a statin could be considered safe and efficacious for treating women with mixed dyslipidemia.